Tweet
Raffi Treats Sargsyan Both As Criminal And Fair Judge
Siranuysh Papyan
22:08 07/03/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/interview/view/29216
Interview with Stepan Danielyan, head of Collaboration for Democracy Centre NGO
Stepan, after the election you mentioned civil disobedience as one of
the ways along which the developments would proceed. Now there is
civil disobedience but it does not seem to be enough. In your opinion,
what will the movement achieve by holding rallies regularly in the
regions and the capital?
Many people talked about civil disobedience, it was not my idea, I
supported this point of view. Civil disobedience is peaceful struggle
when part of the society consciously violates a rule or a law and is
ready to be punished for that. The public thus displays to the ruling
class that it is impossible to live in accordance with the existing
laws but the ruling group does not want to surrender. What are civil
disobedience actions? One thousand people sit in the middle of the
Republic Square and are ready to be arrested for that. As soon as they
are arrested, the other 1000 comes. Such primitive actions would
paralyze the government. If Raffi comes up with such a proposal, I
think there could be several thousands of people for such actions. I
give this example to explain that any targeted collective action can
be more effective than rallies of hundreds of thousands of people. Or,
here is another example from our reality. Several actions of 20-30
young people were able to influence the evaluation of the OSCE/ODIHR
observation mission. Examples will continue. However, the candidate
who has received the vote of the public has neither called for civil
disobedience nor has he proposed a logical framework to convince
people.
Hence, I disagree with you that there is civil disobedience. Second,
you use the word `movement' whereas there are just actions of protest.
Protests and civil movements are different political and legal
categories. A movement has a purpose, philosophy, style of action,
while actions of protest are demonstrative actions against illegality
and require an addressee which must pass a fair decision under the
pressure of actions of protest. When Raffi Hovannisian goes to Serzh
Sargsyan and proposes something or demands on the square that he
resign, he treats Serzh Sargsyan both as a criminal who has usurped
power and a fair judge who must restore justice. Could such actions be
effective? Judge yourself. On the other hand, the part of the society
which is ready for mobilization cannot see the way leading to the
goal.
Stepan, what is the purpose, the goal of this movement? Is
baRevolution a new philosophy, are the appeals political?
Which movement do you need? My modest opinion is that it is not Barev
movement but Barev actions of protest. I cannot understand these
actions. Raffi Hovannisian must be supported, there cannot be two
opinions but the problem is that we must be convinced that we will not
have the same results as in 1996 or 2008. It is worrying that the
organizers of the rallies do not specify the appeals to run in the
municipal election of Yerevan. It is a sign that not everything is
clean.
During the presidential election there were three opinions: first, not
participate in the election because it is impossible to resist the
state machine; second, not participate in the election and launch a
civil disobedience, call the opposition candidates withdraw from the
election; third, participate in the election because this time, for
whatever reason, it is `possible' to win. It is understood that the
opposition has won since 1995 (perhaps except 1999 when there was no
government-opposition division, and the government and opposition were
fragmented), and the issue was legitimization of victory which nobody
has succeeded.
Now Raffi Hovannisian's team must justify its decision to run in the
election and offer a way of triumph to the society otherwise we will
have to deal with an irresponsible and frivolous, maybe dishonest
political unit which starts a political movement in a predictable
situation and does not have the answer to the key question.
The opinion that the candidates running in the election fought against
one another for the title of chief opposition has not been refuted.
The purpose of the struggle was not public interest but group interest
to take a dominant position among other oppositionists.
And there is no need to be surprised at the number of votes for Raffi
Hovannisian. It was natural. One should be surprised at the failure of
the ruling group to work `better' but this is another issue and a very
interesting one.
In regard to the appeals to run in the municipal election of Yerevan
Raffi Hovannisian needs to explain how it is possible to resist the
fraud resource of the ruling group during the municipal election.
History repeats. Coming next to the winner in the presidential
election, there is a wish to repeat success in local elections. Arthur
Baghdasaryan's and Artashes Geghamyan's examples show that the society
will forgive a fraudulent government but not a dishonest opposition.
So, I cannot imagine that Raffi Hovannisian will succeed in the next
elections. This election is his chance. At least, this is how I
understand the current situation.
Stepan, there is an opinion that either the RPA must be liquidated or
an alternative government must be formed. Which option will work or
succeed?
As far as I know, an alternative government is a cultured form of
struggle when the opposition puts intellectual pressure on the
government by means of the alternative government and justifies its
efficiency as compared with the government. It will act as long as the
mechanism of change of government through elections is effective. An
alternative majority is something else in my opinion.
As to the demand to liquidate the RPA, I consider it as the main
purpose of civil disobedience which must be followed by constitutional
reforms, as well as legislative reforms.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Siranuysh Papyan
22:08 07/03/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/interview/view/29216
Interview with Stepan Danielyan, head of Collaboration for Democracy Centre NGO
Stepan, after the election you mentioned civil disobedience as one of
the ways along which the developments would proceed. Now there is
civil disobedience but it does not seem to be enough. In your opinion,
what will the movement achieve by holding rallies regularly in the
regions and the capital?
Many people talked about civil disobedience, it was not my idea, I
supported this point of view. Civil disobedience is peaceful struggle
when part of the society consciously violates a rule or a law and is
ready to be punished for that. The public thus displays to the ruling
class that it is impossible to live in accordance with the existing
laws but the ruling group does not want to surrender. What are civil
disobedience actions? One thousand people sit in the middle of the
Republic Square and are ready to be arrested for that. As soon as they
are arrested, the other 1000 comes. Such primitive actions would
paralyze the government. If Raffi comes up with such a proposal, I
think there could be several thousands of people for such actions. I
give this example to explain that any targeted collective action can
be more effective than rallies of hundreds of thousands of people. Or,
here is another example from our reality. Several actions of 20-30
young people were able to influence the evaluation of the OSCE/ODIHR
observation mission. Examples will continue. However, the candidate
who has received the vote of the public has neither called for civil
disobedience nor has he proposed a logical framework to convince
people.
Hence, I disagree with you that there is civil disobedience. Second,
you use the word `movement' whereas there are just actions of protest.
Protests and civil movements are different political and legal
categories. A movement has a purpose, philosophy, style of action,
while actions of protest are demonstrative actions against illegality
and require an addressee which must pass a fair decision under the
pressure of actions of protest. When Raffi Hovannisian goes to Serzh
Sargsyan and proposes something or demands on the square that he
resign, he treats Serzh Sargsyan both as a criminal who has usurped
power and a fair judge who must restore justice. Could such actions be
effective? Judge yourself. On the other hand, the part of the society
which is ready for mobilization cannot see the way leading to the
goal.
Stepan, what is the purpose, the goal of this movement? Is
baRevolution a new philosophy, are the appeals political?
Which movement do you need? My modest opinion is that it is not Barev
movement but Barev actions of protest. I cannot understand these
actions. Raffi Hovannisian must be supported, there cannot be two
opinions but the problem is that we must be convinced that we will not
have the same results as in 1996 or 2008. It is worrying that the
organizers of the rallies do not specify the appeals to run in the
municipal election of Yerevan. It is a sign that not everything is
clean.
During the presidential election there were three opinions: first, not
participate in the election because it is impossible to resist the
state machine; second, not participate in the election and launch a
civil disobedience, call the opposition candidates withdraw from the
election; third, participate in the election because this time, for
whatever reason, it is `possible' to win. It is understood that the
opposition has won since 1995 (perhaps except 1999 when there was no
government-opposition division, and the government and opposition were
fragmented), and the issue was legitimization of victory which nobody
has succeeded.
Now Raffi Hovannisian's team must justify its decision to run in the
election and offer a way of triumph to the society otherwise we will
have to deal with an irresponsible and frivolous, maybe dishonest
political unit which starts a political movement in a predictable
situation and does not have the answer to the key question.
The opinion that the candidates running in the election fought against
one another for the title of chief opposition has not been refuted.
The purpose of the struggle was not public interest but group interest
to take a dominant position among other oppositionists.
And there is no need to be surprised at the number of votes for Raffi
Hovannisian. It was natural. One should be surprised at the failure of
the ruling group to work `better' but this is another issue and a very
interesting one.
In regard to the appeals to run in the municipal election of Yerevan
Raffi Hovannisian needs to explain how it is possible to resist the
fraud resource of the ruling group during the municipal election.
History repeats. Coming next to the winner in the presidential
election, there is a wish to repeat success in local elections. Arthur
Baghdasaryan's and Artashes Geghamyan's examples show that the society
will forgive a fraudulent government but not a dishonest opposition.
So, I cannot imagine that Raffi Hovannisian will succeed in the next
elections. This election is his chance. At least, this is how I
understand the current situation.
Stepan, there is an opinion that either the RPA must be liquidated or
an alternative government must be formed. Which option will work or
succeed?
As far as I know, an alternative government is a cultured form of
struggle when the opposition puts intellectual pressure on the
government by means of the alternative government and justifies its
efficiency as compared with the government. It will act as long as the
mechanism of change of government through elections is effective. An
alternative majority is something else in my opinion.
As to the demand to liquidate the RPA, I consider it as the main
purpose of civil disobedience which must be followed by constitutional
reforms, as well as legislative reforms.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress