Tweet
THE MYSTERIOUS VERDICT OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/29300
15:38 15/03/2013
Releasing its verdict on the presidential election 2013 and
establishing the official results of the election, the Constitutional
Court has recommended addressing the global issue of lack of public
confidence in elections. By reporting the problem of public confidence
the judges of the Constitutional Court first of all tried to save
their own face along with the official result of the voting but they
also hinted at interesting domestic developments.
In particular, the Constitutional Court recommends legislative and
constitutional changes to address the issue of confidence.
The issue of legislative changes is brought up after every election and
is not something new but constitutional reform is already interesting,
especially when the Constitutional Court recommends that.
It is a hint that the Constitution is not fit for the ongoing political
developments, time and space, which is a cause of domestic crisis
or may cause it in the nearest future considering that this is Serzh
Sargsyan's last term and handover of power will have to be done.
In fact, the adjudication of the Constitutional Court establishes
that the system is unable to resolve this issue, and constitutional
premises are said to be necessary. In other words, it is stated that
the ruling system finds it more and more difficult to govern and to
form government in accordance with the criminal oligarchic rules and it
is necessary to work out solutions within the constitutional framework.
In particular, change of the model of governance is most probably
concerned. The political forces have come up with proposals,
especially recently, when transformation to parliamentary governance
was brought up.
In 2005 a reform of the Constitution was carried out. This reform
expanded the mandate of the parliament and the government, establishing
a semi-presidential model. Nevertheless, it did not ensure smooth
change of power in 2007-2008. Moreover, there was an unprecedented
bloodshed which is evidence that the problem is not the Constitutional
model but the aspirations, thinking, kind of other political forces,
as well as the civic control system in the country.
At the same time, when there is an issue of kind, mentality and
civil society of elites, the constitutional models become a tool for
short-term solutions. Thus, Armenia tries to reach a consensus over
the model of parliamentary governance. However, there is no answer to
the question what will happen if the party that rules in accordance
with this model wins overwhelming majority.
With the issue of political and civil culture, the models of governance
are just conditions of domestic trade which have nothing to do with
the key problems of the state and society.
This time they may have a positive role if they are compliant with
arrangements of the "elites" in the case of the so-called smooth
transfer of power or forming of government. However, the positive
thing is not the circumstance of ensuring smooth transfer but that
of enabling the public to endorse and expand civil consciousness to
form a society which directs or controls domestic developments.
If there is no dynamic progress, it is not important with what model
of governance the "elites" share or steal from each other the resources
of the country.
From: Baghdasarian
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/29300
15:38 15/03/2013
Releasing its verdict on the presidential election 2013 and
establishing the official results of the election, the Constitutional
Court has recommended addressing the global issue of lack of public
confidence in elections. By reporting the problem of public confidence
the judges of the Constitutional Court first of all tried to save
their own face along with the official result of the voting but they
also hinted at interesting domestic developments.
In particular, the Constitutional Court recommends legislative and
constitutional changes to address the issue of confidence.
The issue of legislative changes is brought up after every election and
is not something new but constitutional reform is already interesting,
especially when the Constitutional Court recommends that.
It is a hint that the Constitution is not fit for the ongoing political
developments, time and space, which is a cause of domestic crisis
or may cause it in the nearest future considering that this is Serzh
Sargsyan's last term and handover of power will have to be done.
In fact, the adjudication of the Constitutional Court establishes
that the system is unable to resolve this issue, and constitutional
premises are said to be necessary. In other words, it is stated that
the ruling system finds it more and more difficult to govern and to
form government in accordance with the criminal oligarchic rules and it
is necessary to work out solutions within the constitutional framework.
In particular, change of the model of governance is most probably
concerned. The political forces have come up with proposals,
especially recently, when transformation to parliamentary governance
was brought up.
In 2005 a reform of the Constitution was carried out. This reform
expanded the mandate of the parliament and the government, establishing
a semi-presidential model. Nevertheless, it did not ensure smooth
change of power in 2007-2008. Moreover, there was an unprecedented
bloodshed which is evidence that the problem is not the Constitutional
model but the aspirations, thinking, kind of other political forces,
as well as the civic control system in the country.
At the same time, when there is an issue of kind, mentality and
civil society of elites, the constitutional models become a tool for
short-term solutions. Thus, Armenia tries to reach a consensus over
the model of parliamentary governance. However, there is no answer to
the question what will happen if the party that rules in accordance
with this model wins overwhelming majority.
With the issue of political and civil culture, the models of governance
are just conditions of domestic trade which have nothing to do with
the key problems of the state and society.
This time they may have a positive role if they are compliant with
arrangements of the "elites" in the case of the so-called smooth
transfer of power or forming of government. However, the positive
thing is not the circumstance of ensuring smooth transfer but that
of enabling the public to endorse and expand civil consciousness to
form a society which directs or controls domestic developments.
If there is no dynamic progress, it is not important with what model
of governance the "elites" share or steal from each other the resources
of the country.
From: Baghdasarian