Tweet
POLITICS V POLITICKING: SARGSYAN-TSARUKYAN STANDOFF REVEALS SCARCITY OF POLITICAL DEBATE IN ARMENIA
ANALYSIS | 18.02.15 | 11:54
By GAYANE MKRTCHYAN
ArmeniaNow reporter
Internal political tensions in Armenia may have subsided a little as
President Serzh Sargsyan and Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP) leader
Gagik Tsarukyan reportedly met on Tuesday to end their "war", but the
debate about "lack of political debate" appears to be only starting.
The ultimate "hot phase" of the conflict between the president and the
millionaire opposition leader began last week when Sargsyan accused
Tsarukyan of being 'a pseudo-political phenomenon' and 'evil' for the
country and, as a matter of fact, urged his ruling Republican Party of
Armenia (RPA) to exclude him from the country's political process. In
response to this, Tsarukyan and his opposition allies scheduled a
joint rally for February 20 to demand Sargsyan's resignation.
Analysts and human rights activists think that recent days' political
developments in Armenia do not fit the frameworks of "classical
politics".
Vardan Harutyunyan, head of the Rights and Freedom Center NGO, said
that the PAP leader is not a classical politician and there are only
a handful of classical politicians in Armenia.
"However, as a result of Serzh Sargsyan's pressure Gagik Tsarukyan,
together with the PAP, is moving into the classical field,"
Harutyunyan said.
Cooperation for Democracy Center NGO Chairman Stepan Danielyan thinks
that just like in Russia, in Armenia as well, it is unclear where
the big business ends and politics begins. These two phenomena are
interwoven in the internal political field of the country.
Under Armenia's Constitution, "a deputy [member of parliament] may
not be engaged in entrepreneurial activities, hold an office in state
and local self-government bodies or in commercial organizations, as
well as engage in any other paid occupation, except for scientific,
educational and creative work." However, this provision of the
Constitution seems to remain on paper only. The majority of MPs in
Armenia, in both warring parties, are known to own large enterprises,
'holdings' or 'concerns', they have their own traffic routes, petrol
stations, etc. Those possessing large businesses use politics in
favor of their personal interests.
In his February 12 speech President Sargsyan also effectively ordered
tax audits of Tsarukyan's businesses. Some observers say it only proves
that Sargsyan was aware of the situation that a top politician and MP
owns a business against the provision of the Constitution and turned
a blind eye on it.
Human rights activist Harutyunyan said that the speech showed the real
face of the Armenian government, which, according to him, displayed
that laws and the Constitution are not taken into consideration in
Armenia, in their actions the government is led by opportunities
and power.
"Thus, if somebody takes up an oppositional position, they will
be subjected to persecution outside law. The current actions taken
against the PAP is a means for the government to show their muscles,
which aims to spread terror within the PAP," he argued.
Tigran Yegoryan, lawyer, member of the Europe in Law Association NGO,
said that the axis of this fight is the government's ambitions.
According to him, the second term of presidency is coming to its end
and that legal obstacle creates changes in the political field. Thus,
the first objective for the government is constitutional changes which
will result in drastic changes in the country's administrative system.
"The president's speech showed that there are no state constitutional
self-administered institutions in the country, and everyone is
subjected to their will. At the same time, I must say that these are
not necessary and sufficient preconditions for constitutional changes,
but rather a necessary and sufficient condition to get rid of the
person who has usurped that government and the people running the
state institutions who administer those constitutional institutions
as subjects," Yegoryan said.
http://armenianow.com/commentary/analysis/60734/armenia_sargsyan_tsarukyan_politics_dispute
ANALYSIS | 18.02.15 | 11:54
By GAYANE MKRTCHYAN
ArmeniaNow reporter
Internal political tensions in Armenia may have subsided a little as
President Serzh Sargsyan and Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP) leader
Gagik Tsarukyan reportedly met on Tuesday to end their "war", but the
debate about "lack of political debate" appears to be only starting.
The ultimate "hot phase" of the conflict between the president and the
millionaire opposition leader began last week when Sargsyan accused
Tsarukyan of being 'a pseudo-political phenomenon' and 'evil' for the
country and, as a matter of fact, urged his ruling Republican Party of
Armenia (RPA) to exclude him from the country's political process. In
response to this, Tsarukyan and his opposition allies scheduled a
joint rally for February 20 to demand Sargsyan's resignation.
Analysts and human rights activists think that recent days' political
developments in Armenia do not fit the frameworks of "classical
politics".
Vardan Harutyunyan, head of the Rights and Freedom Center NGO, said
that the PAP leader is not a classical politician and there are only
a handful of classical politicians in Armenia.
"However, as a result of Serzh Sargsyan's pressure Gagik Tsarukyan,
together with the PAP, is moving into the classical field,"
Harutyunyan said.
Cooperation for Democracy Center NGO Chairman Stepan Danielyan thinks
that just like in Russia, in Armenia as well, it is unclear where
the big business ends and politics begins. These two phenomena are
interwoven in the internal political field of the country.
Under Armenia's Constitution, "a deputy [member of parliament] may
not be engaged in entrepreneurial activities, hold an office in state
and local self-government bodies or in commercial organizations, as
well as engage in any other paid occupation, except for scientific,
educational and creative work." However, this provision of the
Constitution seems to remain on paper only. The majority of MPs in
Armenia, in both warring parties, are known to own large enterprises,
'holdings' or 'concerns', they have their own traffic routes, petrol
stations, etc. Those possessing large businesses use politics in
favor of their personal interests.
In his February 12 speech President Sargsyan also effectively ordered
tax audits of Tsarukyan's businesses. Some observers say it only proves
that Sargsyan was aware of the situation that a top politician and MP
owns a business against the provision of the Constitution and turned
a blind eye on it.
Human rights activist Harutyunyan said that the speech showed the real
face of the Armenian government, which, according to him, displayed
that laws and the Constitution are not taken into consideration in
Armenia, in their actions the government is led by opportunities
and power.
"Thus, if somebody takes up an oppositional position, they will
be subjected to persecution outside law. The current actions taken
against the PAP is a means for the government to show their muscles,
which aims to spread terror within the PAP," he argued.
Tigran Yegoryan, lawyer, member of the Europe in Law Association NGO,
said that the axis of this fight is the government's ambitions.
According to him, the second term of presidency is coming to its end
and that legal obstacle creates changes in the political field. Thus,
the first objective for the government is constitutional changes which
will result in drastic changes in the country's administrative system.
"The president's speech showed that there are no state constitutional
self-administered institutions in the country, and everyone is
subjected to their will. At the same time, I must say that these are
not necessary and sufficient preconditions for constitutional changes,
but rather a necessary and sufficient condition to get rid of the
person who has usurped that government and the people running the
state institutions who administer those constitutional institutions
as subjects," Yegoryan said.
http://armenianow.com/commentary/analysis/60734/armenia_sargsyan_tsarukyan_politics_dispute