Tweet
AMNESTY IS A MUST AHEAD OF GENOCIDE CENTENARY - SPECIALISTS
14:26 * 10.03.15
Declaring amnesty is a must for the Armenian authorities ahead of
the Genocide centennial, says a human rights activist.
"Being against amnesty today is practically wrong. I personally find
that amnesty in Armenia is a compromise between the courts and the
society," Avetik Ishkhanyan, the chairman of the Armenian Helsinki
Committee, told Tert.am.
Ever since gaining independence, Armenia has declared amnesty four
times - in 2006, in 2009, in 2011 and in 2013.
Ishkhanyan says his study of the practice in developed democracies
reveals that the measure is very rare in civilized countries where
the judiciary is more independent and developed (allowing for early
release etc) and the penitentiary institutions - better equipped.
"In Armenia, the judiciary is the authorities' appendage, with the
early release mechanisms not functioning in practice. Amnesty is in
a way a compromise to people convicted unfairly or serving time in
severe conditions. [By doing this], Armenian authorities often find
the way to release also political prisoners," he said, adding that
any objection to amnesty would imply expression of support to inmates'
continuing suffering in prisons.
Meantime Ishkhanyan agreed that amnesty decisions also provoke
crime-related tension in the country, often leading up to the detention
of recently released convicts. But he nonetheless emphasized the
importance of the measure. "Inmates look forward to what the call
amnesty because they no longer pin hope on unfair courts and the
possibility of an early release," he noted.
Lilit Sahakyan, a member of the Chamber of Advocates, also agreed that
amnesty is a necessity for Armenia. "Given that the isolation wards
are really overcrowded, with cells for eight people often housing
18-20 detainees, amnesty is a must," she told our correspondent.
On the other hand, the lawyer said she doesn't adequately treat the
situation in Armenia. "Instead of fulfilling their obligations under
the law and avoiding the enforcement of detention as a precautionary
measure, courts try to all the time resolve the problem through
amnesty," she explained.
Although amnesty may prove a temporary solution to the overcrowding
problem in Armenia's penitentiaries, courts should properly perform
their duties to rule out regular need for amnesty.
Any amnesty could be timed to any date.
"I think we have to declare amnesties in Armenia. Otherwise, the
government may soon face problems involving Article 3 of the relevant
convention," Ms Sahakyan said.
Law is not the real problem.
"If the law is harmonious we will not have any problems. In fact, a
restraint is applied in almost all the cases when a relevant petition
is filed. Alternative measures of restraints or declined petitions
are a low percentage," she said.
Ms Sahakyan points out a higher number of petitions.
Although the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) considers this
practice a violation of human rights and lists the cases when arrest
can be a restraint, the situation has not changed.
"Although the Court of Cassation returns verdicts as case law, which
are supposed to regulate the field, it is the Court of Cassation
itself that is inconsistent in honoring the verdicts. That is, there
is no will to change the situation."
http://www.tert.am/en/news/2015/03/10/masnagetner/1612557
14:26 * 10.03.15
Declaring amnesty is a must for the Armenian authorities ahead of
the Genocide centennial, says a human rights activist.
"Being against amnesty today is practically wrong. I personally find
that amnesty in Armenia is a compromise between the courts and the
society," Avetik Ishkhanyan, the chairman of the Armenian Helsinki
Committee, told Tert.am.
Ever since gaining independence, Armenia has declared amnesty four
times - in 2006, in 2009, in 2011 and in 2013.
Ishkhanyan says his study of the practice in developed democracies
reveals that the measure is very rare in civilized countries where
the judiciary is more independent and developed (allowing for early
release etc) and the penitentiary institutions - better equipped.
"In Armenia, the judiciary is the authorities' appendage, with the
early release mechanisms not functioning in practice. Amnesty is in
a way a compromise to people convicted unfairly or serving time in
severe conditions. [By doing this], Armenian authorities often find
the way to release also political prisoners," he said, adding that
any objection to amnesty would imply expression of support to inmates'
continuing suffering in prisons.
Meantime Ishkhanyan agreed that amnesty decisions also provoke
crime-related tension in the country, often leading up to the detention
of recently released convicts. But he nonetheless emphasized the
importance of the measure. "Inmates look forward to what the call
amnesty because they no longer pin hope on unfair courts and the
possibility of an early release," he noted.
Lilit Sahakyan, a member of the Chamber of Advocates, also agreed that
amnesty is a necessity for Armenia. "Given that the isolation wards
are really overcrowded, with cells for eight people often housing
18-20 detainees, amnesty is a must," she told our correspondent.
On the other hand, the lawyer said she doesn't adequately treat the
situation in Armenia. "Instead of fulfilling their obligations under
the law and avoiding the enforcement of detention as a precautionary
measure, courts try to all the time resolve the problem through
amnesty," she explained.
Although amnesty may prove a temporary solution to the overcrowding
problem in Armenia's penitentiaries, courts should properly perform
their duties to rule out regular need for amnesty.
Any amnesty could be timed to any date.
"I think we have to declare amnesties in Armenia. Otherwise, the
government may soon face problems involving Article 3 of the relevant
convention," Ms Sahakyan said.
Law is not the real problem.
"If the law is harmonious we will not have any problems. In fact, a
restraint is applied in almost all the cases when a relevant petition
is filed. Alternative measures of restraints or declined petitions
are a low percentage," she said.
Ms Sahakyan points out a higher number of petitions.
Although the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) considers this
practice a violation of human rights and lists the cases when arrest
can be a restraint, the situation has not changed.
"Although the Court of Cassation returns verdicts as case law, which
are supposed to regulate the field, it is the Court of Cassation
itself that is inconsistent in honoring the verdicts. That is, there
is no will to change the situation."
http://www.tert.am/en/news/2015/03/10/masnagetner/1612557