Print this article>> INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
14 February 2007
Since joining the Council of Europe (CoE) in 2001, Armenia has been subject to its monitoring procedure, which has led to the adoption of five resolutions in CoE's Parliamentary Assembly.
By Gevorg Melikyan, WSI Caucasus Fellow
This article by WSI Caucasus Fellow Gevorg Melikyan first appreared in the Armenian Reporter on Feb. 10, 2007.
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Since joining the Council of Europe (CoE) in 2001, Armenia has been subject to its monitoring procedure, which has led to the adoption of five resolutions in CoE's Parliamentary Assembly. One of the main requirements for accession to CoE is the obligations and commitments to be fulfilled by each member state.
On Jan. 23, 2007, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (or PACE) heard and adopted the report on "Honoring of Obligations and Commitments by Armenia" as resolution 1532, with 32 votes in favor (including the Armenian and most of the Turkish delegation), one against (the Azeri MP) and two abstentions (one each from Turkey and Lithuania). The Jan. 23 report was presented by co-rapporteurs, French centrist parliamentarian Georges Colombier and Finnish socialist Mikko Elo from the Committee on the Honoring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States.
Armenia was represented by Parliament Speaker Tigran Torosian of Armenia's Republican Party, Parliamentary Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Armen Rustamian of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, and Parliament member Stepan Demirchian of the opposition Peoples Party, who contributed to debates with their speeches. The same day another member of the Armenian delegation to PACE, Artashes Geghamian, Parliament member from the opposition National Unity Party, spoke during PACEs discussion of Europes energy security, but did not participate in the Armenia debate.
The report, assessing all aspects of socio-political life in Armenia since its accession, was quite critical towards Armenia's authorities, though noting some changes and improvements in a number of fields. One of the key points of this report was the issue of past and forthcoming parliamentary elections (now set for May 12, 2007), and the presidential elections in 2008.
The PACE rapporteurs stated their strong disappointment that, since Armenias accession to the CoE in 2001, "not a single election held there has been deemed fully free and fair." They argued that the next ballot should at last comply with European standards for free and fair elections as proof of Armenia's progress along the road to democracy and European integration.
While PACE clearly affirmed that democratic elections can be guaranteed only if they are implemented in good faith and if the political will exists at the highest level, "a clear message must be conveyed that in the next elections fraud will simply not be tolerated." Non-tolerance of that fraud could create additional challenges for Armenian authorities, both with regard to Armenia's participation in important European projects, as well as in the matter of potential pressure on Armenia over the Nagorno-Karabakh issue.
The constitutional referendum in Armenia, which was postponed several times due mostly for political reasons, ultimately took place on Nov. 27, 2005. Had it not taken place at the time, Armenia would have risked having its mandate at CoE suspended, as was previously the case with Russia and Belarus. PACE had welcomed the successful completion of this reform process, but "at the same time, the Assembly deplored the irregularities which tainted the conduct of the referendum and the failure to sanction the cases of fraud noted which marred the credibility of the official results."
In the field of pluralist democracy, the Parliament, while welcoming "the constitutional amendments which have improved the separation of, and balance between, the legislative, executive and judicial powers" points out those improvements should lead especially to "the institution of dialogue between the ruling coalition and the opposition." Besides the CoE, other European institutions as well had several times voiced their concern about the lack of a real opposition due to a corrupted political climate in Armenia.
Optimism Over Revised Constitution
In the report the Assembly expressed its optimism over the revised constitution which "now provides for direct or indirect election of the mayor of Yerevan and restricts the possibility of removing mayors from office" by the president.
Here, it is worth recalling that prior to the constitutional referendum in 2005 in Armenia there was much debate between the coalition parties and the opposition on whether Yerevans mayor should be elected directly (i.e. in a popular election) or indirectly (i.e. by the city council). The coalition was advocating for indirect elections, and the opposition for a direct vote. Colombier welcomed the implementation of the constitutional and the legislative reforms, but at the same time noted that "passing legislation is not enough to implement democratic reforms."
Based on this, the Assembly called on the Armenian authorities to take the necessary steps so that the law is effectively applied, which does not always appear to be the case at present. The rapporteur welcomed as well the fact that "the revised Constitution has granted a right of access to the Constitutional Court to ordinary citizens, the Human Rights Defender, members of the National Assembly." The Assembly expressed serious concern about "the allegations of ill-treatment, particularly during police custody, and of extortion by the police and the National Security Service." It declared the fact that "members of the Armenian police are found guilty of abuse of authority or of exceeding their authority, as well as the greater number of allegations that complaints are not lodged for fear of reprisals, & continues to fuel the feeling that impunity prevails."
Thus, PACE voiced its hope that the current legislative reforms introduced with the CoE's assistance will enable the image of the Armenian police to be improved, and the guarantees of democratic supervision of police activities to be strengthened. As regards Armenia's commitment to adopt a law on alternatives to military service in compliance with European standards, and to pardon all conscientious objectors sentenced to prison terms, the Assembly was disappointed to note that the current law, as amended in 2005 and subsequently in June 2006, still does not offer conscientious objectors any guarantee of "genuine alternative service of a clearly civilian nature, which should be neither deterrent nor punitive in character," as provided for by CoE standards. The Assembly welcomed the Nov. 14, 2006, signing of the Armenia-European Union Action Plan, under the EU's European Neighborhood Policy, which opened up a new era for the country, but also the region, as regards European integration."
Concerns Over Karabakh
Commenting on the Armenia-Azerbaijan issue over Nagorno-Karabakh, the Assembly regretted that despite three meetings between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan organized in 2006, and increased efforts by the co-chairs of the Minsk Group, no significant progress had been registered to date towards a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
Ten European parliamentarians took part in the debate following the presentation of the draft resolution.
It is worth mentioning here that almost all of them sent a clear message to the Armenian authorities, noting that "political will and resolve are needed at a high level in order to achieve their proper implementation." Demirchian of the Armenian delegation similarly stressed that "it is obvious that simply passing legislation and changing the constitution are not enough for the implementation of democratic reforms and the democratization of society."
"It is necessary to establish the tradition of respecting the constitution and the laws," he continued. Demirchian presented the results of a recent opinion poll, which found that 80 percent of Armenians do not believe in fair elections. He said that upcoming elections could be freer and fairer only if there is strong political goodwill and a restoration of popular trust in government.
Rustamian focused mainly on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue in the draft. One of his points was over "the concern about the recognition of the de facto administration in Nagorno-Karabakh." For him "no one could stop people from organizing their own democratic way of life." Addressing the same issue, Lithuanian MP Egidijus Vareikis called on Armenian and Azerbaijani authorities, for whom "today is based on the past&to forget this bad, negative past and to create a positive future."
"The only solution is to agree on peace and to reconcile," he concluded. Unusually, neither the Azerbaijani nor Turkish representatives intervened in the debate.
Reactions Good, Bad ... and Non-existent
As in the past there has been little reaction to the report and subsequent resolution in Armenia.
Surprisingly, not a single draft resolution -- all of which are public and can be found on the Council of Europe's website or obtained from the head of the Armenian delegation in PACE, Tigran Torosian -- is ever discussed or debated before it goes to the PACE sessions.
Public documents addressing a number of issues affecting Armenia's future are routinely ignored or underestimated by the Armenian media, NGOs, and the public. This may be largely a reflection of the lack of civic awareness among Armenians, and their apathy towards the country's political life.
The Armenian delegation to PACE is also to blame, for shunning collaboration with NGO's and the media. Another obstacle to the dissemination of the Council of Europe's values in Armenia is the limited coverage provided by the Armenian Public Television (H1), which typically includes only interviews with Armenian delegates about their own work and resulting perceptions of PACE.
Other televisions stations are either unable or uninterested in sending correspondents. Additionally, persistent problems with fast and reliable Internet connection, and a limited number of journalists fluent in English or French, means that other media outlets are similarly restricted in their coverage, even though PACE sessions are streamed live, and debate transcripts are published shortly thereafter. Following the Jan. 23 session, the head of Armenia's delegation, Speaker Torosian, assessed the report as "extremely positive" and "without precedent for Armenia." But a former member of the Armenian delegation to PACE, Shavarsh Kocharian of the National Democrats Party, took a cooler approach, describing the report as a "balanced paper."
PACE's Disconnect on Armenian Issues
Two days later, on Jan. 25, PACE debated threats to journalists -- both to their lives and to their right to freedom of expression. As part of that debate PACE members condemned the Jan. 19 murder of the Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink and passed an amendment urging Turkey to repeal the infamous Article 301 from its penal code.
(Article 301 has made it a crime to "insult Turkey's identity, state institutions and security forces," opening the way for the prosecution of Dink and others.)
Although this topic is directly connected to Armenian concerns, only Rustamian from the Armenian delegation was registered for a speech. The point he made during discussions was to stress in the resolution that Hrant Dink, while a Turkish citizen, was of Armenian origin, and that officials of the CoE had failed to mention that this very fact was an important feature of his murder. However, since Rustamian's good intention had not been made into an amendment, the resolution was adopted without a single word about the Armenian origin of Hrant Dink.
The Armenian delegation's passivity and political "skepticism" also has negative consequences in debates over the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, where Armenian MPs frequently adopting a reactive posture. A generation of newly-elected parliamentarians from other countries unfortunately are not very familiar with the issue, especially with the Armenian position. But having participated in PACE debates over the conflict, they are now quite familiar with the arguments of Azerbaijani and Turkish parliamentarians and their supporters from other countries. As a result, PACE members overall have a biased understanding and approach to the Nagorno-Karabakh issue.
The PACE resolution 1416 on "The conflict over the Nagorno-Karabakh region dealt with by the OSCE Minsk Conference," passed in January 2005, provides a telling example. That resolution included passages such as "a considerable part of the territory of Azerbaijan is still occupied by Armenian forces," which has "led to large-scale ethnic expulsion and the creation of mono-ethnic areas and resembles the terrible concept of ethnic cleansing." Incredibly, Speaker Torosian (at the time Deputy Speaker and still head of Armenia's delegation) tried to give a positive spin to this resolution, even presenting it as an important victory of Armenian diplomacy because some even worse passages had been removed from the final resolution.
While Azerbaijani MPs and their supporters use every PACE session to unload yet another barrage of accusations against Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh (the latest session featured claims that Armenian doctors have engaged in torture and the removal of body parts from kidnapped Azeri children), PACE leadership holds out hope for an Armenian-Azerbaijani parliamentary dialogue.
On the fringes of this winter plenary session, the CoE launched an initiative to begin a regular face-to-face dialogue on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The heads of the two delegations, Speaker Torosian and the Azerbaijani Parliament's Foreign Relations Committee chair Samad Seyidov, said that "while the OSCE Minsk Group should play the lead role in finding a solution to the conflict, the CoE has a vital supportive role to play in improving the atmosphere and dispelling misunderstandings." Back in Armenia, Torosian said that he was not suffering from an exaggerated optimism over the meeting's impact. Not hiding his skepticism about results of such meetings, he argued that he would consider the initiative a success when in fact it produces real results.
Gevorg Melikyan is the founding president of Solidarity of Students (S.O.S), a non-governmental organization in Armenia; in 2005 he interned at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) in Strasbourg. Melikyan is currently a Caucasus fellow at the World Security Institute in Washington, D.C. The views expressed in this essay are his own.