Opposition Says No to Constitutional Ammendments
In a widely anticipated move, and although risking incurring the wrath of the U.S. and Europe, RFE/RL also reports that the opposition in Armenia have used televised debates in the Armenian National Assembly on proposed ammendments to the constitution to urge voters to reject them in a referendum to be held during November.
The move dealt a serious blow to Kocharian’s and his governing coalition’s hopes for rallying sufficient popular support for the proposed changes at a referendum due in November. It came on the third day of heated debates on the issue in the Armenian parliament.
The leaders of the opposition Artarutyun (Justice) alliance and the National Unity Party (AMK) reiterated their allegations that the authorities have repeatedly violated the existing Armenian constitution that already guarantees free elections, human rights and the rule of law.
In essence, the opposition are hoping to turn the referendum into a vote of no confidence in the Armenian President Robert Kocharian who they believe falsified presidential elections in 2003 and is responsible for the high level of corruption in the country. Kocharian’s main challenger in those elections, Stepan Demirchyan, urged voters to say “no” to the ammendments and to the “illegitimate regime.” Another opposition leader, Artashes Geghamian, went even further.
“Dear people, if you say ‘no’ to the [amended] constitution — and that’s what National Unity is urging you to do — you will say ‘no’ to the organizers of the October 27 [1999 attack on the Armenian parliament], the falsified elections of 1998-2003, and the barbaric acts of April 2004,” AMK leader Artashes Geghamian declared for his part. “You will also say that real power belongs to the people.”
Regardless of the lack of democracy in Armenia and fears that elections in 2007 and 2008 as well as local elections this year will fail to meet international standards, the Council of Europe and United States considers the adoption of the constitutional ammendments crucial for Armenia’s future democratization. However, the opposition disagree and believe that Kocharian will use the adoption of a new constitution to seek a third term in office.
“The reason why individuals that perpetrated vote falsifications and high-level corrupt officials are not held accountable is not the flawed constitution but a few individuals’ penchant for clinging to power at any cost,” he added. “When criminal elements are growing intertwined with the government, who can guarantee that elections will not be rigged and citizens’ rights will not be violated after the enactment of the constitutional amendments?”
Some of the other opposition leaders claim that a positive outcome of the November referendum would enable Kocharian to seek a third term in office in 2008. They say in that case the authorities could declare that Armenia has a new constitution and start a new countdown of presidential terms. The existing constitution bars the Armenian president can not stay in power for more than two five-year tenures.
However, a Kocharian spokesperson denied such claims in a Russian newspaper that also quoted sources in the Kremlin that the Armenian President will instead seek to pass on power to his most trusted lieutenant, Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisyan. Even so, and depsite widespread apathy in society, most Armenians say they will not stand for such a move.
So if the voters say “NO” who wins?
1. the opposition may win a temporary moral victory, because it persuaded people to vote as they wanted.
2. the authorities will win in a long term, because they are less than anybody interested in amendments. In a short term they will look much better in the eyes of outside world as more “progressive” than the opposition.
3. the people of Armenia will be loosers in the long trem, because even small steps improving constitution are better than sticking with the old/bad version.
But the fact that opposition stepped forward and discussing the amendments in the parlament in a civilized manner is promissing.
Comment by Գագիկ — August 31, 2005 @ 9:24 pm
If voters say “no” and the referendum is not falsified then democracy wins. Same if the voters say “yes.”
Problem is, the apathy in society means the necessary turnout for the referendum to be valid might not be obtainable.
What then? The authorities falsify the vote — ASSUMING they really do want the referendum passed. Maybe they don’t. Who knows?
However, I understand what you mean. The problem is that Armenia lost during the 2003 presidential and parliamentary elections and everything else stems from that.
What’s the solution?
Comment by Administrator — September 1, 2005 @ 8:05 am
I do not know what is the solution, I do not have a remedy. And this is a big personal issue that spills over Armenia as a country. I did not want to get involved in politics in Armenia becasue I did not see solutions. And by that I mean not absence of democracy or political culture, but also a damning role that external factors play in internal life of Armenia. Factors over which one has little control.
But anyway, one simple thing that opposition could do is celebrate victory. Some of the amendments were forced on the authorities and they are a step forward. So for once opposition could accept the fact of positive change and urge voters to participate in democratic process and vote for changes. Meanwhile work for more and better changes. Opposition can be positive sometimes and assisting, it shoulldnt be all confrontation. They loose credibility with such actions and actually add fuel to the indifference in the population.
Comment by Գագիկ — September 1, 2005 @ 11:10 pm
Carnival of Revolutions
This week’s (relatively short, no chance competing with onefreekorea’s) Carnival reaches you from Sheki, a town afoot the mighty Caucasus in Azerbaijan. It is published on Sunday, since I’ll be on the road to Tblissi tomorrow. I have…
Trackback by Ben Paarmann — September 4, 2005 @ 4:22 pm
Gagik, I guess the problem is simply this. After the 2003 Presidential Elections, the opposition want to use the referendum to force new Parliamentary or Presidential Elections. I agree that this is not a desirable situation and as much as I think that the opposition have no ideas or represent anything different over Kocharian (who was just a continuation of LTP’s regime in most regards anyway), the point is Armenia is at crisi point.
Unless someone does something to ensure that democracy evolves in Armenia in time for the 2007 parliamentary elections and 2008 presidential elections, not much can be done anyway. Yes, I suppose the opposition could move closer to work with the government but as Demirchyan thinks those in power were responsible for the assassination of his father and Aram Sarkisyan believes the same about his brother, I don’t see that they’ll ever be able to work together.
And that’s not forgetting the human rights abuses of opposition supporters in 2003 and 2004. I mean, the whole country is polarized and on opposing sides. I can’t see any solution out of that except for democratic elections and more political and media freedom. However, the authorities show no sign of doing anything in that regard. I don’t know. Armenia will be the country it makes of itself and that’s what you’re seeing now.
Incidentally, you could argue that the government could make more concessions if they want to avert a potential political and constitutional crsis.
Comment by Administrator — September 4, 2005 @ 4:49 pm
I am not saying that opposition should work closely with government, I am just saying they could regard amendments as a step, positive one, imposed on RK and can keep preasure or increase it to make more changes (like for elected major of Yerevan) without refusing the present ones. That will be constructive.
Comment by Գագիկ — September 5, 2005 @ 7:08 am
Gagik, you’re probably right and to be honest, if I were a citizen I’d be more inclined to vote for the ammendments than not. Ironically, however, it appears that most people I’ve spoken to at least won’t vote either yes or no. They just won’t take part. That’s a damning refelction on people’s trust in both the government and the opposition. Regardless, if that is the situation, the ammendments will fail because not enough people will take part. Think that was the sitution when they last tried to pass a different set of ammendments concurrently with the 2003 parliamentary elections.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2005 @ 7:37 am
Russia is playing a dirty game as evident frrom series of articles in Nezavisimaya and their analysis by D.Petrosian (NT).
Comment by Գագիկ — September 6, 2005 @ 7:00 am