The
RA first Ombudsman Larissa Alaverdian said about the RA CC settlement.Yesterday
the RA Constitutional Court took a decision, which a lot of persons compared with
the decision about holding a "referendum of confidence" on the occasion
of the RA Parliamentary elections on 16 of April 2006. How does the RA first Defender
of Human Rights interpret the CC decision? We asked Mrs. Alaverdian about it who
didn’t only turn to the Constitutional Court with the facts of violating the rights
of inhabitants in North and General avenues but also included those facts in her
annual report 2005. L. Alaverdian is sure that though the CC yesterday decision
gives the answer that the stressed laws about amortization and the RA Government
decisions are anti-constitutional but the problem of restoring the right of the
RA citizens’ property hasn’t been settled in the period of that amortization.
"I we take into consideration that we live in a certain period and certain
people, families stand behind all this who have been suffered not only for the
right of their property but also for human dignity and other human rights, then
just it needs in interpretation. This comes from the 4th point of the CC settlement;
"Following the positions of the second part of the 102nd article and taking
into consideration that the RA NA and the Government are obliged to correspond
a lot of deeds of the problem to the Constitution and CC settlement and regulate
by the law". "That point of the CC is settled by compromise by which
isn’t possible to restore the rights of people by internal mechanisms that suffered
during that process. And more, the 4th point gives an opportunity for violating
the rights of other groups. Anyway, the decision needs in deeper interpretation
because the practice has shown that the meanings put in the formulations beforehand
aren’t included in the written text. That settlement doesn’t allow to seek for
the possibility of restoring human interests", – L. Alaverdian noticed.Whether
this CC settlement can be a ground for the victims of "state needs"
to be able to restore their rights in legal form. According to Mrs. Alaverdian
the 4th article strengthens that turning to the courts is result ness until the
laws aren’t corresponded to the RA Constitution".But laws can be adopted
in such a formulation in the future as if that amortization has been done taking
into consideration the state interests."That’s why I have some expectations
to this decision. And though the CC with the first three points says with some
expectations that the amortization is anti-constitutional then it is obvious by
the 4th point the attitude towards the human rights which really exists in Armenia."But
could the CC do more than considering anti-constitutional the amortization of
people. "The problem is to recognize those laws and decisions of the
government anti constitutional. But I worry about the 4th point, which is the
order of using that settlement. I will speak of this settlement more thoroughly
in some days. It becomes clear that such a period is given for this approach and
such opportunities to the executive power that they come to say that the interests
of the authority are superior from the interests of common citizens", – the
RA first ombudsman declared.Naira Mamikonian
