“Uncovering March 1 will cause many people’s headache”

Seda Safaryan an ex-member of “The Fact-Gathering Group” on that case thinks so

 “I have an impression that everybody wanted to uncover March 1, however it was not uncovered. In reality, I do not agree now either that there can be purposeful process of uncovering March 1. March 1 uncovering will cause many people’s headache. It means that many must not only leave the government, but also Armenia. March1 was not an ordinary event to blame someone, conceal and move on”, said the Heritage Party ex-representative of “The Fact-Gathering Group” Seda Safaryan yesterday having in mind the past experience, showing extremely skeptical attitude towards the nowadays political statements about uncovering that case, since she was is not sure that anything had changed. “If he is so anxious about March 1, then why he did not talk about it long ago when there was a need for that. E.g. I am sure that the Fact-Gathering Group must have the possibility to listen to all three presidents. Now I have an impression that they blame only one of them for drawing the plan, fulfilling it and the tragic impact it had”, noted our interlocutor in regard to Robert Kocharyan’s latest interview. In general, Mrs. Safaryan had an impression that Kocharyan tried to justify his and Serzh Sargsyan’s govenments by that interview directing all his criticism toward Levon Ter-Petrossian and his supporters. “It surprises me that Robert Kocharyan thinks that Ter-Petrossian had leverages, forces, influence on the brass in that situation and did not do a hand’s turn to control the situation. There is an obvious impression that Kocharyan has nothing to do with March 1 situation, meanwhile we all know how big his role was in all that. According to high-ranking police officers they informed Robert Kocharyan about holding an operative discussion on February 28 and the actions discussed at the operative discussion on March 1 morning. I even questioned, was the president informed about the outcome of other discussions? Kocharyan wants to show that it was a situation aroused by itself. I believe that everybody has political responsibility; however who in what degree and for what, one must yet diversify”, said Seda Safaryan. As a result of the Fact-Gathering Group’s work our interlocutor came to a conclusion that those events were “designed” in every detail in opposition to Robert Kocharyan’s statement that in this case the president himself did not supervise. “To understand that whole situation you should have known how they were preparing in 10/33-10/32 units, when and what type of weapon they took when they left and where they were going”, remembered Mrs. Safaryan claiming that the only forces that could “oppose” or “slip” from the grasp of the government, the police and the NSS forces and could wander armed around the city were oligarchical forces. Therefore, our interlocutor perceives all the post-March 1 accusations and convictions as “a punishment for the idea and opposing”, if not she asks why the “willful” murderers were not punished on March 2, when there were photos, recordings and videos and they were very easy to discover. Now he finds it impossible to conduct an impartial investigation post factum and punishing the very guilty. By the way, in regard to giving-not giving an order, she pointed out that all who had used “Cheryomukha 7” said that they had had such an order. The terms chosen for imposing a state of emergency are also incomprehensible for Seda Safaryan. Kocharyan says that a state of emergency was imposed when there had been deaths, markets had been robbed; everything was being smashed to pieces, “If everything was over, why ever there was a need for a state of emergency? The state of emergency was imposed after the state of emergency they had created. Imposing a state of emergency meant horror for the process of uncovering March 1 as a crime that was planted in the people, dispersed the witnesses of the killings from Armenia, and a convenient investigation was made. It was a state of extreme horror, because the regulations denoted by the Constitution for that situation are completely different.” In general our interlocutor advises to diversify, the places where the rally took place and where fighting took place. She thinks very interesting the overall movements of the military, police and NSS forces, the preparations made beforehand, the barbed wire put, the clarifications given by the high-ranking officers of the police to “Fact-Gathering Group” and many other things. She was also interested when and how the purposes of the opposition became clear to Kocharyan that he speaks of going for “unlawful actions by the opposition” and whether those assumed purposes were the very reason why he attacked and used weapons banned by the law.