Don’t claim electoral fraud before the elections

The PACE co-rapporteurs on Armenia called for this in their report.

It is obvious from “The functioning of democratic institutions in Armenia”, the18-page report discussed at the September 8 meeting of the PACE Monitoring Committee what a titanic work was done by the co-rapporteurs to set free the people arrested in regard to the March 1, 2008 events. In particular, it is mentioned that during his visit to Armenia in the framework of the Forum for the Future of Democracy, in October 2010, John Prescott urged the authorities to release the remaining prisoners on parole. Also during their March 2011 visit they stressed that the imprisonment of opposition supporters “poisons the political atmosphere in the country” etc. In the explanatory memorandum of the report, the rapporteurs criticized both the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee on March 1 events (“The placing of the blame for the polarized political climate solely on the
opposition forces, especially on those supporting Mr. Levon Ter-Petrossian, is regrettable as it undermines the credibility of the report by the Inquiry Committee”) and the Fact-Finding Group (“Regrettably their findings underscore the politicization of the work of the group as they seem to focus on procedural mistakes and errors by the responsible investigation services rather than on establishing clarity with regard to the circumstances of these 10 deaths”). They also mentioned that during their last visit to Armenia, “President Sargsyan clearly demonstrated his personal commitment to establishing responsibility for the 10 deaths that occurred.”
In the memorandum, the co-rapporteurs recurred in detail to the reform package, firstly stressing that the reforms proposed should not focus on legislative change per se but equally on “changing existing practice and mentality”. In the subsection called “Electoral reform”, a rather obvious insinuation was made, “Regrettably, questioning the fairness of the election process, and alleging –or at least insinuating– electoral fraud, has been part of the election strategies of several parties in the past. This has not contributed to the public trust in the election processes and has been harmful. We therefore call upon all parties not to undermine the public trust in the election process by unnecessarily questioning the election process or claiming electoral fraud before the elections have even taken place.”
In the subsection called “Media pluralism”, it is mentioned, “An essential condition for the democratic development of Armenia is the creation of a genuinely pluralist media environment, which is so far still lacking in the country.” Here they recur to the tender organized in December 2010 and call not giving “A1+” a broadcasting license “a controversial decision”. Quoting the argument of the sides, the co-rapporteurs mentioned, “We regret that the authorities –in this case the NCTR– rejected the bid from A1+, while being fully aware about its significance, on what would seem to be purely technical/administrative arguments, without allowing “Meltex” to correct or clarify the background information they had given to support their bid.” They also quote the decision of the CE Committee of Ministers to stop supervising the execution of the ECtHR judgment in the case of “A1+” and mention that this decision met with profound criticism by Armenian opposition and most civil society and media representatives. The co-rapporteurs gave importance to differentiating the approaches of the ECtHR and the PACE to this issue, “While the decision of the
ECtHR demanded that an open and transparent broadcasting license tender procedure be organized by the Armenian authorities, the Assembly has always asked that, in addition, such a tender process should result in a more pluralist and diverse media environment.”
In the “Concluding remarks” the co-rapporteurs mention the priorities for their future monitoring: “the conduct of genuinely democratic parliamentary elections that result in a parliament that is truly reflecting Armenian society”; “the creation of a robust democratic and pluralist political environment”; the establishment of an open and pluralist media environment; the reform of the police and the judiciary. The PACE is supposed to discuss the next report on all this in 2013.