Gagik Jhangiryan representing the Armenian National Congress (ANC) proposed to establish a parliamentary commission investigating the events of March 1 again yesterday. It is obvious that this proposal will undoubtedly not be accepted in the National Assembly, but it seems to me that the proposal is very right and appropriate. Certainly, the given MP’s personality is not perceived unambiguously either. Admittedly, he is not one of the swans from Tchaikovsky’s famous ballet. However, on the other hand, he is not some monster – he is an ordinary Armenian (post-Soviet) prosecutor with an ordinary portion of corruption and sadism. God willing, the time will come when the alleged crimes of the former military prosecutor will be investigated – it will be when the prosecutors and investigators who worked with him will not hold their offices anymore. However, it is a less urgent issue than the investigation of the March 1 slaughter.
Almost every day (for example, two days ago in Madrid), there are clashes between the protesters and the police and the latter use force against citizens, people are often injured. However, during those clashes no one dies, as a rule. The reason is very simple – the police are ordered not to shoot at people with lethal ammunition and Cheryomukha. In the case of March 1, neither the investigation body, nor the Nikoyan Commission has answered the question who made such a decision.
Why does nonetheless a political body, the National Assembly, have to deal with that case. Because I think saying March 1 one should understand not only the 10 deaths, but also what happened before and after that. For example, then President Robert Kocharyan’s speech in front of students when he said that the organizers of the rallies will appear in prison, if they went on like that. As far as I can understand, the head of state must not decide or state in advance who will be imprisoned – it is done only by the court decision. Similarly, he must not rally members of the Constitutional Court around him and order what decision they must make. Probably, the parliamentary commission should also examine the fact that from March 1 to 20, there was censorship of the press – the mass media were forced to only express the official opinion and it means the closure of all normal mass media. Certainly, objective investigation must take into account also the provocative statements of some oppositionists before March 1. In any case, March1 is a stigma not only for the presidents, government and law-enforcers, but also for the state and the people. The sooner we get rid of that stigma, the better.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
