Although Raffi Hovhannisyan is not the candidate I voted for, I treat that kind, honest, and patriotic person with great respect and liking, I am happy for his success, proud that many citizens who want to change our life are gathered in Freedom Square. I also think that Karapet Rubinyan and Nikol Pashinyan who, overcoming “interparty problems,” expressed their support for the Heritage Party leader did the absolutely right thing.
After saying so many good things, now I have to say also the negative. As a man who has been dealing with texts all of his life and has been editing them for at least 18 years, I should assert that Raffi’s texts, speeches, yesterday’s speech at the rally, in particular, didn’t have a strong logical structure, it wasn’t clear where the starting point and where the conclusion are. Certainly, individual parts were very emotional and basically right; perhaps, they were very encouraging for those gathered. However, from my perspective, they were not “purposeful.” Because besides the idea of having a good, fair, prosperous, and democratic country that is acceptable for all of us, we the citizens, should realize what concrete way the given politician offers for that. And if we put aside all the right phrases, the bottom line will be, I think, the following: Mr. Hovhannisyan suggests that the incumbent president come to Freedom Square, resign his office and declare him, Raffi, president (how? based on what document?). Let us just theoretically assume that Serzh Sargsyan agrees and does so; it will be an absolutely irresponsible, arbitrary and unlawful attitude from both of them. But all of us want the establishment of constitutional law, don’t we? Besides, such an attitude of two candidates who have won hundreds of thousands of votes will be a subject of mockery around the world.
Therefore, the struggle is surely honest, but the goals should be formulated more clearly. Oppositionists can demand Serzh Sargsyan’s resignation. They can demand a recalculation, and if it shows huge distortion, the Central Election Commission (CEC) can make a respective decision. In the end, probably there will be a need in the future to file a petition in the Constitutional Court, which can find the CEC’s decision unfavorable for the opposition void. Probably there are other solutions too. But it is obvious that just coming and “handing over the crown” will be disrespectful to the law and, in the end, to the citizens too.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
