The NA Vice President Hermine Naghdalyan referring to the CC report that made much noise and the struggle of different wings in RPA
– Last week, the President Serzh Sargsyan’s assessment at the presidential regarding parliamentary discussions of CC report and subsequent political statements, gave rise to various interpretations. Do you share the President’s assessment?
First of all, I would like to point out that for two days under unprecedented open and transparent conditions the findings of the most important institution’s, Control Chamber’s activities were discussed at the Parliament. Later, there were also many other discussions and opinions. And, as you said, the natural culmination of was the RA President’s reference. In other words, once it became clear that the government made all the facts and details a subject for public discussion. To remind you we had a similar discussion in September. In other words, this is not a show, this is the exact position of the authorities, consistent manifestation of political will, or as the President stated in his speech: “the state itself is speaking the highest about the existing drawbacks, publicly identify high-risk areas.” And this is really the way to creating an atmosphere of public intolerance. CC has accomplished a lot of work, and today it has really become the most important institution and the most important tool of legitimate monitoring of public funds, state property, and the use of community property. I think that this is the main success that we should record. Secondly, I believe that the meaning of the majority of political will to initiate an open and transparent discussion, and the logical development can, and, definitely, will be the persistence to provide assessment with utmost accountability, including legal assessment to all phenomena. There should be consequences, and the atmosphere of impunity must be excluded. And this is also a political will, which is consistent with the Republican party, and with many statements of the RA President. We, the Republicans, have repeatedly emphasized this in our speeches and questions, realizing our political responsibility. And here an important idea like the red thread was running during the entire discussions, if we would only need to check out, we would have established another Prosecutor’s Office or a tax authority. The CC has much larger mission because creating a Control Chamber, the public, on behalf of the Chamber wants to see a structure that not only documents the violations, but also reveals the reasons giving rise to the violations, and analyses and comes up with recommendations, which enables the whole management process staying out from defects of systemic nature. We have talked about this again. And was also much talked about during this parliamentary discussion: it is not only important to record violations, but also to identify systemic gaps, and thus to fight not against crime or dereliction, but to create guarantees that the blemish of such systemic nature vanish thoroughly. This is a pivotal role of the Control Chamber or a special mission.
– The CC chairman said that he has acted within the scope of his authority as prescribed by law.
Read also
– And in this sense, I think it is important to once again address the Law on Control Chamber, which defines the objectives, functions, competencies, but does not provide the objective of the activities of Control Chamber. Let’s agree that establishing one more company next to existing 16 inspection companies in our country (all over the world inspecting company with such broad powers unlike other inspection companies, for example, not being limited in timing of inspection, and being present in the inspected facilities, up to the year-round) is justified only if it pursues a qualitatively different objective, to promote increase of efficiency in public administration system. During the existence of Control Chamber, we had two laws: the one adopted in 1996 and later significantly amended version in 2006. During these amendments, in my opinion, essential formulations were made, which were left out of the law. The first law says that the Control Chamber is an organization implementing financial audits, studies and analysis, in the second law we lost this provision of the law, and CC became only an inspecting, supervision implementing independent public body. In other words, the situation that we have today, to some extent also occurred in the result of this. This discussion brought up another problem, which, in my opinion, is connected with the Basic Law. We have seen that there is a lack of objective and thorough investigation, which cannot take place in the plenary session hall. The Government believes that the format of discussions has not allowed it to fully present its arguments, and it appeared under unequal conditions. In this sense, of course, the example that was brought from the Estonian experience was also important referring to the discussion of current reports at the Parliament and the formats of discussing current reports in profile committees. I would add also the procedure that is defined, during all our inspections, the inspected may bring its recommendations and get answers to these recommendations, which remained unfinished in the Law of Control Chamber. I think it also greatly created the situation, which we have now, when the agencies come up with recommendations, and they are left unanswered. I would like also to remind you that in the Article of the previous law “The objectives of the Control Chamber” we have had a provision on submitting a reference in the beginning of each semi-annual about use of the state budget loans and credits of the previous semi-annual, and about privatization and the process of implementing denationalization program. In other words, the element of current supervision and information was found in the previous law, which was later also removed. I consider that these are serious problems that have weakened the targeted activities of Control Chamber. Our primary goal is not to have a regular inspection company, but analyzing available gaps, various types of non-productive expenditures and abuses, and elimination of the reasons giving birth to these actions.
– During this time, quite a lot analysis and publications were made in the Republican Party regarding the existence of different “wings”, which taking the advantage of the situation on CC report are trying to move their issues forward. Is there such a thing?
– There also emerged a situation that we had repeatedly seen before, when such open conversation was used by the opposition and some media to give shady intrigues, personified approaches, some “wing fights” and other qualifications, and to initiate ‘witch-hunt’. I am a member of the Republican Party for more than 15 years, and many times I have heard about various leaders of different times who, as if, are building up their wings, and that there is a struggle going on between those wings. But I want to point out that first of all, I’ve never seen the wings and over the years I have been the witness that the Republican Party has managed to come out of all trials and present as a more unified and monolithic structure. The attitude of Republicans in regard to this issue and all other issues containing speculations, I think, should be viewed from one point of view, we are all from the wing of Republican Party and the President. There is no need to look for intrigues in the places, where they do not exist, and in case of not finding to invent them. There is no need to try presenting the Republican Party as a separated, multi-layer structure. Each of us in our way, with our recommendations and participation would like to voice and resolve the issues that are brought up by the President of our country.
Nelly Grigoryan
“Aravot” daily
