“Nowadays figures are trying to plunge a part of the society into adventure vortex; they are voicing irresponsible calls for upheaval and overthrow the government by force,” announced the Head of NSS Gorik Hakobyan on Sunday, speaking on the Day of NSS officers.
As long as the names of “nowadays figures” were not voiced, each one can think of a figure who has recently voiced anti-constitutional and provocative calls. For example, I think of the deputy police chief Levon Yeranosyan who threatens to cut off his political opponents’ ears or “smash their heads”. Or perhaps, it is about the Republican politicians who say that their party will last long in power. It is, of course, anti-constitutional because, according to the Basic law, the issue is decided by voting.
It is clear, however, that when a country’s power structures make such statements, they mean the unbalanced manifestations by some opposition groups. However, in this sense, it seems that there is no cause for concern in Armenia. The five opposition forces presented in the National Assembly are engaged in entirely “classical” political activities; they argue on some matters and largely agree with the government on some fundamental matters (e.g., about the EaEU). If remarks are made at the National Assembly improper for MPs, first of all, they are unlikely to be a violation of the Constitution, secondly, they are mostly uttered from the lips of representatives of the ruling political force.
Three of these five political forces held rallies in the fall, in which, as far as I know, no anti-constitutional speeches were made. The “most horrible” threat, with which the Parliamentary trio acted, was the forced resignation of the president under certain circumstances. Resignation is a process entirely fitting in the Constitution. Improper speeches were also made during the rallies, however, not so many than during opposition rally in any country.
Read also
Only Shant Harutyunyan has actually talked about rebellion. The preamble of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads about the rebellion: It is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law. The poor Armenian translation in the UN website sounds as follows, “It is essential to protect human rights by the rule of law, so that he (Who? Perhaps, the human – A.A.), as a last resort, is not compelled to rebel against tyranny and oppression.” Here, it is a complex issue: it is possible to revolt or rebel in legal and illegal ways; there is no rule of law in Armenia, nor “tyranny” or dictatorship. How then it is possible to interpret the Declaration, it is hard to say.
One thing is clear: criticisms and warnings should be made more earmarked to avoid suspecting all in vain.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
