Police may act disproportionate and violent actions in any place – Armenia, Artsakh, or, let’s say, Los Angeles. The difference is that in Los Angeles, you can sue against the police for his disproportionate and violent actions and the chances are great that you win if you are righteous. You too can apply to the court and complain of the law enforcer but there is almost no chance of your winning. (The recent striking example was the apparent violence committed against the journalist of “A1+”). In Artsakh, as I understand it, you do not have even the chance to sue on this matter. And as to what the citizen of Armenia should do whose rights are violated in Artsakh, generally, is not clear.
I see the problem in the legal dimension. Who were the people who brutally attacked “The Founding Parliament” and its supporters’ motorcade? If there were the police, then which units did they represent? Who were the armed people in masks standing on the hills, who were shooting into the air? Getting this information officially was very difficult, not to speak about applying to the court instances. Probably, relevant authorities of Armenian and NKR need to have some kind of document that regulates such relations.
Since all of this is missing, what remains are the Facebook emotional outbursts and political speculations. To the point, from all sides. For example, considering the actions of law enforcers of Nagorno-Karabakh is a national treason. Or, vice versa, assault on the motorcade headed by Zhirayr Sefilyan who liberated Artsakh, is a national treason. Like in many other cases, we lack the culture of moderate and sober assessment. People are either pure angels or Aliyev’s spies.
Among all of these discussion, there is one problem that singles out. How to avoid splitting Armenia and Artsakh by spiritual, cultural, ideological and military sense? And how to divide Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh in an administrative sense? Some say that the first one automatically assumes the second one, and that Artsakh is a province of Armenia, and Bako Sahakyan is one of the Governors. This justifies the “100th anniversary without the regime” protest, which was decided to hold in Stepanakert too, as it would be done in Gyumri and Kapan. But to justify this-or-that political action does not probably worth of refusing the strategy adopted twenty years, which is based on self-determination and the existence of the two Armenian states.
Read also
We like to repeat that Artsakh is an independent state with its established institutions. Now, the time has come for the leadership of Artsakh to prove it. One of the indicators of the established state is that given state may punish the law enforcers exceeding their power. This exceed in non-established states is tried to cover up by patriotic slogans.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
This is indeed an interesting article, based on an unusually objective approach and a sensible point of view.
But unfortunately, its fundamental premise is flawed, as is also its primary analogy.
Yes, in a regular or ordinary, routine situation, the police authorities in Los Angeles, Paris, Toronto, etc., are legally accountable towards the public, vis-à-vis the citizens, and they can be sued if they act in an abusive or an unlawful way.
But the events at issue which unfolded in Artsakh do not constitute a normal, a regular police operation. The matter is related to national security concerns. And when it comes to such a situation, you can be assured that nobody can do much neither, in Los Angeles, Paris, Toronto, Sydney, etc.
Moreover, in any country, the organism who is ultimately qualified and empowered, by virtue of the Law, to decide whether or not there are national security concerns at stake, is the police (or police-related) force, which acts – and has the duty to act – upon those concerns. In some instances, those authorities are not even bound to disclose the details of such a decision to any other state authority, not even to a Judge, in his/her Chambers… You should take a look at the US “Patriot Act”, for instance, or to any similar legislation in other developed, Western countries…
And all this applies to just an “ordinary” surrounding. So, we may imagine how it is, in a war zone… In this regard, if we want to make a distinction between police action and physical brutality, allow me to remind you, as an example only, that in the USA, just two months ago, the Senate issued a report confirming that certain governmental bodies are in the habit of committing systematic torture… And this is only the part which is being formally, officially admitted…
From this point forward of the analysis, we can no longer remain on the level of theory, principles and objective assessments, and we have to enter the sphere of subjective opinions, political considerations , biased or “partisan” positioning, etc…. Or, as you put it, “the Facebook emotional outbursts and political speculations”… And I just don’t feel like it, here…
Yours Truly,
Haytoug Chamlian, Attorney-At-Law, Canada
Thank you, dear Haytoug, for detailed comment