The Constitutional Reform Commission received remarks from various political parties related to concept paper of the constitutional reforms. “Freedom” party, in the face of Hrant Bagratyan, expressed its concerns regarding this document. Hrant Bagratyan notes, “No democracy turns out to be by removing or weakening the post of the president. It will result in an irresponsible situation. Today, we are able to at least clearly blame the leader of the country for the errors. Tomorrow, we would not have it either. And the government authorities would do what they wanted in the framework of the “constitution”.”
The other concern refers to the rights of the Diaspora to elections. Hrant Bagratyan notes, “As per Constitution, there is a risk of losing the election institute and destroy the system of citizenship. What do you mean by saying a Diaspora representative and why he should elect the president of Armenia? Does the President of Armenia rule him so that he is elected as a representative? And what about the citizen of Armenia?” Mr. Bagratyan also states that no well-known sociologists, economists, historians and philosophers were included in the staff of the Committee. The development of the concept paper of the Constitution considered the scanty remarks by the 6 members of the Venice Commission. Then, he concludes, “This once again proves that the purpose of the constitutional reform is different, a political one and no task is set to improve the quality of governance.”
Aravot.am was curious to learn from the CEO of the “Civil Society Institute” NGO Artak Kirakosyan whether he was invited to the discussion of the constitutional reforms as a civil society representative, he replied, no, and added that they have not applied either. However, he stressed that the reforms are necessary and it is also necessary to attend this process for it is a fundamental matter, and non-participation and boycotting would mean admitting our weakness that “this is bad, it’s all the same, they will do what they want, therefore, it is better to boycott”. Artak Kirakosyan is sure that even if you come out of the situation defeated, it would be a fight, which will strengthen the civil society and the political parties. However, Artak Kirakosyan cannot give guarantees that if changes are made, we would give solutions to many problematic issues.
Turning to the issue of the right to vote by the Diaspora, Mr. Kirakosyan, in fact, countered Hrant Bagratyan’s allegation. “Today, the situation is truly strange. The citizens of Armenia who live abroad have no chance to participate in the elections. It’s not that seven million passports will be given at once and the Diaspora will participate in the elections, it is not realistic. But it is strange that the people who have temporarily left for a migrant job do not have the chance to vote.” To Hrant Bagratyan’s concern of whether the issue of switching to a proportional system is resolved, or whether in the result of removal or weakening of the post of the president of Armenia, the opposition will definitely obtain leverages, Mr. Kirakosyan gave a general reply, “I’m not the one to give a solution. We cannot answer for someone else. But the amendments are necessary as the current Constitution has many problems. There’s no guarantee in anything, but this does not mean that we should sit idle and do nothing.” Artak Kirakosyan agrees that the constitutional amendments would be a political decision too, but it would be wrong to boycott on it. He wrapped up, “We are fighting for some minor changes, but when it comes to the essential, we say we are powerless and that’s it. This is wrong.”
Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
