The “Heritage” party board meeting is over where a decision was made to refuse President Serzh Sargsyan’s invitation to attend the consultation on Constitutional amendments at Baghramyan 26. According to our information, the members of the board had quite discrepancies about this matter and, eventually, it was decided not to go to the meeting. Aravot.am clarified with the Vice-Chairman of the “Heritage” party, Armen Martirosyan, whether the Board has made the decision unanimously, Mr. Martirosyan was reluctant to talk about or giving any details, saying, “I will not make any comments with regard to voting, because there is already the final decision, a voting and we will act within its framework.” Last time, at Baghramyan 26, after the meeting of Ruben Hakobyan and Armen Martirosyan, a big reaction was followed by the public and other Board member of the “Heritage” party.
To our question of whether it had an impact on this decision, Armen Martirosyan replied, “Absolutely, if I were sure that this Constitution indeed would have a very positive impact for the state and it would resolve the problems facing the country, I would be ready to attend according to my principles, even through the path of self-destruction and have my positive remarks and activities about it. But since the situation is not so, this Constitution is worsening, naturally, we have expressed our views that we are against. We are not in favor of the previous Constitution, because we see that it needs to be amended, we are in favor of the parliamentary system, because it is our program provisions in the two national elections. However, this does not mean that what is presented is a parliamentary system. The parliamentary system implies a great representation, it suggests mechanisms of counterbalances and restraints, which is completely missing in this draft, and there is a sovereignty-related problem”.
To our question of perhaps you could present your approaches personally to Serzh Sargsyan and he would give way, Armen Martirosyan replied, “We had already presented the first time, if there were a reaction after it, and we would see that some of the recommendations were already passed, we would try continuing this dialogue. But since they were not passed, then what was the sense of this meeting?”
Hripsime JEBEJYAN
