In the draft of the Constitution amendments, the A1+ TV Company Director Mesrop Movsesyan vs. Armenia’s ECHR decision has not been taken into consideration. Note that the Venice Commission had proposed to take “Mesrop Movsesyan vs. Armenia” ECHR decision into consideration in the draft Constitution”, in other words, the NCTR decisions on granting a license should be substantiated. “It is difficult to understand why the Venice Commission was not consistent to the implementation of its proposal, because not only the NCTR’s proposal was ignored but the stable majority, and later no changes were made in the Apostolic Church and a number of other provisions.
The Venice Commission found out that the power of passing, approval and denial of the Constitution is the task of the citizen, the political forces and the civil society of the country. Once we do not like it, we would not approve it. This is the main argument that the Venice Commission showed that it cannot urge any country saying that this formulation or this constitution is suitable for your country,” opines human right defender Artur Sakunts, detailing that the Venice Commission was not expressing any definite posture about the main provision of stable majority but saying that maybe it would be defined by the Electoral Code. The human right defender recalled that Armenia implemented the ECHR decision regarding the “A1+” formally. “A tender was declared, but A1 + again failed, the documents were not accepted as justification to be able to be on the air. There were no proper grounds relating to the transmission of Armnews. On what ground it is recognized a winner?”
Arpine SIMONYAN
