“No final solutions can be made in any legal regulation unless we ensure their proper enforcement,” said the member of the Constitutional Reforms Committee, Gagik Ghazinyan, today, in response to the question of Aravot at the RA Academy of Justice prior to the discussion of the draft constitutional reforms. We asked Mr. Ghazinyan whether the amendments proposed in the draft suggest final solutions to the issues that exist in the RA justice system, about which, by the way, the Head of the EU Delegation to Armenia, Ambassador Piotr Świtalski made tough observations recently.
Mr. Ghazinyan noted that the ambassador’s words are not new, we also, the “healthy-minded people and experts, the representatives of the public, whose hearts ache for our justice and our country not only criticize,” they are constantly talking about these issues. Mr. Ghazinyan excludes the solution of these comprehensive issues only thru legal settlements. “The main problem is not so many legal arrangements, but I do see it in the increase in the level of their enforcement, which requires to have a good law enforcing and as much good law-enforced civil society, having relevant legal culture, the relevant degree of legal awareness and demanding. Unless there is no public demand for justice, they will have no result.”
Referring to the legal arrangements on judicial power of the draft more specifically, according to Gagik Ghazinyan, the availability of the aforementioned conditions enable to have a better justice. To our next question of whether he sees the solution of the legal enforcement problem in the face of the initiator of the constitutional amendments – the President of Armenia and his headed political force, the Republican Party of Armenia (RPA), Mr. Ghazinyan did not answer, just saying that the political component is not his sector, he is not aware on this, is not eligible and has no desire to talk.
To the observation by one of the reporters that from his words we can assume that it is possible to apply the current Constitution without amending it should we have a proper legal enforcers, Gagik Ghazinyan considered it beyond doubt that in the event of proper legal enforcer and under the current Constitution we could have better results. But without going for amendments and achieve expected results – no. “Only with regard to the judiciary, we have such a revolutionary solutions, which by the current Code many solutions prevent showing our desired results in the industry.”
Read also
We asked why the lawyers keep claiming that the draft does not provide the independence of the judiciary, in particular, the fact that the judges of the Court of Cassation should be elected by the parliament, where the ruling political party will have the dominant role. In other words, the judges of the Court of Cassation can be elected by one political party. Gagik Ghazinyan considers the question a bit simplified but sees a problem. He also has doubts about the legal-judicial sector of the draft, he considers this the only “a little” doubt causing issue.
Incidentally, this clause was also cited by the Venice Commission, noting that the issue is a bit more politicized. “The problem exists. I also do not perceive it definitely. It is not the case that any issue was passed at the Committee by consensus or unanimous agreement. There were doubts, disputes and simply this view dominated that we make it public and by the procedures of competition. Also, hoping that the future parliament, I do not know to what extent is this hope fundamental, will be high-quality and will be beyond political, party and personal ambitions and the best ones will be elected. In that case, perhaps, it will serve its purpose. Otherwise, we can assume that the solution was not so successful.”
Nelly GRIGORYAN
