There is a contradiction between the words written in the draft Electoral Code and the reality
European experts who are getting acquainted with Armenia’s new draft Electoral Code indeed are far away of Armenia’s reality. They think, “What a progressive norm the authors of this draft have? Indeed, “personalized” candidates should be in the party list for each constituency so that given candidates shall represent the interests of given precinct.” The members of the Venice Commission was not familiar with Tokhmakh Mher who will be “organizing elections” in Erebuni, or General Manvel who will be the “driving wheel” in Etchmiadzin and the nearby villages and they do not know how and whose interests they are going to defend.
There is not more “progressive norm” in the draft about the national minorities. The draft Electoral Code (Article 84) reads, “The second part of the national electoral list of a political party, alliance of political parties shall include no less than two and no more than four representatives from each national minority. A candidate included in the second part of the national electoral list of a political party, alliance of political parties may also be included in the first part of the electoral list.” Without getting into the details of what confusion can the “first and the second parts of the list” cause, it’s a topic of a separate discussion. In this case, we are talking about national minorities. And so, all the party lists must include 2-4 representatives of national minorities. Again, it sounds very nice for an Armenian expert not unfamiliar to the Armenian reality, yes, of course, let’s say, the Yezidi voter must be given a chance to vote for the Yezidi party, the Assyrians for the Assyrian and so on. But the reality is different.
First, in a country like Armenia, it will be difficult for the opposition parties to find 2-4 representatives of national minorities who will be willing to be included in their list. In Germany, for example, there are Turks both among the Social Democrats and the Christian Democrats because it does not contain any threat, and both parties have chances not only to be involved in the Bundestag but also to become a majority. But it’s hard to imagine that let’s say in Russia, Ara Abrahamian’s structure would support Nemtsov, Navalny or even relatively oppositional communists. And it is not to blame if the Union of Armenians of Russia had done something like that, this structure would deteriorate the situation of our compatriots living in this country. In the authoritarian states, in other words, the national minorities are always next to the government. In Armenia, I have not heard in 25 years that any national community has come up with a statement in support of, let’s say, the presidential opposition candidate. Incidentally, in Georgia, the main Armenian organizations were successively supporting Shevardnadze, Saakashvili and Ivanishvili.
Read also
In addition, in the case of Armenia, the issue of mandatory inclusion of national minorities in the National Assembly is not so urgent. In Georgia, Russia and Iran, there is a need to have representative of various nationalities, they are multinational states, and the nations can have political, and not only cultural and educational problems, and should be represented in the general political structure. In Armenia, where the Yazidis make up 1.2% of the population by the 2011 census, Russians – 0.4%, Assyrians – 0.09 percent and so on, the political problems seem not to arise. Of course, our foreign fellow citizens must have wide cultural and educational rights, but whether it requires having a “parliamentary quota”.
And most importantly, even if such a quota in the list is a must, then, anyway, there will be such a “money competition” in this “second list” personalized candidates in the case of “at least 101” seats in the National Assembly that the national minorities will get no seat. Hence, the Article cited in the draft Code is simply a formal sentence. Perhaps, for the Venice Commission.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
