For as long as I can remember — even back in Soviet times — I have regarded human rights defenders as non-conformists. Recently I was reading Andrei Sakharov’s memoirs, and what struck me most was how he, overcoming countless obstacles, managed to visit political prisoners (notably in the infamous Mordovia camps) and tried, at the very least, to offer them moral support.
In my view, a true human rights defender must stand with those who are oppressed and persecuted — not with those holding the truncheon. I might have disagreed with Mikael Danielyan or Avetik Ishkhanyan (who, sadly, are no longer with us) on any number of issues, but I cannot imagine either of them ever condoning the existence of political prisoners. And, incidentally, this is also how things work in far more developed democracies — in Western Europe and the United States: a representative of civil society simply cannot be an appendage of the police or security services.
In Armenia, however — an authoritarian state sliding toward totalitarianism — things are different. The very notions of “human rights advocacy” and “civil society” (and, for that matter, “NGO”) have been thoroughly distorted. Those who claim to speak on behalf of that society have, over the past seven and a half years, become deeply politicized and have turned into an integral part of the authoritarian power structure. It’s a pity — in a country suffering from a deficit of moral authority, those organizations could have served as islands of genuine democracy and genuine humanism.
… I’d even propose that special offices be allocated for “human rights defenders” inside police and National Security Service departments, to make their communication with law enforcement smoother. They could then jointly work on “criminal” (in reality, political) cases. This would also allow the “human rights defenders” — under the watchful eye of investigators — to compose their hymns of praise to our glorious law enforcement agencies right on the spot.
Read also
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
