DOCSLIB.ORG

Kazm ENG.Cdr

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kazm ENG.Cdr TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication ................................................................................................................................ 7 I. INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION..................................................................................... 8 II. ABOUT THE NIS ASSESSMENT.......................................................................................13 III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................18 IV. PROFILE OF CORRUPTION IN ARMENIA .................................................................... 23 V. ANTI-CORRUPTION ACTIVITIES .................................................................................. 25 VI. FOUNDATIONS OF NIS ................................................................................................. 27 VII. NATIONAL INTEGRITY SYSTEM .................................................................................. 34 1. LEGISLATURE ...................................................................................................................... 34 2. PRESIDENT ........................................................................................................................ 48 3. EXECUTIVE .......................................................................................................................... 54 4. JUDICIARY ............................................................................................................................. 65 5. CIVIL SERVICE .................................................................................................................... 79 6. LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ................................................................................... 99 7. CENTRAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION ............................................................................. 112 8. HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER .......................................................................................... 120 9. CHAMBER OF CONTROL ................................................................................................ 132 10. POLITICAL PARTIES ........................................................................................................ 138 11. MEDIA ................................................................................................................................. 148 12. CIVIL SOCIETY ................................................................................................................... 159 13. BUSINESS ......................................................................................................................... 168 VIII. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................181 IX. RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................................................................186 X. BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................... 190 NATIONAL INTEGRITY SYSTEM ASSESSMENT ARMENIA 2014 3 FOREWORD Corruption remains as one of the most serious problems of Armenia. Thus, it is one of the most substantial obstacles in the economic and political development of the country, creating threats to the county’s security. The root causes of corruption in Armenia are the convergence of the political and business elites, dominance of monopolies both in political and economic realms and insufficient level of checks and balances between the branches of the government. The high level of tolerance towards corruption in the society also contributes to the prevalence of corruption in Armenia. In such situation it is not surprising Armenia’s low ranking in the Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) ranking table, as well as qualitative and quantitative data proving high level of corruption in the country from the studies of other reputable international organizations, such as The World Bank, World Economic Forum, Freedom House and others. Obviously, it would not be completely correct to argue that Armenia’s political leadership does not realize the seriousness of the situation with corruption and does not take any steps to tackle it. In particular, since 2003 two national anti-corruption strategies with their respective action plans have been adopted (2003-2007 and 2009-2012). Currently the development of the third strategy and its action plan is under way. By joining the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), OECD Istanbul Action Plan Anti-corruption Network and signing and ratifying UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), Armenia assumed a number of international anti-corruption obligations. These obligations, together with the implementation of the measures foreseen by the action plans of the previous anti- corruption strategies entailed to the adoption of several laws and other legal acts, which have serious anti-corruption prevention potential. Also, certain steps were undertaken aimed at harmonizing the national legislation on the criminalization of corruption with stricter requirements of international standards. However, primarily, the insufficient level of political will, as well as other factors, brought to unsatisfactory level of implementation and enforcement of those legal acts and many of them remained on paper. The atmosphere of impunity remains a serious problem for the country. As a result of that the public perceives the anti-corruption policy of the government not as a genuine fight of corruption, but rather its imitation. On behalf of Transparency International Anti-corruption Center (TIAC), which is the official accredited representative of the Transparency International global anti-corruption movement in Armenia, I have the honor to present this study on the assessment of the Armenia’s National Integrity System (NIS), which is the third such study conducted by TIAC. To some extent, this study is the continuation of the previous study, which was conducted in 2009-2012, and it analyzed the changes in the situation of corruption and developments in the fight against it that took place after the conduct of that study. This study assesses the legal grounds regulating the activities of those state and non-state institutions and establishments, which are key actors in the prevention and counteraction to corruption, as well as how this activities are implemented in practice. The main goal of the study is to assess the strong and weak features of those institutions, which will enable, through applying its findings and conclusions, to develop more effective and ambitious national anti-corruption policy. I would like to express my gratitude to all those, who have their profound input to this research, and, primarily, to the Lead Researcher. The input of the research assistant6s was also invaluable. NATIONAL INTEGRITY SYSTEM ASSESSMENT ARMENIA 2014 5 Very important was the contribution of the members of the Advisory Board, whose comments and suggestions substantially enhanced the quality of the study. I would also like to express my deep appreciation to the Secretariat of Transparency International, especially to Mr. Andy McDevitt, for the academic management and external review of the report, and Ms. Emilija Taseva, for the coordination of the project implementation. Finally, I express my gratitude to European Union, the principal donor of the project, and Open Society Foundations-Armenia, co-funder of the project, without whose support this project would not be possible. Varuzhan Hoktanyan Executive Director, Transparency International Anti-corruption Center Country Coordinator of the Project 6 Transparency International ANTICORRUPTION CENTER DEDICATION “The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything” Albert Einstein Amalia Kostanyan Amalia Kostanyan had a passion for removing Armenia’s “makeup”, and freeing her motherland from corruption, dishonesty, unfair treatment and lack of respect towards her fellow citizens. Armenia will always be indebted to her for establishing an organisation in 2000, which later would become known as the Armenian chapter of Transparency International. With her death, Armenia lost one of its brightest and best: a tough corruption fighter with an amazing level of integrity. She left a legacy for her like-minded colleagues, inspiring them to always push higher and further beyond their “comfort zones”, which is the only way to register success in fighting corruption. One of the fruits of her labour was Armenia’s first National Integrity System Assessment. She valued this research very much. As a person with honour she was a pleasure to know and to work with. We dedicate this research to her bright memory in the souls and hearts of her family, friends and colleagues. Varuzhan Hoktanyan and Khachik Harutyunyan NATIONAL INTEGRITY SYSTEM ASSESSMENT ARMENIA 2014 7 I. INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION NIS UPDATE COUNTRY COORDINATOR Hoktanyan Varuzhan, Executive Director of Transparency International Anti-corruption Center NGO Armenia AUTHORS Harutyunyan Khachik (Main author of all pillars, foundations and other sections, except for the “business” pillar and part of “civil service”.) Manukyan Artak (Author of the “business” pillar and the indicator “reduce corruption risks through safeguarding public procurement” of “civil service” pillar.) RESEARCH REVIEW Andy McDevitt, Transparency International Secretariat RESEARCH ASSISTANTS Vakhtang Siradeghyan,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Armenia: a Human Rights Perspective for Peace and Democracy
    6OJWFSTJU´U1PUTEBN "OKB.JIS]"SUVS.LSUJDIZBO]$MBVEJB.BIMFS]3FFUUB5PJWBOFO &ET "SNFOJB")VNBO3JHIUT1FSTQFDUJWF GPS1FBDFBOE%FNPDSBDZ )VNBO3JHIUT )VNBO3JHIUT&EVDBUJPOBOE.JOPSJUJFT Armenia: A Human Rights Perspective for Peace and Democracy Human Rights, Human Rights Education and Minorities Edited by Anja Mihr Artur Mkrtichyan Claudia Mahler Reetta Toivanen Universitätsverlag Potsdam 2005 Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.ddb.de abrufbar. © Universität Potsdam, 2005 Herausgeber: MenschenRechtsZentrum der Universität Potsdam Vertrieb: Universitätsverlag Potsdam Postfach 60 15 53, 14415 Potsdam Fon +49 (0) 331 977 4517 / Fax 4625 e-mail: [email protected] http://info.ub.uni-potsdam.de/verlag.htm Druck: Audiovisuelles Zentrum der Universität Potsdam und sd:k Satz Druck GmbH Teltow ISBN 3-937786-66-X Dieses Manuskript ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Es darf ohne vorherige Genehmigung der Herausgeber nicht vervielfältigt werden. This book is published with the financial support of the Volkswagen Stiftung -Tandem Project Berlin/ Potsdam, Germany. The publication can be downloaded as PDF-file under: www.humanrightsresearch.de An Armenian version of the publication which includes papers of the con- ference and carries the title “Armenia from the perspective of Human Rights” was published by the Yerevan State University in Armenia in Au- gust 2005 and made possible through
    [Show full text]
  • Mission in Armenia 29 March to 3 April 2008
    Mission in Armenia 29 March to 3 April 2008 June 2008 - N°499/2 Mission in Armenia, 29 March to 3 April 2008 FOREWORD Alerted by both the "Democracy in Armenia" group and the Civil Society Institute (an FIDH affiliate) to the violent repression that followed the presidential elections in this country in February 2008, the undersigned lawyers and jurist were mandated by the President of the Paris Bar Association (M. le Bâtonnier de l’Ordre des Avocats de Paris) and the International Union of Lawyers (l’Union Internationale des Avocats) on one hand and, on the other hand, the FIDH (International Federation of Human Rights). The mission visited Yerevan from 29 March to 3 April to report on the situation of the right to defend oneself and the right to freedoms in the Republic of ARMENIA following the events that took place in February and March 2008. INTRODUCTION Before considering the legal and juridical context of the mission's work, it is appropriate to recall some chronological milestones to put into perspective the current situation in Armenia and its evolution, seventeen years after the independence of the Republic of Armenia was proclaimed in the Southern Caucasus. - 21 September, 1991: the Republic of Armenia becomes independent following a referendum. - October 1991: Election by universal suffrage of Mr. Levon TER-PETROSIAN, who becomes the first President of the Republic of Armenia. - 1992-1994: Fighting in the autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabakh between the opposing Armenian self- defence forces and the Azerbaijan armed forces. A cease-fire comes into force on 14 May 1994.
    [Show full text]
  • Combatting and Preventing Corruption in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia How Anti-Corruption Measures Can Promote Democracy and the Rule of Law
    Combatting and preventing corruption in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia How anti-corruption measures can promote democracy and the rule of law Combatting and preventing corruption in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia How anti-corruption measures can promote democracy and the rule of law Silvia Stöber Combatting and preventing corruption in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia 4 Contents Contents 1. Instead of a preface: Why (read) this study? 9 2. Introduction 11 2.1 Methodology 11 2.2 Corruption 11 2.2.1 Consequences of corruption 12 2.2.2 Forms of corruption 13 2.3 Combatting corruption 13 2.4 References 14 3. Executive Summaries 15 3.1 Armenia – A promising change of power 15 3.2 Azerbaijan – Retaining power and preventing petty corruption 16 3.3 Georgia – An anti-corruption role model with dents 18 4. Armenia 22 4.1 Introduction to the current situation 22 4.2 Historical background 24 4.2.1 Consolidation of the oligarchic system 25 4.2.2 Lack of trust in the government 25 4.3 The Pashinyan government’s anti-corruption measures 27 4.3.1 Background conditions 27 4.3.2 Measures to combat grand corruption 28 4.3.3 Judiciary 30 4.3.4 Monopoly structures in the economy 31 4.4 Petty corruption 33 4.4.1 Higher education 33 4.4.2 Health-care sector 34 4.4.3 Law enforcement 35 4.5 International implications 36 4.5.1 Organized crime and money laundering 36 4.5.2 Migration and asylum 36 4.6 References 37 5 Combatting and preventing corruption in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia 5.
    [Show full text]
  • FIRST SECTION CASE of KARAPETYAN and OTHERS V
    FIRST SECTION CASE OF KARAPETYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA (Application no. 59001/08) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 17 November 2016 This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. KARAPETYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA JUDGMENT 1 In the case of Karapetyan and Others v. Armenia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of: Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, President, Kristina Pardalos, Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, Paul Mahoney, Aleš Pejchal, Robert Spano, Armen Harutyunyan, judges, and Abel Campos, Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 30 August and 11 October 2016, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on the last- mentioned date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in an application (no. 59001/08) against the Republic of Armenia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by four Armenian nationals, Mr Vladimir Karapetyan, Ms Martha Ayvazyan, Mr Araqel Semirjyan and Ms Karine Afrikyan (“the applicants”), on 29 November 2008. 2. The applicants were represented by Mr Vahe Grigoryan, a lawyer practising in Yerevan. The Armenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr G. Kostanyan, Representative of the Government of Armenia before the European Court of Human Rights. 3. The applicants alleged, in particular, that their dismissal from office following their statements in the media had violated their right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the Convention. 4. On 17 November 2011 the applicants’ complaint under Article 10 of the Convention was communicated to the Government.
    [Show full text]
  • The Treaty of Sevres As the Legal Basis for the Western Armenia’S Territorial Claims to Turkey ***
    Правова система України й міжнародне право, порівняльне правознавство DOI : 10.36695/2219-5521.2.2019.38 УДК 341.01 O.M. POlivAnOvA , A.A. AbrAAMiAn Olena Mykolayivna Polivanova , Ph .D. in Law, Asso - ciate professor of Kyiv University of Law of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine * ORCID : 0000-0002-5670-8900 Anna Aramivna Abraamian , master student of Kyiv University of Law of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine ** THE TREATY OF SEVRES AS THE LEGAL BASIS FOR THE WESTERN ARMENIA’S TERRITORIAL CLAIMS TO TURKEY *** Problem statement . History of the Armenian statehood has more than a few thousands of years and it may even be regarded as the oldest in the history of human civilization 1. Armenian statehood took different forms: from Azzi-Hayasa confederation (1500 – 1290 BC) to the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, also known as the Cilician Armenia, Lesser Armenia, or New Armenia 2 (1198–1375). Sources vary on when Armenian statehood was lost. Some scientists suggest that its loss may be dated to 1375 when the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia was ceased to exist 3. Others state it was lost in 1045 with the fall of Bagratid Armenia, because Cilician Armenia was outside of the traditional Armenian homeland, while Bagratid Armenia was the last major Armenian state in the Armenian Highlands 4. Nevertheless, since the loss of Armenian statehood at that time, the First Armenian Republic (the Armenian National Council declared the independence of Armenia on 28 May 1918), officially known at the time of its existence as the Democratic Republic of Armenia, was the first mod - ern Armenian state.
    [Show full text]
  • REPORT by the COMMISSIONER for HUMAN RIGHTS MR THOMAS HAMMARBERG on HIS VISIT to ARMENIA 7 – 11 October 2007
    Strasbourg, 30 April 2008 CommDH(2008)4 Original version REPORT BY THE COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS MR THOMAS HAMMARBERG ON HIS VISIT TO ARMENIA 7 – 11 October 2007 For the attention of the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly CommDH(2008)4 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................ 4 II. NATIONAL SYSTEM FOR HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION....................................................... 5 1. HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER (O MBUDSMAN )...........................................................................................6 2. CIVIL SOCIETY ....................................................................................................................................6 3. NATIONAL ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS ............................................7 III. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.................................................................................................. 7 1. STATUS OF JUDGES AND THEIR INDEPENDENCE .....................................................................................8 2. AUXILIARIES OF JUSTICE .....................................................................................................................9 3. THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL ..................................................................................................................9 a) Access to justice and transparency of legal process...........................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Here Is a Need for an Anti-Crisis Policy
    From Artsakh to Armenia: displaced children’s right to education. Summary This report focused on the rights of education of displaced children of the Republic of Artsakh in the Republic of Armenia, who flee their homeland due to the war of 2020 between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the territories of Artsakh. During negotiations regarding the disputed territory, the region and conflict are called Nagorno-Karabakh because it involves the unrecognized republic of Artsakh and 7 regions which were under Armenia forces control and were part of Artsakh’s administrative division and they were going to remain like that until the status of Artsakh was solved. So, during the whole report Artsakh and its 7 regions which were under Artsakh’s control, and were populated by indigenous Armenians who became now refugees, will be addressed as the Republic of Artsakh. Please note, that in direct quotations the region may be referred to as Nagorno-Karabakh. Although an agreement was signed and the war in Artsakh ended, not all displaced families want to go back, because now seven regions of Artsakh are under the control of Azerbaijan. The purpose of this report is to investigate how Armenia accommodates its obligation to respect, protect, and fulfill rights to education for displaced children of Artsakh. Despite the fact that it is not the first military conflict over territories of Artsakh, which caused forced displacement, no previously conducted fact-finding report was focused specifically on the right to education of children displaced to Armenia. This project aims to also increase awareness and draw the state's attention to the displaced children’s problems in Armenia, specifically their right to education.
    [Show full text]
  • Div Style="Position:Absolute;Top:1541;Left
    ÆÀ. î²ðÆ ÂÆô 21 (1371) Þ²´²Â, ÚàôÜÆê 13, 2008 VOLUME 28, NO. 21 (1371) SATURDAY, JUNE 13, 2008 غð ²ÜÎÆôÜ¾Ü Üàð Òºð´²Î²ÈàôÂÆôÜܺðàì ÆÞʲÜàôÂÆôÜܺðÀ زðî 1-À äÆîÆ Ø²ðî²Ðð²ô¾ð ÎÀ ܺîºÜ ºôðàä²ÚÆ ÊàðÐàôð¸ÆÜ ÎðÎÜàôƱ ÎÿÀê¾ø, вڲêî²ÜÆ ÄàÔàìàôð¸Æ 70 îàÎàêÀ ì²ÊÆ Ø¾æ ¾ ÚàôÜÆêÆ 20-ÆÜ Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ ³é³çÇÝ Ý³Ë³- õáõÙ, ³ÛÉ»õ ÝáÛݪ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý å³ñ³ÏÇ íñ³Ûª 4 ų٠ï»õáÕáõ- îúøÂ. ². ¶²¼²ÜÖº²Ü ·³Ñ È»õáÝ î¿ñ-ä»ïñá뻳ÝÇ ·É˳- ß³ñųéÇÃÝ»ñáí ϳï³ñõáõÙ »Ý û³Ùµ: õáñ³Í ѳٳÅáÕáíñ¹³Ï³Ý ß³ñÅ- Ýáñ Ó»ñµ³Ï³ÉáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ »õ Ñ»- ø³Õ³ù³å»ï³ñ³ÝÁ å³ñï³- ÀÝóóÇÏ ï³ñáõ³Ý ²åñÇÉ 9- Ù³Ý Ï»¹ñáÝÁ ÚáõÝÇë 10-ÇÝ Ññ³- ï³åݹáõÙÝ»ñ§, - Áëáõ³Í ¿ Û³Û- õáñ ¿ 72 ųÙáõ³Û ÁÝóóùÇÝ ÇÝ, ²É. êå»Ý¹Ç³ñ»³ÝÇ ³Ýáõ³Ý å³ñ³Ïáõ³Í Û³Ûï³ñ³ñáõû³Ùµ ï³ñ³ñáõû³Ý Ù¿ç£ å³ï³ëË³Ý ï³É ¹ÇÙáõÙÇÝ: ØÇÝ- û÷»ñ³ÛÇ »õ å³É¿Ç ³½·³ÛÇÝ ³Ï³- »Ï³õ Û³Ûï³ñ³ñ»Éáõ, ÿ г۳ë- Þ³ñÅÙ³Ý Ï»ÝïñáÝÁ ݳ»õ ÏÁ ã»õ ³ÛÅÙ µáÉáñ ÝٳݳïÇå ¹Ç- ¹»ÙdzÛÇ ³Ï³¹»Ù³Ï³Ý óïñáÝÇ ï³ÝÇ Çß˳ÝáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ Çñ»Ýó Û³Ûï³ñ³ñ¿, áñ Çß˳Ýáõû³Ý ³Ûë ÙáõÙÝ»ñÁ Ù»ñÅáõ³Í »Ý: ß¿ÝùÇÝ Ù¿ç ïáõ³Í ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñ³- í»ñçÇÝ ·áñÍáÕáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáí Ù³ñ- ·áñÍáÕáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ÏÁ Ëáñ³óÝ»Ý ØÇõë ÏáÕÙ¿, ѳÝñ³ÛÇÝ Ï³ñ- Ï³Ý »ñ¹áõÙÇÝ ³éÇÃáí Çñ ³ñï³- ï³Ññ³õ¿ñ ÏÁ Ý»ï»Ý ºõñáå³Ï³Ý »ñÏñ¿Ý Ý»ñë ɳñáõ³Í íÇ׳ÏÁ »õ ÍÇùÇ áõëáõÙݳëÇñáõû³Ý ¦Î³- ë³Ý³Í ׳éÇÝ Ù¿ç, ê»ñÅ ê³ñ·ë- ÊáñÑáõñ¹ÇÝ ³éç»õ: ³õ»ÉÇ ÏÁ µ³ñ¹³óÝ»Ý ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý Éá÷§ ÙÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ Ñ»ÕÇݳϳõáñ »³Ý åÇïÇ å³ï·³Ù¿ñ, ¦...Ù»ñ Åá- Ú³Ûï³ñ³ñáõû³Ý Ù¿ç Áë- ×·Ý³Å³Ù¿Ý ¹áõñë ·³Éáõ Ñ»é³Ý- ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñåáõû³Ý Ññ³å³ñ³Ï³Í Õáíáõñ¹Ç ÙÇç»õ ãå¿ïù ¿ ³Ýçñ- áõ³Í ¿, áñ Ó»ñµ³Ï³Éáõ³Í ¿ ¦Ô³- ϳñÝ»ñÁ£ Ýáñ ïáõ»³ÉÝ»ñÁ, µ³õ³Ï³Ý ïËáõñ å»ïÝ»ñ ëï»ÕÍ»Ýù, ãå¿ïù ¿ ³Ýѳ- ñ³µ³Õ§ ÏáÙÇï¿Ç ݳËÏÇÝ ³Ý¹³Ù гϳé³Ï ß³ñáõݳÏáõáÕ
    [Show full text]
  • Assemblée Générale Distr
    Nations Unies A/HRC/16/44/Add.2 Assemblée générale Distr. générale 23 décembre 2010 Français Original: anglais Conseil des droits de l’homme Seizième session Point 3 de l’ordre du jour Promotion et protection de tous les droits de l’homme, civils, politiques, économiques, sociaux et culturels, y compris le droit au développement Rapport de la Rapporteuse spéciale sur la situation des défenseurs des droits de l’homme, Margaret Sekaggya Additif Mission en Arménie* Résumé Du 12 au 18 juin 2010, la Rapporteuse spéciale sur la situation des défenseurs des droits de l’homme a effectué une visite en Arménie, où elle s’est entretenue avec de hauts responsables de l’État et des défenseurs des droits de l’homme d’horizons divers. Cette visite avait pour but d’évaluer la situation des défenseurs des droits de l’homme en Arménie à la lumière des principes énoncés dans la Déclaration sur le droit et la responsabilité des individus, groupes et organes de la société de promouvoir et de protéger les droits de l’homme et les libertés fondamentales universellement reconnus (Déclaration sur les défenseurs des droits de l’homme). Après un chapitre d’introduction, la Rapporteuse présente, dans le chapitre II, le contexte général dans lequel les défenseurs des droits de l’homme exercent leurs activités en Arménie. La société civile, et notamment les défenseurs des droits de l’homme, exercent leurs fonctions dans un environnement de plus en plus politisé et rares sont les acteurs qui n’ont pas été touchés par les divisions politiques de ces dernières années, en particulier au lendemain des événements de 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Corruption Risks Assessment in Defence Establishments in Armenia
    CORR CORRUPTION RISKSRISKS ASSESSMENT IN DEFENCE ESTABLISHMENTS IN ARMENIAASSE TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL anticorruption center 2 Corruption Risks Assessment in Defence Establishments in Armenia This publication was made possible by the support of Counterpart International’s Armenia Representation and the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under Associate Cooperative Agreement through Transparency International Anticorruption Center public organization with support of Transparency International Defence and Security Programme. Content, views and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Counternpart Intermattional’s Armenia Representation, USAID or the United States Government. CORRUPTION RISKS ASSESSMENT IN DEFENCE ESTABLISHMENTS IN ARMENIA Program Team Leader - Sona Ayvazyan Coordinator – Luiza Ayvazyan Country Assessor – Virab Khachatryan Peer Reviewers – Artur Sakunts, Varuzhan Avetisyan International Experts – Leah Wawro, Emma Kerr Corruption Risks Assessment in Defence Establishments in Armenia 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS 4 INTRODUCTION 5 COUNTRY PROFILE 6 METHODOLOGY 8 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 10 SUMMARY OF RESEARCH 16 POLITICAL AREA 16 FINANCIAL AREA 55 PERSONNEL 67 OPERATIONS 90 PROCUREMENT 93 APPENDICES 115 1. QUESTIONNAIRE 115 2. TI-DSP GOVERNMENT DEFENCE 123 ANTI-CORRUPTION INDEX GLOBAL RESULTS 4 Corruption Risks Assessment in Defence Establishments in Armenia ABBREVIATIONS CSO Civil society organization
    [Show full text]
  • Report to the Armenian Government on the Visit to Armenia Carried Out
    CPT/Inf (2007) 47 Report to the Armenian Government on the visit to Armenia carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 2 to 12 April 2006 The Armenian Government has requested the publication of this report and of its response. The Government's response is set out in document CPT/Inf (2007) 48. Strasbourg, 13 December 2007 - 3 - CONTENTS Copy of the letter transmitting the CPT's report ............................................................................5 I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................7 A. Dates of the visit and composition of the delegation ..............................................................7 B. Establishments visited...............................................................................................................8 C. Consultations held by the delegation and co-operation encountered...................................9 II. FACTS FOUND DURING THE VISIT AND ACTION PROPOSED ..............................11 A. Police establishments ..............................................................................................................11 1. Preliminary remarks ........................................................................................................11 2. Torture and other forms of ill-treatment..........................................................................12 3. Safeguards against the ill-treatment
    [Show full text]
  • Tough Choices Observations on the Political Economy of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia
    Tough Choices Observations on the Political Economy of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia Robin S. Bhatty Mimeo, prepared for the World Bank December 2002 "This paper represents the views of its author, not of the official view of the World Bank. World Bank staff views may differ substantially with characterizations contained in this paper. All other usual disclaimers apply." 1 I. OVERVIEW ECONOMIC REFORM IN THE SOUTH CAUCASUS The paper which follows presents an analysis and discussion of the problems confronting and prospects for continued economic reform in the three states of the South Caucasus region of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS): Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. Although differentiated by language and religion, in many important ways more unites the three Caucasian states than divides them, at least in terms of the economic and political challenges they face as they attempt to move beyond their Soviet pasts and the difficult experiences which afflicted them in the 1990s. In all three states, the key ingredient for further progress will be the commitment of the national governments and ruling elites to pressing ahead with reforms. All three states have made significant progress in reforming their economies since the fall of the Soviet Union, but to a great extent they are now confronted with even more difficult and politically painful choices. Reform is an intrinsically political process requiring the distribution of costs and gains; each state has its own internal strengths and weaknesses which will shape its ability and willingness to adopt various types of changes. For the international financial institutions and donors who seek to facilitate and expedite these reforms, an understanding of the political costs and risks confronting local decision-makers is crucial in determining the ultimate success – or failure – of the reform campaign.
    [Show full text]