DOCSLIB.ORG

Revolution in Armenia? the Power and Prospects of the Protest Movement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revolution in Armenia? the Power and Prospects of the Protest Movement 115th CONGRESS Printed for the use of the 2nd Session Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe Revolution in Armenia? The Power and Prospects of the Protest Movement APRIL 26, 2018 Briefing of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe Washington: 2018 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 3191 Sfmt 3191 X:\_HS\WORK\30030.TXT NINA CSCESeal.EPS Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe 234 Ford House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 202–225–1901 [email protected] http://www.csce.gov @HelsinkiComm Legislative Branch Commissioners HOUSE SENATE CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, NEW JERSEY ROGER WICKER, MISSISSIPPI, Co-Chairman Chairman ALCEE L. HASTINGS, FLORIDA BENJAMIN L. CARDIN. MARYLAND ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, ALABAMA JOHN BOOZMAN, ARKANSAS MICHAEL C. BURGESS, TEXAS CORY GARDNER, COLORADO STEVE COHEN, TENNESSEE MARCO RUBIO, FLORIDA RICHARD HUDSON, NORTH CAROLINA JEANNE SHAHEEN, NEW HAMPSHIRE RANDY HULTGREN, ILLINOIS THOM TILLIS, NORTH CAROLINA SHEILA JACKSON LEE, TEXAS TOM UDALL, NEW MEXICO GWEN MOORE, WISCONSIN SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, RHODE ISLAND Executive Branch Commissioners DEPARTMENT OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE [II] (2) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 3193 Sfmt 3193 X:\_HS\WORK\30030.TXT NINA ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION FOR SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE The Helsinki process, formally titled the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, traces its origin to the signing of the Helsinki Final Act in Finland on August 1, 1975, by the leaders of 33 European countries, the United States and Canada. As of January 1, 1995, the Helsinki process was renamed the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe [OSCE]. The membership of the OSCE has expanded to 56 partici- pating States, reflecting the breakup of the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia. The OSCE Secretariat is in Vienna, Austria, where weekly meetings of the partici- pating States’ permanent representatives are held. In addition, specialized seminars and meetings are convened in various locations. Periodic consultations are held among Senior Officials, Ministers and Heads of State or Government. Although the OSCE continues to engage in standard setting in the fields of military security, economic and environmental cooperation, and human rights and humanitarian concerns, the Organization is primarily focused on initiatives designed to prevent, manage and resolve conflict within and among the participating States. The Organization deploys numerous missions and field activities located in Southeastern and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. The website of the OSCE is: <www.osce.org>. ABOUT THE COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE The Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the Helsinki Commission, is a U.S. Government agency created in 1976 to monitor and encourage compliance by the participating States with their OSCE commitments, with a particular emphasis on human rights. The Commission consists of nine members from the United States Senate, nine mem- bers from the House of Representatives, and one member each from the Departments of State, Defense and Commerce. The positions of Chair and Co-Chair rotate between the Senate and House every two years, when a new Congress convenes. A professional staff assists the Commissioners in their work. In fulfilling its mandate, the Commission gathers and disseminates relevant informa- tion to the U.S. Congress and the public by convening hearings, issuing reports that reflect the views of Members of the Commission and/or its staff, and providing details about the activities of the Helsinki process and developments in OSCE participating States. The Commission also contributes to the formulation and execution of U.S. policy regarding the OSCE, including through Member and staff participation on U.S. Delega- tions to OSCE meetings. Members of the Commission have regular contact with parliamentarians, government officials, representatives of non-governmental organiza- tions, and private individuals from participating States. The website of the Commission is: <www.csce.gov>. [III] (3) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 3193 Sfmt 3194 X:\_HS\WORK\30030.TXT NINA Revolution in Armenia? The Power and Prospects of the Protest Movement APRIL 26, 2018 Page PARTICIPANTS Everett Price, Policy Advisor, Commission for Security and Cooperation in Europe ............... 1 Elen Aghekyan, Independent Research Analyst .......................................................................... 3 Stephen Nix, Eurasia Regional Director, International Republican Institute .......................... 5 [IV] (4) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 3193 Sfmt 3193 X:\_HS\WORK\30030.TXT NINA Revolution in Armenia? The Power and Prospects of the Protest Movement April 26, 2018 Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe Washington, DC The briefing was held at 4:01 p.m. in Room SVC 200, Capitol Visitor Center, Wash- ington, DC, Everett Price, Policy Advisor, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, presiding. Panelists present: Everett Price, Policy Advisor, Commission on Security and Coopera- tion in Europe; Elen Aghekyan, Independent Research Analyst; and Stephen Nix, Eurasia Regional Director, International Republican Institute. Mr. PRICE. Good afternoon. Thank you, everybody, for coming. On behalf of our chair- man, Senator Roger Wicker, and our co-chairman, Congressman Chris Smith, I would like to welcome you to this U.S. Helsinki Commission briefing on the ongoing protest move- ment in Armenia. I’m really looking forward to the conversation today since we find our- selves in the midst of a fascinating and fluid moment of transition in Armenia that almost no one could have predicted just a couple weeks ago. We decided to pull together an expert panel on short notice in light of the dizzying pace of developments in Yerevan. Con- sidering how much has transpired in recent days, allow me to say a few words to set the stage for our discussion before I turn the floor over to our briefers. April was supposed to be a month of significant transition for the Republic of Armenia, but not like this. This month, the country’s political system was slated to for- mally transition from a semi-presidential system to a parliamentary one in accordance with profound constitutional changes approved by a popular referendum in December 2015. The 2015 referendum was initiated by Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, who served as president since 2008 and whose final 5-year term in office ended earlier this month. Opponents of the referendum at the time argued that the constitutional changes were employed by the president to extend his time in office by assuming the post of prime minister in 2018. To allay these concerns, Sargsyan vowed then to not seek the position of prime minister at the end of his term. (1) VerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 3194 Sfmt 3194 X:\_HS\WORK\30030.TXT NINA Yet, as parliament prepared to meet earlier this month to elect a new head of govern- ment, it became clear the ruling party would put forward Sargsyan for the newly empow- ered vote. The country’s fractured opposition cried foul, and a protest movement emerged. On Monday, after more than week of surging nonviolent protest and acts of civil disobe- dience, and just 4 days after holding his first Cabinet meeting, Sargsyan stepped down as prime minister, ushering in an uncertain period of political transition. This is a superficial gloss on the present political moment that our panelists will flesh out and help us to better understand. My summary focuses on the over fault lines in the political dispute, but we know from experience that the energy that fuels massive popular movements is most often drawn from undercurrents of discontent that are imperceptible at the surface until they burst into the open in unpredictable ways. It strikes me as well that the political drama in Yerevan, which is in many ways a powerful one, is a personal one, too. The current contest has been framed by some as a contest between a powerful establishment, Sargsyan, and the scrappy and disheveled protest leader, Nikol Pashinyan. After the election of Sargsyan in 2008, Pashinyan was at the helm of a large-scale protest movement contesting the legitimacy of the election, an uprising that Sargsyan’s government put down with force, and pushed Pashinyan into hiding. There is an inter- esting note of symmetry to the fact the beginning to Sargsyan’s term in office is now bookended by Pashinyan leading a successful popular movement to unseat him. We have intentionally put a question mark in the title of this briefing because this outcome, Sargsyan’s resignation, raises more questions than it answers. Put simply: What happens next? What will be the outcome of early dialog between the government and pro- test leaders? Can the movement achieve more lasting reform of the entrenched power structures in Armenia’s political system? Will this collective mobilization translate into sustained political engagement? What are the regional implications of this domestic upheaval? We have an excellent duo of briefers to help us today formulate, understand, and hopefully answer these questions and others. I neglected to introduce myself. I’m Everett Price. I’m a policy advisor on the U.S. Helsinki Commission, where I cover Armenia and the rest of the Southern Caucasus. Elen Aghekyan will speak first. She is an independent researcher and former research analyst at Freedom House, where she managed Europe and Eurasia content for the organization’s Freedom in the World and Freedom of the Press surveys. She most recently authored the Armenia chapter of Freedom House’s Nations in Transit 2018 Report, which is a comprehensive, comparative, and multidimensional study of reform in the former Communist States of Europe and Eurasia.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download Economic Monitor Armenia
    ECONOMIC MONITOR ARMENIA Issue 1 | October 2019 [updated] Overview • Economic growth in Q1-19 (7.2%) and Q2-19 (6.5%) significantly higher than expected • Budget surplus in 7M2019 due to high revenues & under-execution of capital expenditures • Inflation forecast for 2019 at 2.1%; low inflation key ingredient of macroeconomic stability ➢ Stable macroeconomic situation • Significant jump of current account deficit in 2018 to 9.4% of GDP; quite high • FDI only at 2.1% in 2018, not sufficient for financing the current account deficit • Imports (+21.4%) increased much stronger than exports (+7.8%) in 2018 ➢ Export promotion and FDI attraction key for external stability • Mid-term fiscal consolidation: budget deficit ≈ 2% and central gov debt < 50% of GDP • At the same time: lower tax rates and higher expenditures on social & investment planned ➢ Ambitious mid-term fiscal plans Special topics • Recent political events • Fight against corruption • Energy: challenges and government plans • FDI attraction: focus on most promising target groups and institutional framework Basic indicators Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Belarus Ukraine Russia GDP, USD bn 13.1 45.2 17.2 61.0 134.9 1,610.4 GDP/capita, USD 4,381 4,498 4,661 6,477 3,221 11,191 Population, m 3.0 10.0 3.7 9.4 41.9 143.9 Source: IMF WEO from April 2019; Forecast 2019 Trade structure Exports Imports EU 28% | Russia 28% | Switzerland 14% | Others 30% EU 23% | Russia 25% | China 13% | Others 39% Others Copper ores Others Machinery/ 19% 22% 24% Electrical Vegetable and 19% animal products Mineral 6% Motor vehicles Metals products 6% Textiles 12% 14% 10% Textiles Gold 6% 7% Metals Animal and Spirits 7% vegetable 8% Mineral products Tobacco Chemicals products (excl.
    [Show full text]
  • OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Election Observation Mission Republic of Armenia Parliamentary Elections, 2 April 2017
    OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Election Observation Mission Republic of Armenia Parliamentary Elections, 2 April 2017 INTERIM REPORT 21 February – 14 March 2017 17 March 2017 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • On 29 December 2016, the president of the Republic of Armenia called parliamentary elections for 2 April. Following a referendum held on 6 December 2015, the Constitution was amended changing Armenia’s political system from a semi-presidential to a parliamentary one. These will be the first elections held under a new proportional electoral system. • Parliamentary elections are regulated by a comprehensive but complex legal framework, which was significantly amended in 2016 through an inclusive reform process that was seen by most OSCE/ODIHR EOM interlocutors as a step forward in building overall confidence in the electoral process. A number of previous OSCE/ODIHR recommendations have been addressed. Civil society organizations were initially involved in the discussions of the draft Electoral Code, but did not endorse the final text, as their calls to ease restrictions on citizen observers were not addressed. • The elections are administered by a three-tiered system, comprising the Central Election Commission (CEC), 38 Territorial Election Commissions (TECs), and 2,009 Precinct Election Commissions (PECs). The CEC regularly holds open sessions and publishes its decisions on its website. The PECs were formed by the TECs on 11 March. Some OSCE/ODIHR EOM interlocutors expressed concerns about PECs capacity to deal with the new voting procedures. • Voter registration is passive and based on the population register. OSCE/ODIHR EOM interlocutors generally assessed the accuracy of the voter list positively.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Strategeast Westernization Report 2019
    ABOUT STRATEGEAST StrategEast is a strategic center whose goal is to create closer working ties between political and business leaders in the former Soviet countries outside of Russia and their peers in the U.S. And Western Europe. StrategEast believes nations from the former Soviet Union share a heritage that has resulted in common obstacles to the formation of stable, effi cient, market-oriented democracies. We hope to appeal to political, business, and academic leaders in post-Soviet countries and the West, helping them better understand one another, communicate across borders, and collaborate to support real change. Our work is focused on the 14 former Soviet states outside of Russia. This post-Soviet, non-Russia (PSNR) region includes: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. StrategEast focuses on six key issue areas that are especially infl uential to the transition to Western political and economic systems: fi ghting corruption, implementing a Western code of business conduct within a post-Soviet business environment, modernizing infrastructure, promoting independent LEARN MORE press and civil society, energy transparency, and leadership impact. AT OUR WEBSITE: www.StrategEast.org StrategEast is a registered 501c3 based in the United States. THIS REPORT Ravshan Abdullaev Salome Minesashvili Maili Vilson WAS WRITTEN BY: Ilvija Bruģe Parviz Mullojanov Andrei Yahorau Tamerlan Ibraimov Boris Navasardian Yuliy Yusupov Gubad Ibadoghlu Sergiy Solodkyy Zharmukhamed Zardykhan Leonid Litra Dovilė Šukytė © 2019 StrategEast. All rights reserved. ISBN: 978-0-578-46255-4 “StrategEast Westernization Report 2019” is available on our website: www.StrategEast.org StrategEast 1900 K Street, NW Suite 100 Washington, D.
    [Show full text]
  • Contested Publics : Situating Civil Society in a Post-- Authoritarian Era : the Case Study of Tunisia, 2011–2013
    Fortier, Edwige Aimee (2016) Contested publics : situating civil society in a post-- authoritarian era : the case study of Tunisia, 2011–2013. PhD Thesis. SOAS, University of London http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/23642 Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non‐commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder/s. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this thesis, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given e.g. AUTHOR (year of submission) "Full thesis title", name of the School or Department, PhD Thesis, pagination. Contested Publics: Situating Civil Society in a Post-Authoritarian Era The Case Study of Tunisia 2011–2013 Edwige Aimee Fortier Thesis submitted for the degree of PhD in Development Studies 2016 Department of Development Studies Faculty of Law and Social Sciences School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London Page | 1 Abstract Periods of sociopolitical transition from authoritarian rule offer renewed expectations for more representative and accountable state institutions, for enhanced pluralism and public participation, and for opportunities for marginalised groups to emerge from the periphery. Several thousand new civil society organisations were legally established in Tunisia following the 2010–2011 uprising that forced a long-serving dictator from office.
    [Show full text]
  • CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 98, 6 October 2017 2
    No. 98 6 October 2017 Abkhazia South Ossetia caucasus Adjara analytical digest Nagorno- Karabakh www.laender-analysen.de/cad www.css.ethz.ch/en/publications/cad.html ARMENIAN ELECTIONS Special Editor: Milena Baghdasaryan ■■Introduction by the Special Editor 2 ■■Before the Voting Day: The Impact of Patron–Client Relations and Related Violations on Elections in Armenia 2 By Milena Baghdasaryan ■■The Role of Civil Society Observation Missions in Democratization Processes in Armenia 8 By Armen Grigoryan (Transparency International Anticorruption Center, Armenia) ■■Some of the Major Challenges of the Electoral System in the Republic of Armenia 12 By Tigran Yegoryan (NGO “Europe in Law Association”, Yerevan) Research Centre Center Caucasus Research Center for Eastern European German Association for for East European Studies for Security Studies East European Studies Resource Centers Studies University of Bremen ETH Zurich University of Zurich CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 98, 6 October 2017 2 Introduction by the Special Editor Parliamentary elections have become the central event in Armenia’s political life as the constitutional referendum of 2015 transformed the country into a parliamentary republic. The first parliamentary elections after the referendum were held on April 2, 2017; they were soon followed by municipal elections in Armenia’s capital on May 14, 2017. During the national elections several Armenian NGOs organized an unprecedentedly comprehensive observation mission, by jointly having observers in about 87% of the republic’s polling stations, while the oppositional Yelk alliance claims to have been able to send proxies to all of Yerevan’s polling stations during the municipal elections. However, the public discourse in Armenia holds that the core of violations took place outside the polling stations.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Opinion Survey: Residents of Armenia
    Public Opinion Survey: Residents of Armenia February 2021 Detailed Methodology • The survey was conducted on behalf of “International Republican Institute’s” Center for Insights in Survey Research by Breavis (represented by IPSC LLC). • Data was collected throughout Armenia between February 8 and February 16, 2021, through phone interviews, with respondents selected by random digit dialing (RDD) probability sampling of mobile phone numbers. • The sample consisted of 1,510 permanent residents of Armenia aged 18 and older. It is representative of the population with access to a mobile phone, which excludes approximately 1.2 percent of adults. • Sampling frame: Statistical Committee of the Republic of Armenia. Weighting: Data weighted for 11 regional groups, age, gender and community type. • The margin of error does not exceed plus or minus 2.5 points for the full sample. • The response rate was 26 percent which is similar to the surveys conducted in August-September 2020. • Charts and graphs may not add up to 100 percent due to rounding. • The survey was funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development. 2 Weighted (Disaggregated) Bases Disaggregate Disaggregation Category Base Share 18-35 years old n=563 37% Age groups 36-55 years old n=505 34% 56+ years old n=442 29% Male n=689 46% Gender Female n=821 54% Yerevan n=559 37% Community type Urban n=413 27% Rural n=538 36% Primary or secondary n=537 36% Education Vocational n=307 20% Higher n=665 44% Single n=293 19% Marital status Married n=1,059 70% Widowed or divorced n=155 10% Up
    [Show full text]
  • The Press in the Arab World
    The Press in the Arab World a Bourdieusian critical alternative to current perspectives on the role of the media in the public sphere Hicham Tohme A thesis submitted to the Department of Politics in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy October 2014 1 Abstract The current literature on the role of media in the public sphere in general, and particularly politics, is divided among two opposing trends. The liberal/pluralists argue that media is playing a democratic role consisting of either representing public opinion and/or informing it. The critical theorists argue that media is in fact controlled by and represents elite interests. But even critical theories of the role of media in politics are driven by the belief that media ought to play a democratic and liberal role in society. Both theories therefore share a common normative understanding of what the role of media ought to be and are therefore the product of a common normative ideological framework, the liberal paradigm. This prevents them from properly framing the question of what media actually do in societies which lie beyond the scope of the experience of liberal Europe. This dissertation seeks to transcend this debate, and the liberal paradigm along with it, by arguing that, given a different historical context than the European one, the practice and ethos of media develop differently, and cannot therefore be understood from the lens of the European experience and the liberal paradigm born from within it. To do that, I use Bourdieu's theory of fields to trace the birth and evolution of the private press in Beirut and Cairo from 1858 till 1916.
    [Show full text]
  • 5195E05d4.Pdf
    ILGA-Europe in brief ILGA-Europe is the European Region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans & Intersex Association. ILGA-Europe works for equality and human rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans & intersex (LGBTI) people at European level. ILGA-Europe is an international non-governmental umbrella organisation bringing together 408 organisations from 45 out of 49 European countries. ILGA-Europe was established as a separate region of ILGA and an independent legal entity in 1996. ILGA was established in 1978. ILGA-Europe advocates for human rights and equality for LGBTI people at European level organisations such as the European Union (EU), the Council of Europe (CoE) and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). ILGA-Europe strengthens the European LGBTI movement by providing trainings and support to its member organisations and other LGBTI groups on advocacy, fundraising, organisational development and communications. ILGA-Europe has its office in Brussels and employs 12 people. Since 1997 ILGA-Europe enjoys participative status at the Council of Europe. Since 2001 ILGA-Europe receives its largest funding from the European Commission. Since 2006 ILGA-Europe enjoys consultative status at the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations (ECOSOC) and advocates for equality and human rights of LGBTI people also at the UN level. ILGA-Europe Annual Review of the Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People in Europe 2013 This Review covers the period of January
    [Show full text]
  • 1 June 21, 2021 PRELIMINARY ANNOUNCEMENT June 20, 2021 Early Parliamentary Election Voting and Counting Process the Akanates
    June 21, 2021 PRELIMINARY ANNOUNCEMENT June 20, 2021 Early Parliamentary Election Voting and Counting Process The Akanates observation mission conducted both long-term and short-term observation of the June 20, 2021 early parliamentary election in Armenia. The mission deployed 580 observers to a sample of 300 polling stations across the entire territory of Armenia. In addition, 22 mobile observer teams visited another 150 polling stations outside of the sample, and 33 observers followed the activities of 33 territorial electoral commissions (TECs). The polling stations included in the sample of 300 were selected through a random representative sample and include a parallel vote tabulation (PVT) exercise. The PVT statistical approach provides a reliable measure for evaluating election-day processes, including polling station opening, voting, polling station closing, and summarizing the results, as well as the distribution of votes among parties. Although the observation mission did not cover all 2008 polling stations, sample-based PVT still allows to speak of the electoral process and results received, at the national level. It can verify or question the official election results which can help build confidence in the electoral outcome․ According to our observations, election day saw engaged and active participation from citizens. The process was fundamentally organized, smooth, and without serious violations. Nevertheless, a number of polling stations had a palpable level of tension, mostly due to the presence of unauthorized persons inside the polling station, who sometimes directed voters, exceeded the maximum number (2) of proxies per political party and cast the secrecy of vote into doubt. Although violations were noted on the part of representatives for multiple parties and alliances (I’m Honored Alliance, Prosperous Armenia Party, Civil Contract Party, Awakening National Christian Party, Armenian National Congress Party, Shirinyan-Babajanyan Democrats’ Alliance), the majority of violations involved representatives of the Armenia Alliance.
    [Show full text]
  • Pashinyan's Gambit Or Armenia's Failed Revolution
    ACTA VIA SERICA Vol. 5, No. 1, June 2020: 121–152 doi: 10.22679/avs.2020.5.1.005 Pashinyan’s Gambit or Armenia’s Failed Revolution VAHRAM ABADJIAN The article is a critical examination of the political developments in Armenia since the ‘Velvet Revolution’ of April-May 2018, when, on the wave of massive protests against the ruling regime, new young forces came to power raising amongst broad segments of population enormous enthusiasm and hopes about radical reforms that would lead to profound transformations in the political and socio-economic spheres. It contains a thorough analysis of underlying political processes in the country in an attempt to answer a number of topical questions, so important to get a deeper understanding of the situation in Armenia and in the South Caucasus region. Based on the analysis of the new authorities’ performance against the acknowledged benchmarks and standards of democracy consolidation, such as: separation of powers, independence of the judiciary, good governance, transitional justice the author comes to the conclusion that they failed to achieve any breakthrough in the above-mentioned fields. On the contrary, as demonstrated by concrete examples, what occurred in Armenia was not a revolution but a mere regime change under the leadership of Prime Minister Pashinyan, who gradually has concentrated in his hands executive, legislative, and quasi-totality of the judicial branch of power. Key words: Armenia, ‘velvet revolution’, PM Pashinyan, democracy consolidation, political parties Dr. VAHRAM ABADJIAN ([email protected]) is an independent international affairs expert and former Ambassador of Armenia to the United Kingdom. 122 Acta Via Serica, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report
    RA Parliamentary Elections April 2, 2017 “Independent Observer” Public Alliance Final Report 2017 RA Parliamentary Elections April 2, 2017 “Independent Observer” Public Alliance Final Report 2017 Editor Artur Sakunts Authors Vardine Grigoryan Anush Hambaryan Daniel Ioannisyan Artur Harutyunyan The observation mission was carried out with the financial assistance of the Council of Europe and European Union, European Endowment for Democracy, Open Society Foundations - Armenia, Sigrid Rausing Trust, Czech Embassy in Armenia and Norwegian Helsinki Committee. The report was produced with the financial assistance of the European Union and Council of Europe. The “Long-term Electoral Assistance to the Election Related Stakeholders in Armenia” Project is funded within European Union and Council of Europe Programmatic Co-operation Framework in the Eastern Partnership Countries for 2015-2017. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to represent the official opinions of the funding organizations. All rights reserved. Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................... 7 Methodology ........................................................................................................ 8 Legislative Framework and Political Context ................................................. 10 Organization of Elections .................................................................................. 18 Electoral Commissions...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of the April 2, 2017 Parliamentary Elections In
    04.03.2017-10.04.2017 • No: 110 EVALUATION OF THE APRIL 2, 2017 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN ARMENIA The 6th parliamentary elections were held in context, the period of socio-economic tension in Under these conditions, 1,500 deputy candidates Armenia on April 2, 2017. According to the the country, where alliance ties with Russia participated in the recent elections. According to unofficial results announced by the Armenian (especially military field) have been strength- the results of 2009 polling stations operated in 13 Central Election Commission, 60.86% (namely ened. As known, it is expected that the Constitu- electoral districts nationwide, the distribution of 1,575,382) of the 2,588,590 registered voters tional reform, with its first four chapters entered votes is as follows: the Republican Party of participated in the elections and the Republican into force on December 22, 2015, will be com- Armenia 49.17% (771,247); the Tsarukyan Alli- Party of Armenia won with 49.17% (771,247) of pleted by April 2018. The Constitutional Reform, ance 27.35% (428,965); the Way Out Alliance total votes. which was launched by the initiative of the Pres- 7.78% (122,049); the Armenian Revolutionary According to the Article 89 of the Constitution of ident Serzh Sargsyan, was supported by the Federation “Dashnaksutyun” Party 6.58% the Republic of Armenia with the amendments, Armenian Republican Party, the Prosperous (103,173); the Armenian Renaissance Party which were introduced by the referendum on Armenia Party and the Armenian Revolutionary 3.72% (58,277); the Ohanyan-Raffi-Oskanian December 6, 2015, Armenia has a single legisla- Federation “Dashnaksutyun” Party.
    [Show full text]