Says NA Speaker Artur Baghdasaryan

 - How do you estimate the process of the constitutional amendments? Why do the Armenian authorities play “ping pong” with Venice Commission and don’t adopt the proposals of this structure?

- The process of constitutional amendments is of current working nature. The acting Constitution proved its viability. You need reforms in parallel with the development of the public relations, and you know that it’s included in the undertaken obligations of Armenia in PACE. The Basic Law of the country is not possible to change in one day: it’s a complicated and responsible process, where numerous legal and political problems of principle should get their solution. This means a comparison and collision of opinions and this means long lasting discussions in the country and beyond its borders. What refers to the recommendations of Venice Commission, then they are mainly included in the working draft, which was sent to the Venice Commission.

- Does the one that sent to the Venice Commission on July 7 comply with the requirement of democratization of the Constitution?

- The draft of the Constitution sent to the Venice Commission is a serious edited document. To say that the whole work is over is not right, as there are various legal and editing key provisions subject to be corrected. But the presented draft is essentially improved is a fact. I would like to speak especially about fundamental items, about which there were inquiries both by the opposition and international community. The first key problem refers to the separation of the powers, and the shaping of the effective system of checks and balances. According to the draft, RA President can appoint a Prime Minister only a person enjoying the confidence of the parliamentary majority; moreover, the President can’t release the Prime Minister or the Government anymore without the consent of the National Assembly. This is a rather important reform, by which the role of the National Assembly, and the legislative power becomes an essential balance. I also consider important the reform made in the sphere of judicial power, according to which, the judicial power becomes independent from the executive power: the justice council is formed with 13 members, the nine members are elected at the judges’ general meeting, the two are appointed by the National Assembly and the two are appointed by the President of the Republic. The Chairman of the Cassation Court presides over the sittings of the Justice Council without the right to vote. These are also important reforms. The third group refers to the local self-government: it’s written distinctly in the Constitution draft that Yerevan is a community. And the community heads are elected. It means they’ve given an exhaustive solution to the problem of the electing the Mayor.

- In your opinion, how shall be elected the Mayor of Yerevan?

- There are two approaches: direct election and indirect election. Both are accepted in the international experience and are spread means. I’, for the indirect election because it will enable to develop the political system and elect the community head through representative body. The important thing is that it’s clearly fixed that the Mayor’s post shall be elective: that was both the proposal of the opposition and the Venice Commission.

- There is an opinion that the NA Speaker had a great role in the constitutional amendment, isn’t it?

- As an NA Speaker, I had my active role in the process of constitutional reforms: you and the community are aware of my public viewpoints that were published in the newspapers and sounded by TV in connection with the process of constitutional reforms. If we wish to build free, democratic society, we’ll have to make amendments in the Basic Law of our country emanating from that philosophy. Those amendments shall emanate from the philosophy of the power decentralization, distinct separation of the power wings, establishment of effective mechanisms of human rights’ protection and effective system of local self-government. Naturally, I actively participated in those works being in this post and as a leader of a political force. What was done is a result of a joint work. And who had what concrete role, the time will estimate, the problem is, perhaps not giving the estimation to what has been done by each of them, but the result of the work.

- If the opposition refuses to participate in the process of constitutional amendments, how are you going to persuade CE that there is an atmosphere of political consent in Armenia, isn’t it required from RA authorities?

- It’s not in my functions to persuade anybody, moreover, the Council of Europe. The Council of Europe is a specialized political organization, and be sure that it’s well informed both about the reforms taking place in Armenia and the stances of each political force. Without our intervention they have their viewpoints and based on those viewpoints they form their relevant stance.

- Do you consider possible that the constitutional referendum will become the beginning of the power shift?

- I’ve already said that only after 1,5 years there will be parliamentary elections in Armenia, and there is no need for the new power shift. We shall all be interested in the success of the constitutional referendum. We shall have a reformed Constitution, which will emanate from our interests, at the same time we’ll have to fulfill one of the most important obligations of Armenia. The constitutional amendments also mean positive changes in our legislation. Eventually, we should not forget that the bad laws create good possibility for speculations and illegalities.

I don’t think that the constitutional referendum can become the beginning of the power shift, there should be a comprehensive campaign for the success, and the results of the referendum will comply with the people’s real desires. We should not go through the road rigging any election process, which can be a basis for inner-political shocks. The future of Armenia is the free elections but not the forced pressures, the conventional speculations of the voters’ will, which means a road to the past, but not to the future. One road that against it not only we’ll fight but also numerous political forces thinking like us, as well as the whole people and world community. Eventually, all those, who hamper the democratic reforms, cause inevitable revolutions because the world develops forward, and in these competitive and changing conditions it’s required to be sober, balanced in the process of deepening initiative reforms, which is inclined to see our country in the civilized European family, which means free, competitive economy, open, transparent and tolerant society.

- In mass media s new version of the settlement of Karabakh problem is being already circulated, according to which, the five liberated regions are returned, during 10 years a referendum will be held in Karabakh, etc. Are you familiar with this version and your estimation?

- In connection with the key problem of Nagorno Karabakh negotiations are underway, expressing public stances in advance, more by NA Speaker, I don’t consider expedient because it will harm the negotiation process. But it’s a fact that the liveliness is noticeable, and there are positive tendencies for the settlement of the problem. In my opinion, there are two main principles for Armenia, first the problem of the security of the Nagorno Karabakh people, and the second, the issue should be solved by mutual compromises. Any compromise shouldn’t be in the cost of our peoples’ dignity and the victory obtained with the price of blood of thousands of people. I think that we should do our best to complete the victory obtained in the battlefield by diplomatic success. We should be aware that it’s not possible to solve the problem presenting the one side demands. The problem shall be solved with acceptable mechanisms for both sides. Besides, the political forces representing power and the opposition had a joint statement, the main theses remain actual till now. What refers to the five regions or the referendum, we shall not come to conclusions before the planned time. When the approaches get specified, then clear political estimations should be given to those approaches.

MARGARIT YESAYAN