1 / 2

Dear compatriots,

Observing the situation on the RA Constitutional Court (CC) and created over it I cannot but share the following concerns among the public related to that:

1. On the CCD-1476 decision

Examining the case on Robert Kocharyan’s application and making its CCD-1476 decision, the Constitutional Court has not been a matter of decent discussion and/or without substantial motivation has refused the CC judge’s application on impossibility of participation in the examination of the case of the CC three members on the outward biased basis towards the applicant, with that putting under suspicion among the public the provision of the fair court.

In addition, regarding the CCD-1476 decision in one of the presented special opinions it was directly pinpointed by the co-rapporteur on the given case that the Court had shown unsubstantiated hastiness in making this decision and in fact, had recorded that the decision could be different, if not such hastiness. In the same opinion, recording the complexity of the problem in the basis of the case and the public sounding, the co-rapporteur indirectly raised the necessity of examining it in oral procedure in the established order by the RA Constitutional Law on the Constitutional Court, which however, did not take place.

In fact, the decision made in this way (I am deprived of evaluations on negligence or deliberateness) is connected with a case being examined in other judicial instance, in the frameworks of which the charge refers to the encroachments directed against democracy and constitutional order in Armenia and with that is of historical and political importance for Armenia.

With regards to the content of the CCD-1476 decision we can confidently note that without outward substantiation the Constitutional Court essentially deviated from legal positions expressed by itself relating to the legislative gap for more than one decade.

2. On the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the CC applications addressed to the Venice Commission:

By now, the doubts on the fact in what procedure the CC presented applications to the ECHR and the Venice Commission, taking into consideration the important fact that by the CCWD-81 and CCWD-82 of July 18 working order decisions the CC had already suspended the examination of the given cases.

The Constitutional Court had not provided the Armenian text of its applications addressed to the ECHR and the Venice Commission to the RA National Assembly which was recognized respondent on the cases of the examination of the applications stemming from the March 1 trial. In response to the document addressed to the CC Staff by the NA Staff, a formal document has been received that the respondent on these cases is not the NA Staff and the Armenian version of the application cannot be provided to the latter.

3. On CC autonomy and political influence

I don’t consider irrelevant to mention that the right is reserved to the CC judges to elect President of the Court with constitutional regulations that entered into force in April 2018. Meanwhile, a few days ago after entering it into force, on 23 March 2018, the fact of appointing the CC President the CC member, and before being elected in that office the RPA member, member of the RPA Faction, the NA political majority, politician, as well as with that fact the tenure being designed until 2035 for H. Tovmasyan, essentially deprived the CC judges of the possibility to elect President of the Court.

This was commented as willfulness from the ruling political party by the public directed to the appointment in the CC President’s office its representative, as well as an encroachment against autonomy of the Constitutional Court.

I think that the RA National Assembly as a legal and legitimate representative of the people of the Republic of Armenia and the only state institute with primary mandate, within its authorities shall express its positions related to the abovementioned problems and situation.