LEGITIMACY – A LEGAL CATEGORY

When one has no facts and nothing to say

The speeches and statements L. Ter-Petrosyan and his proponents made in the Constitutional Court testify to the fact that those people are still under the direct influence of the post-electoral rallies and the subsequent events organized on March 1-2, so they confuse the legal process of disputing the election results with political assessments and speculations.
As we know, the Constitutional Court is examining the election results. Whereas, L. Ter-Petrosyan’s speech delivered on March 5 contained no single word on their being falsified. No evidence was given with regard to any specific action aiming to falsify the results either in the pre-election period or on the voting day.
If, instead of disputing the election results, the appealing party exercises its right to make a speech in Constitutional Court with the purpose of criticizing the post-electoral atmosphere, then, as it is common to say, it de facto admits the legitimacy of the specific numbers recorded in favor of each candidate on February 19.
Among Mr. Ter-Petrosyan’s arguments, the only one, which is more or less related to the whole pre-election period, is the fact that Prime Minister S. Sargsyan performed his official duties during the pre-election campaign, that’s to say, the issue under consideration is the legitimacy of the registration of the given candidate.
The following question comes up: when is the time for disputing the issue of the given candidate’s registration: after he holds a convincing victory or right after he is registered as a candidate? What’s more, the representatives of the international observation missions were satisfied with the explanation given by the Ministry of Justice with regard to this issue, and they admitted that the existing legislation of Armenia allows the incumbent Prime Minister to remain in office during the campaign.
Especially considering that the concept known as “civil service” bears no relationship to a political position. This is also confirmed by the very first article of the RA Law on Civil Service adopted on December 4, 2001. Its provisions also apply to the Electoral Code adopted on February 5, 1999. And Article 78 of the Electoral Code concerns the obstacles to terminating the official duties, i.e. it is purely dispsositive in nature, rather than imperative in nature.
Another extraordinary example of a political speculation is the second “argument” brought by L. Ter-Petrosyan, i.e. the reference to the constitutional requirement on the impermissibility of imposing martial law or a state of emergency during the whole period of holding elections and examining the post-electoral claims. A question arises as to why in that case the ex-President tried to settle the events of March 1-2 only a few days after applying to the Constitutional Court, thus creating a “discrepancy” between the Constitution and time limits of examining the post-electoral claims, a competence vested in the Constitutional Court. Didn’t L. Ter-Petrosyan know that the Constitutional Court did not have the right to go beyond the established time limits for examining his claim? So, why did he violate the country’s internal political stability, thus necessitating the state of emergency?
Perhaps, with the purpose of insisting on the contrary now, i.e. the media do not elucidate the trial in a proper manner, his proponent-witnesses are arrested, and hence, there is only one choice for the court: to declare the results of the elections null and void.
After the unsuccessful attempts of discrediting the election results by such ridiculous “arguments”, L. Ter-Petrosyan arrived at the following conclusion in his speech delivered on March 5, “I have no idea how any decision made by the Constitutional Court in such conditions will be accepted by me as an appellant, by the people and the international community.” And he also demanded that the proposals on improving the political atmosphere in Armenia as enshrined in the EU Chairmanship declaration dated March 4 be complied with.
Do these proposals have anything in common with the case examined by the Constitutional Court, i.e. the legitimacy of the February 19 elections? Isn’t it clear to L. Ter-Petrosyan that by transferring the legal issue to the domain of political speculations he fully guarantees the rejection of his own “arguments” by the Constitutional Court?
We believe that the issue is more than clear to L. Ter-Petrosyan. This person has nothing on earth to say; that’s why, instead of making statements at the Theatrical Square, he chooses the Constitutional Court.
ARMEN TSATOURYAN

| Home | >>

E-mail article | Discuss article new!

Discussion

71 days before | remove (5) | reply
Gabriel wrote:
read osce's report:
http://www.osce.org/odihr-elections/documents.html?lsi=true&limit=10&grp=222

RSS © Hayots Ashkhar

Headlines for March 07, 2008

LEGITIMACY – A LEGAL CATEGORY
ARMEN TSATOURYAN 1
When one has no facts and nothing to say The speeches and statements L. Ter-Petrosyan and his proponents made in the Constitutional Court testify to the fact that those people are still under the direct ...
ALL THE FACTS TO BE REPRESENTED TO THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
GEVORG HARUTYUNYAN
Interview with RA Assistant to the President Vigen Sargsyan. “Mr. Sargsyan based on what does the Presidency of the European Union propose to cancel the state of emergency in Yerevan?” “Firstly ...
THE ONLY WAY TO CURE “HEADACHE”
LILIT POGHOSYAN
To Continue The Process Of Reforms In response to our questions, MP from “Bargavach Hayastan” fraction, Chair of the standing Committee on the Issues of European Integration Avet Adonts touches upon ...
NECESSARY TO ENTER INTO A DIALOGUE
1
Despite being blinded with hatred “I want to state once again that there happened something we were speaking about for several months on end and were unable to prevent. And if we were unable to prevent ...
WHEN ALL THE RPOPOSALS ARE TURNED DOWN
According to VIGEN SARGSYAN, “When the newly elected President announced that he was ready for a political dialogue even before forming a coalition with the factions not admitting the election results ...
KOSOVO AS A PRECEDENT
The OSCE representative considers Kosovo a precedent for the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. “Despite the existing differences between the problems of Kosovo and Nagorno Karabakh, the Kosovo ...
BRYZA HEARD WHAT HE EXPECTED TO
US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State MATTHEW BRYZA, Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, says that he has arrived in Yerevan to have a meeting with different parties with the purpose of forming an idea ...