THE STATE CANNOT ALLOW THE SELF-DESTRUCTION PROCESS TO CONTINUE

Interview with NA Deputy RAFIK PETROSYAN

“Mr. Petrosyan, the NA extraordinary session introduced changes in and amendments to the law on ‘Holding Gatherings, Demonstrations, Marches and Rallies’. What was such necessity conditioned by?”
“The law establishing the order of organizing and holding mass events was adopted by the National Assembly in 2004. On the recommendation and at the demand of the Venice Committee, it was reformed a year later. The necessity of reviewing the law became obvious in the context of the post-electoral demonstrations and marches as well as the mass disorders organized on March 1.
It became obvious that there were quite a large number of shortcomings in the law, and especially some clauses contravened the International Convention on the Protection of Human Rights, as well as our country’s constitutional order ensuring the security of the population during mass events.
The existing law did not include all the bans enshrined in the norms of international law and unconditionally applied in the democratic countries during mass events.
In the aftermath of the well-known mass events organized in more liberal legislative conditions, 8 citizens of our country died, more than 200 people were wounded. Three of them are now in a rather grave condition. It is first of all necessary to initiate political events to prevent the repetition of all this and to rule of the ambitions of pushing different groups of people to a confrontation.”
“And what particular changes and amendments were introduced to the law?”
“It is impossible for any law to remain unchanged. Along with the development of public relations and by the call of the times, the laws constantly change. As far as the March 1 events are concerned, we are obliged to prevent the repetition of the confrontations, mass disorders, plunder, ravage and other activities demoralizing the country and the state.
We have reviewed the norms on prohibiting gatherings and demonstrations. Authorizing such mass events was prohibited in case of overthrowing the constitutional order, inciting national, racial and religious hatred, preaching war and violence.
By introducing a change in the law, we added to it a Section from Article 11 of the International Convention of Human Rights. The Section was not previously included in the law. According to it, mass events can also be prohibited in such cases when they may cause mass disorders, ruin the security of the state, the public order, the health of the population and morality as well as violate others’ constitutional rights and freedoms.
The legislative was obviously guided by state-public interests, and it accomplished the logic of the law. In this context, the law also established the competences of the body authorized to disallow mass events.
To reject a claim for organizing gatherings or demonstrations, the competent body should have reliable data. According to our legislative change, such reliable data should be provided by the Police and the National Security Service in the form of an official conclusion. Only this may serve as grounds for prohibiting a mass event.
And under Section 6 supplemented to the law, the body organizing a mass event may be rejected if the demonstrations and marches organized by it in the past had grave consequences or led to violence and human losses. Such restrictions are not forever either, and according to the law, will not be applied if the organizers, the organizers have been found out and there are reliable data on the share of guilt of each organizer. Anyway, the law established that mass events may be rejected only in grave conditions when all the resources for preventing the obvious danger have been exhausted. The estimations that may serve as grounds for rejection should be made by the Police and the National Security Agencies.
In Clause 3, Article 9 we have established that the right to hold mass events may not be exercised in case they pose a threat to the security of the state and the nation, result in the violation of the public order, influence the society’s moral-psychological condition or violate others’ constitutional rights. We have removed the notion “spontaneous and non-mass events” from the law, as this implies the existence of less than 100 participants.
Article 29 of our Constitution directly states that rallies should be held peacefully, without the use of weapons. We practically saw how a ‘peaceful’ rally changed into mass disorder, violence against the Police, plunder and ravage. Under the current law the organizer may, within three days after giving a notice, obtain permission from the competent body for holding a demonstration or a march. I have already said that all the rejections should be substantiated, and three days in this case is required.
If the legislative had not introduced the required changes in the law, there might be no guarantee that the March 1 events would not be repeated after March 21, when the state of emergency would no longer be in effect. The state cannot allow for the continuation of murders and self-destructions. The legislative was just obliged to help the President of the Republic restore and re-establish lawfulness and regular public order in our country.
GEVORG HAROUTYUNYAN

| Home | >>

E-mail article | Discuss article new!

RSS © Hayots Ashkhar

Headlines for March 19, 2008

THE STATE CANNOT ALLOW THE SELF-DESTRUCTION PROCESS TO CONTINUE
GEVORG HAROUTYUNYAN
Interview with NA Deputy RAFIK PETROSYAN “Mr. Petrosyan, the NA extraordinary session introduced changes in and amendments to the law on ‘Holding Gatherings, Demonstrations, Marches and Rallies’. What ...
AZERBAIJAN’S STRATEGY OF “SMALL VICTORIES”
VARDAN GRIGORYAN
Recording the fact that, it is difficult to estimate the resolution submitted by Azerbaijan to the UN General Assembly can’t be estimated as a serious political victory over Armenia, we shouldn’t forget ...
EUROPE AND WE
“Europe wants what Armenian people want. During my meetings in Brussels many officials said they anticipate the state of emergency to be lifted, a dialogue, to make the arrests more concrete and to lift ...
NO LEGAL FORCE
Estimating the adoption of the resolution regarding Nagorno Karabakh, submitted to the UN General Assembly by Azerbaijan V. Oskanyan said: “ I estimate negatively the resolution submitted by Azerbaijan ...
EASILY REFUTED
Political analyst Levon Melik-Shahnazaryan said, all the nine points of the resolution “About the Situation in the Occupied Territories of Azerbaijan” submitted by Azerbaijan to the 62nd session of the ...
TO BE SUBJECTED TO CRIMINAL LIABILITY
8
“I am sure that democracy will not suffer as a result of adopting a law on ‘Holding Gatherings, Demonstrations, Marches and Rallies’, and the imminent dangers to the state and the people will be essentially ...
ONE UPRISING AGAINST ANOTHER
According to SEYRAN AVAGYAN, “The movement of the radical opposition was headed by a person who was silent and absent for ten years. Whereas, in 1996 the opposition was waging an everyday political battle; ...