KARABAKH AT AN INTERSECTION
Davit Gharabekyan – Independent analyst
KarabakhOpen
18-06-2007 11:42:32
The upcoming election again necessitates our society to take a test
on democracy. The hope for legality started fading away soon.
After the well-known letter of the director of the Civic Action Center
NGO the CEC gave a nervous and insulting response, which was followed
by "sudden" hindrances for the human rights defender to visit the
penitentiaries, while he used to monitor prisons before that. The
Demo Newspaper and KarabakhOpen.com were checked out of the list of
local media which get grants from the NKR government.
Avoiding details, I will say that the society is now in an atmosphere
which reminds of the times of Peter’s reforms: officials of different
ranks rush to take a test on loyalty to the likely presidential
candidate to hold on to their posts.
I nevertheless hope that the next leader (whoever is elected) will
display will and determination and will not let the pre-election
moods or any ends prevail over the national interests and long-term
programs of development.
The leaders of the surveys conducted by the abovementioned independent
media and NGOs have so far successfully avoided extremities, although
the psychological tension is tangibly growing as the election campaign
is drawing nearer.
However, the choice of ways of development depends on the society. If
it wishes to live in legality and share responsibility with its
leader for its future supporting it through the difficulties of
social transformation and consistently pursues its goal, the nation
will overcome the crisis.
How the government should agree with people
Fundamental changes in the society are facilitated by the gradual
replacement of a one-pole government by a bipolar government. People,
the society is becoming the second pole, the most active part of which
is the independent media and NGOs. I consciously rule out political
parties and the parliament.
First, because the parliament has lost the role of a representative
of people and a bridge between people and the executive.
Second, the majority of parties have become nominal
organizations. However, none of the parliament parties complies with
the classical definition of a party, and has not proved its right
to be considered as a party, taking a test in government, fame and
political struggle.
Meanwhile, a lot of journalists stood up for their rights with endless
reproaches from the people they criticize, including influential
officials.
They raised and covered sharp issues, despite difficulties, and
obviously there is more trust and interest in their reports that the
meetings and conferences of parties.
The appearance of an NGO or establishment of an open discussion on
a complicated and urgent issue on the eve of the election is now
fashionable to perceive as lobby for a presidential candidate. In
addition, it is now fashionable to discern plots or intrigues,
or backstage forces in the actions of the opponent. In addition,
the outside forces are associated with something negative, cunning,
destructive.
A show on the Public Channel last week suggested that the meetings of
NGOs are funded by organizations backed by Jewish-Masonic forces. So
shall we reject international cooperation? As to money, I have
never seen an independent reporter who, unlike their critiques, has
apartments outside NKR, realty for several hundreds of thousands of
dollars (minimum), expensive cars…
So where is the way out? How can we improve our lives? The dialogue
among the public forces will help transfer the discussion of the
abovementioned problems into a constructive framework and define
the primary internal and external problems, as well as to work out
mechanisms of solving them.