WHEN THE THIEF SCREAMS, CATCH THE THIEF!
S. Baghdasaryan
Hayots Ashkharh Daily, Armenia
Dec 12 2007
During the most recent demonstration, ex-President L. Ter-Petrosyan
touched upon the privatization implemented in Armenia, naturally
trying to substantiate that the process was carried out brilliantly
under his rule. In the meantime, nothing was mentioned about the
results of the privatization. And this was done on purpose.
Whereas the results are extremely striking; however, this is not to
the benefit of the former authorities.
We have recently mentioned that there were more companies privatized
in Armenia in 1997, in comparison the subsequent 10 years.
All in all, 4187 out of the 9400 privatized companies were alienated
under the rule of LTP.
Although the number of the companied privatized in that period
was exceeded by 228, the profit received by the state was several
times lower. The 4178 enterprises were sold at a total sum of AMD 40
billion. Whereas during the subsequent years the sums debited at the
expense of the state exceeded by AMD 272 billion.
And what about the sums which were to be received by the state at
the expense of alienating the major part of public property?
The thing is that, they weren’t received or, they were received in
such an amount that was several times lower than the real sum. As to
the rest, it was pocketed by those who stood by the then leaders of
the country. Instead of increasing the financial means of the state,
which were scarce as it is, LTP and his surrounding world were doing
their best to speedily sell the state property for next to nothing.
One should be at least blind in order to justify the voucher
privatization. It was just eye-washing aiming to conceal the plunder
that was taking place at the first stage of the privatization. With
the purpose of dazzling the people, vouchers were distributed among
them, but they later became a tool for some people for acquiring
state property at a price several times lower than the state value.
As we know, a short time after their release, the vouchers lost
their nominal value. Moreover, they were 4-5 times below the nominal
value. So to say, a voucher costing AMD 10 thousand appeared in
the market at the price of AMD 2-2.5, as a result of the unbearable
conditions existing in the country. After a short while, the enriched
lords began to collect them and own the state property.
Let’s bring just one example. Thanks to ex-Prime Minister H. Bagratyan,
the "Ararat Wine Factory of Yerevan" was sold at the price of USD 200
thousand. And an additional sum of USD 1 million was paid in exchange
for the accumulated debts. But these were debts that had emerged in
the aftermath "good" governance of the state enterprise.
That is, the state had to pay for the improper work of some people.
Such problems were faced by almost all the companies preparing for
privatization. The outstanding figures of the Armenian pan-National
Movement appointed by the authorities as Heads of different enterprises
demolished them and halted their operation, accumulating debts in
large amounts. Instead of being held accountable for the damages
brought to the state, the same directors later acquired the privatized
factories. A question arises: wasn’t it at the expense of the company’s
debts to the state that the country’s leadership was doing it, while
being deeply immersed in debts? Has L.T.P forgotten all about this?
This obviously demonstrates that the state property was wasted by
the authorities, and no one ever bore any responsibility for that.
While the recovery of what we had lost required a long time.
Have the former authorities ever tried to understand why Armenia
started recording a high economic growth, the financial debits of the
states increased and the unpaid budgetary expenses were suddenly paid,
and the problem of the accumulated mutual debts (which the former
authorities never managed to resolve) fell to the bosom of history
long ago?
Naturally, economy cannot work on its own. Relevant conditions
are required for that. One of those conditions is to change the
privatization doctrine which envisaged the recovery of production or
the re-operation of the factory that didn’t wok for several years
running. And this became the basis of the high economic growth,
which L.T.P. avoids speaking about.