PRESS RELEASE
THE HERITAGE PARTY
7 Vazgen Sargsian Street
Yerevan 375010, Armenia
Tel: (+374 – 10) 580.877
Fax: (+374 – 10) 543.897
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:
5 May 2009
Heritage’s New Representative Attends PACE Session
Yerevan–Zaruhi Postanjian, the new member of the Armenian delegation
to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) and the
Heritage Party’s MP, was in Strasbourg from April 27 to 30, where she
participated in the spring session of PACE and also delivered remarks
during several discussions. The member of Armenia’s parliamentary
political opposition especially took the floor during the debates over
the report on the referendum held in Azerbaijan, the protection of
human rights during emergency situations, and the Russian-Georgian
conflict (the relevant speeches and addresses, in Armenian and
English, are attached to this press release).
Also, Postanjian had a private meeting with Thomas Hammarberg, the
Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights. But prior to this
discussion, she took part in and addressed during the questions and
answers held in the frames of Hammarberg’s report presented on April
30.
Furthermore, Heritage’s representative at PACE was elected to the
Bureau of the European People’s Party (EPP) and to the PACE Committee
on Culture, Science and Education.
Over the course of the session, Zaruhi Postanjian also met with
numerous delegates from other countries and exchanged views on the
pressing domestic and foreign issues in the political agenda.
Founded in 2002, Heritage has regional divisions throughout the
country. Its central office is located at 31 Moscovian Street, Yerevan
0002, Armenia, with telephone contact at (374-10) 536.913, fax at
(374-10) 532.697, email at [email protected] or [email protected], and
website at
2009 ORDINARY SESSION
________________________
(Second part)
REPORT
Eleventh sitting
Monday 27 April 2009 at 3 p.m.
ADDENDUM 1
________________________________________
Mrs POSTANJYAN (Armenia). – I should first like to express my
gratitude and respect to all delegations of all countries present at
this high chamber of European values. I am proud that the three
countries of the Southern Caucasus – Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan –
are members of this responsible council. Through their membership and
their work, these three neighbour nations should demonstrate a common
commitment to the rights and dignity of all human beings, the hope of
peace and meaningful progress in our region.
On 24 April, we marked the 94th anniversary of the Armenian genocide.
Armenians throughout the world mourned and remembered the 1.5 million
victims of that mets yeghern – the great catastrophe. At the same
time, many Armenians voiced their frustration with the current Turkish
authorities, which continue to deny the plain facts of history: that
94 years ago, the Armenian people were erased from their ancestral
homeland of 3 000 years. On 24 April, we the Armenians also expressed
our appreciation for the many European countries, all of them members
of this council, which have recognised that great genocide and
national dispossession.
Concerning the matter at hand, I would like to register a simple fact:
the current state of Azerbaijan has declared itself to be a legal
successor of the first ever Azerbaijani state, which was founded in
1918. This is relevant because, as you know, the Republic of
Mountainous Karabakh did not in 1918 constitute part of the
short-lived Republic of Azerbaijan. Artsakh, as it is known in
Armenia, had always belonged to the Armenian people. You know also
that such is the case with Nakhichevan, too, and that only the
reshaping of national borders – planned and executed undemocratically
by Stalin and other Bolshevik leaders – forced the Armenians from
their native land. But, then again, you may not know this, because
Azerbaijan has attempted to erase the footprints of the Armenian
people from Nakhichevan. By commission or sanction of Azerbaijan’s
authorities, Armenian cross stones, monuments and graves have been
destroyed at Jugha as recently as December 2005, during Azerbaijan’s
membership of the Council. My colleague Raffi Hovannisian, from
Armenia’s opposition Heritage party, and the republic’s first Minister
of Foreign Affairs, has, from this very platform, spoken to you about
the cultural genocide in Nakhichevan.
I feel that I should be clear: my statement today stems not from
personal or ethnic offence, but is part of the healthy criticism that
all democratic nations should make when a neighbour stumbles, as
Azerbaijan has. I point to its errors – as I point to the errors of my
own government – not to find fulfilment in condemnation, but to serve
the ideals of democracy. Consider the facts. Consider the latest
changes in that republic’s constitution, which repealed that most
basic democratic safeguard: presidential term limits. Consider that
these changes were enacted to support the president of Azerbaijan, who
is the son of the republic’s past president. Colleagues, I cannot
imagine that the concept of dynastic rule can be made to fit into an
understanding of democracy that is contemporary and European.
As for the Republic of Mountainous Karabakh, I ask you to recall that
it was according to the enshrined right of nations to
self-determination, the Montevideo Convention, and controlling Soviet
law, that this historically Armenian land gained its independence in
1991. Please recall also that the republic’s various presidential and
parliamentary elections have been monitored by international
observers, and found to be satisfactory and encouraging. Most
importantly, the population of Artsakh has adopted that most basic
document of liberty, a democratic constitution. In law but also in
spirit, the Armenians of Artsakh have been loyal practitioners of
liberty and democracy.
I say all this not to force an impression, but to return several
forgotten pieces to this international puzzle. I return the question
of democratic standards. I return the destruction of Armenia’s
cultural heritage. I return the massacres of Armenians in Baku and
Sumgait. I return the Armenian territories, now occupied, of Getashen,
Martunashen, and the greater part of Shahumyan.
Dear colleagues of the Council of Europe, I join your ranks today not
to press the views of my government – I certainly cannot recommend
Armenian democracy to Azerbaijan – but to make it clear that democracy
has standards. Neither fear nor false civility should forbid an open,
honest, and bold discussion from taking place in this most special
chamber – the lighthouse of European democracy.
=/Documents/Records/2009/E/0904271500ADD1E.htm
2009 ORDINARY SESSION
________________________
(Second part)
REPORT
Eleventh sitting
Monday 27 April 2009 at 3 p.m.
ADDENDUM 2
________________________________________
The protection of human rights in emergency situations
The following texts were submitted for inclusion in the official
report by members who were present in the Chamber but were prevented
by lack of time from delivering them.
Mrs POSTANJYAN (Armenia). – The citizens of the Republic of Armenia
have a clear notion of the rules of dictatorship ever since the Soviet
period. Soviet citizens were distinctly aware that if they held a
peaceful demonstration against the government they would be deprived
not only of their freedom but also of their lives. Being citizens of a
Council of Europe member country, we believed that we could make a
complaint about the falsified results of the elections through holding
peaceful demonstrations. And we were sure that it was possible to
exercise that right, because it is about eight years since the
provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights were introduced
in national legislation, and they are superior to the laws of our
country.
On 1 March 2008, Armenians who are members of the Council of Europe
were subjected to illegal repression during the exercise of their
constitutional rights, as a result of which 10 citizens were killed.
Three of them were killed by special means such as KC carbine
Cherlomukha 7 gas bullets. Some of the victims, among them one
soldier, before being killed got bodily injuries, but the investigator
did not take any measures to find out the place and circumstances in
which such injuries were received. On 1 March there were also 200
wounded people, and more than 100 people were arrested; 56 of them are
still in jail. The study of their cases and the process of trials show
that almost everyone is being prosecuted for their political views.
And the cases of the 10 killed victims are not being fairly
investigated based on equal conditions, in reasonable time and in
accordance with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
On the contrary, the Armenian Government does everything to hide the
offenders.
The basis of arbitrary and self-contained government of the Armenian
executive power was set up in the middle of the 1990s. This is the
reason that dictatorship is rooted in our country during the past 10
years. In essence, power change in Armenia has not happened through
elections since 1995. Armenian citizens held a peaceful demonstration
on the falsified results of presidential and parliamentary elections
of 2003 and the demonstration was dispersed by law enforcement
agencies in 2004 by use of violence. At that time as well, many
peaceful demonstrators were imprisoned for some period of time. And
although later the Council of Europe responded to those events and
certain legislative changes were made, all these, unfortunately, were
baring imitative nature and were not supposing the real solution to
the existing issues and growing crisis.
Why do I remember and speak about those past events? My opinion is
that the well-known tragic events of 1 March 2008 have a deeper
background which comes from the fact that we, as delegates from
Council of Europe member countries, do not react adequately or on time
to various human rights violation cases that take place in different
countries. In my opinion, well-known international organisations
should evaluate the fulfilment of tasks taken on by those who govern
not by self-deceptive words, `It was a step forward’, but the real
content, which is to find out whether people who became victims of
violations of Convention provisions could later restore their rights –
or whether the state which has violated those provisions of the
Convention took real and working measures to avoid repetition of such
violations.
I would like to give a special emphasis to the fact that all that I
have mentioned took place directly in front of the influential
delegates and experts of the Council of Europe. The Venice Commission
made comments on the Armenian Law on Conduct of Marches, Strikes and
Demonstrations, and on Articles 225, 225.1, 300 and 301 of the
Criminal Code. As a result changes were made in the above-mentioned
laws, but in fact those people who should have derived positive
benefits from those changes did not make any use of them.
Demonstrations are prohibited. Those accusations by which the four
deputies of the National Assembly were deprived of their immunities
have no legal power any more. Consequently, on 3 March 2008, the
petition presented by the Chief Prosecutor in illegal, groundless and
Stalinist style to deprive the deputies of their immunities, and
accepted by the deputies of the coalition power, should have also lost
its power. However, at present they are illegally imprisoned.
I would like to mention as well that in spite of the decision made by
the European Court of Human Rights on the violated rights of `A1+’ TV
company, in accordance with Article 10 of the European Convention on
Human Rights, there is no progress in this matter either, and Armenian
television watchers are deprived of an opportunity to watch a TV
channel with an alternative point of view, because the National
Assembly suspended the broadcasting frequencies, contests reasoning
the digitisation of the TV companies broadcast.
On 1 March 2008, the second President of the Republic of Armenia,
Robert Kocharyan, announced the state of emergency for 20 days, by
illegally limiting the constitutional rights of our citizens, and
access to alternative freedom of speech supposed by Article 15 of the
European Convention on Human Rights. Kocharyan even used the military
forces during the state of emergency. And if we, dear colleagues, do
not make a proper evaluation of illegal activities carried out by the
second Armenian President and the current authorities within a
reasonable time, then in our country, which is a member of the Council
of Europe, as well as in other countries, new events such as those of
1 March could not be prevented.
=/Documents/Records/2009/E/0904271500ADD2E.htm
2 009 ORDINARY SESSION
________________________
(Second part)
REPORT
Fourteenth sitting
Wednesday 29 April 2009 at 10 a.m.
ADDENDUM 1
Follow-up given by Georgia and Russia to Resolution 1647 (2009)
The humanitarian consequences of the war between Georgia and Russia:
follow-up given to Resolution 1648 (2009)
Mrs POSTANJYAN (Armenia). – In our modern world, any conflict resolved
by force is condemned to failure. The well-known resolution of the
Georgian-Ossetian conflict partially restrained the regional
militarists, among them the government of Azerbaijan, and persuaded
them not to unleash a new war. The Council of Europe, which has
already some 60 years of experience, has perfectly proven by its
activities that the most efficient and effective way to prevent the
occurrence of international conflicts and the establishment of
dictatorships lies in the diligent meeting of commitments assumed by
the states themselves in the respect and defence of human rights and
fundamental freedoms.
The border of the countries of the South Caucasus region and the
region’s territorial autonomous administrative units were shaped by
the self-imposed decisions of the Soviet leaders Lenin and Stalin. As
a result, the South Caucasian multi-national population inherited a
very difficult heritage. They should either adapt to those unfair
decisions or struggle to regain their violated rights.
The heads of the states of the Caucasus can avoid the danger of
further explosive outcomes of the changes to the above-mentioned
borders fin the South Caucasus only if they actually start respecting
human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well establish mutually
beneficial co-operation with the nations of those territories.
Unfortunately, a number of citizens were prosecuted for their
political views within both Armenia and Georgia, as well as in
Azerbaijan, and this trend is particularly dangerous for
non-homogenous countries. In the young members countries of the
Council of Europe such as Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan, numerous
violations of human rights and the incomplete development of
democratic institutions are mainly conditioned by systemic abuses and
illegal actions of the authorities in those countries, which are
accompanied by various violations of constitution and international
norms and basic standards of rights and civil liberties.
It is obvious that, parallel to the tense internal political situation
in Georgia, the national and individual citizens’ rights, as well as
their educations ones, such as being able to receive education in
their mother tongue, and the socio-economic rights of the native
Armenian population of Javakhq territory of Georgia are being
violated.
The situation became more strained when one of the leaders of United
Javakhq-Democratic Alliance organisation, Vahagn Chakhalyan, was
unjustly sentenced to 10 years of prison accused of carrying illegal
weapons. I appeal to Georgia to review the judicial case of Vahagn
Chakhalyan in accordance with the requirements of Articles 5, 6, 10
and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. And in order to
avoid new conflicts, it is necessary that the native nations of that
territory, including the Armenians in Javakhq, are afforded their
rights.
Dear colleagues, if we are truly concerned about the establishment of
a civil society that will ensure the safe and harmonious living for
the multinational population of the European family, then we should
prioritise the real protection of human rights and not merely give an
imitation of doing so.
And finally I would like to raise an alarm on Armenian churches and
graves in Georgia. Making use of the fact that the Armenian churches
in Georgia do not possess officially acknowledged status from the
state until now, I must stress the fact that the Georgian Government
promotes their dispossession from Armenians by not taking any measures
to safeguard them. The destroyers of Armenian graves and cross-stones
in Tbilisi disrespectfully continue their deeds without any
appropriate response from the authorities in the Georgian capital. It
seems that the encroachment and desecration of Armenian churches,
cross-stones and graves reveals a systemic attempt to destroy them.
The Georgian authorities should take very seriously their
responsibilities as the leaders, particularly in regard to the
preservation of the historical cultural heritage of the nations in
their multinational country and protect and respect their human rights
without any national, religion and territorial discrimination.
?link=/Documents/Records/2009/E/0904291000ADDE.htm
2009 ORDINARY SESSION
________________________
(Second part)
REPORT
Sixteenth Sitting
Thursday 30 April 2009 at 10 a.m.
________________________________________
THE PRESIDENT. – The next question is from Mrs Postanjyan
Mrs POSTANJYAN (Armenia). – Honourable Commissioner, are you aware
that Armenia’s prosecutor general had dismissed the previous charges
that he had laid after the 1 March tragedy, and that was the reason
for the imprisonment of several Armenian MPs, but that the MPs were
not released, and without any legal grounds and without the Armenian
National Assembly’s approval, the prosecutor general has laid new
charges?
Did you know that three of the 10 victims of the 1 March tragedy were
killed by the police? Even though more than one year has passed, no
police officer has been held to account to date, and in fact, a fair
trial, in compliance with Articles 2 and 6 of the European Convention
on Human Rights, is not being held.
THE PRESIDENT. – Would you like to reply, Mr Hammarberg?
Mr HAMMARBERG. – After the events in connection with the demonstration
of 1 March, we went to Yerevan to make the first assessment of the
situation. Ten people were killed in the violence during that
demonstration. Two were policemen and the eight others were civilians.
There were violent elements in the demonstration, but the majority of
demonstrators, who had been there for several days, were absolutely
peaceful. Some 100 people were arrested and charges were being
prepared.
I have been there three times since then, and have had discussions
with the prosecutor general on each occasion. I voiced to him my
scepticism about the nature of the evidence produced against seven of
the more leading demonstrators, which I found not very strong. After
that, there was an initiative within the parliament to change the law
on these points, which was very sweeping and could be misunderstood or
misused. Following that change in the law, the prosecutor general has
also changed his indictment, and the trial against the seven people
has been broken up into five parts, involving five different judges. I
see that as progress, but I remain concerned about the fact that the
seven opposition political leaders are still held in custody on what I
regard as very thin grounds. This situation has being going on for
more than a year, and I hope that a solution will be found rapidly. My
recommendation was that an amnesty be declared, in order that these
people can be released and that the focus in that country can be to
build for the future in terms of the protection of human rights.
This has been a very sad period in the history of Armenia. We did
contribute to one discussion there on how to investigate what
happened. Some lessons from that discussion can perhaps be drawn in
respect of Moldova, by the way. A parliamentary commission had been
set up in order to make an inquiry, but the problem was that there was
very minimal participation on the part of the opposition. It was seen
broadly as a government commission, which meant that it had little
credibility when it came to establishing facts. On our recommendation,
the president decided to set up another body composed of five experts:
two nominated by the government, two by the opposition and one by the
ombudsman, who was to act as chair. This new fact-finding committee
has started its work. There were some problems in the beginning, but I
hear that the work is progressing and that the committee might be able
to establish what actually happened, in order to avoid propaganda and
undue politicisation, and to build the ground for the healing process.
The Council of Europe and its resolutions have played an important
role in dealing with this issue, not least your own co-rapporteurs,
through their reports and visits to the country. There was excellent
co-operation between the two wings of the Council of Europe.
We remain concerned and we still cannot see good reasons for keeping
those seven political leaders in detention, but we are hearing some
positive signals about a solution to this problem. If that solution
comes, the Council of Europe can look back at this period and see that
we did contribute constructively to solving at least some of the
difficulties in Armenia.
ocuments/Records/2009/E/0904301000E.htm