Author: Toganian Liana

5 ARMENIAN NGO TO RECEIVE $40,000 IN GRANTS FROM WORLD BANK AND SOROS FOUNDATION

ArmenPress
May 12 2004

YEREVAN, MAY 12, ARMENPRESS: Five Armenian non-governmental
organizations will receive a total of $40,000 in grants from the World
Bank and the Open Society Institute (Soros Foundation) in 2004 as
part of World Bank’s Small Grants Program. The relevant agreements
were signed today. The program was started six years ago and two
years ago the Soros Foundation joined it.

Naira Melkumian, a senior official of the World Bank Yerevan office,
said the main goal of the program is to help resolve the most pressing
problems of the vulnerable segment of the population “or at least to
outline ways for their resolution.”

Larisa Alaverdian from the Armenian branch of the Soros Foundation,
said the five organizations were selected from a pool of 115
applicants. She said the Bank and the Foundation will continue to
support the implementation of the program.

One of the organizations, Atur, of Assyrians, living in Armenia,
will use the grant for publication of 2,000 copies of a book in
their mother tongue. The other organization, called Millennium, will
publish a book of seven successful stories of Armenian refugees from
Azerbaijan who settled in Armenia’s rural regions. The stories then
will be used for shooting a documentary.

OSCE IS NOT INDIFFERENT

A1 Plus | 21:32:48 | 12-05-2004 | Politics |

The Head of the OSCE Office in Yerevan, Ambassador Vladimir Pryakhin,
today welcomed the resumption of contacts between the authorities
and the opposition in Armenia.

“I encourage both sides to engage in a meaningful and genuine
dialogue in order to resolve, within the constitutional framework,
the continuing difficulties,” Ambassador Pryakhin said.

He said the participating States of the 55-nation OSCE were following
political developments in Armenia closely: “Dialogue is the best
means to achieve a common understanding, settle differences and
promote political stability.”

Vladimir Pryakhin called on the Armenian authorities to review the
cases of all those detained during recent demonstrations.

He also urged the authorities to continue their efforts to reform
the Administrative Code in order to eliminate the practice of
administrative detentions.

“This practice is incompatible with European human rights standards,”
he said.

The Head of the OSCE Office noted that other international
organizations were also very concerned about this practice, as
reflected in a Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Resolution
of 28 April.

International Journalist’s Network
May 11 2004

Covering Environmental Issues
May 17, 2004 – May 21, 2004

Workshop

In Yerevan, Armenia. Organized by the Caucasus Media Institute (CMI)
with support from the U.S. Embassy and the UN Environmental Program.
The workshop is aimed at improving journalists’ coverage of
environmental news. British and local specialists will conduct the
training in Armenian and English for 12 journalists. Application form
(in Armenian):
CMI did not specify a deadline, but it said applicants would be
notified by May 7. Send a completed application, letter of support
from an editor-in-chief, and three work samples to Seda Muradyan, CMI
program officer, at [email protected]. The CMI Web site:

ARMENIAN RULING COALITION AND OPPOSITION TO CREATE “NEW POLITICAL SITUATION”

07.05.2004 13:20

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The ruling coalition of Armenia, the united opposition as
well as the Independent United Labor Party and National Deputy parliamentary
faction acknowledged the necessity of creating a new political situation in
Armenia, the joint statement of the Armenian parliamentary factions adopted
yesterday evening on completion of 5-hour negotiations says. The parties
agreed on continuation of political consultations and formation of an agenda
on the basis of former statements of the coalition and opposition. As
secretary of Justice opposition bloc Victor Dallakian told the journalists,
about 30 issues, including the PACE resolution on domestic situation in
Armenia, have been submitted to discussion. To remind, political
consultations are continued today.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, MO
May 5 2004

The Zoo is going global with conservation efforts
By Diane Toroian Keaggy
Of the Post-Dispatch

The St. Louis Zoo has spent 10 years and $70 million restoring its
home in Forest Park. Now, it wants to help restore the planet.

The Zoo will announce Wednesday a major conservation initiative that
will put Zoo scientists and resources in 12 troubled habitats across
the globe. Leaders say the St. Louis Zoo WildCare Institute will
establish reserves, study endangered species and teach indigenous
people how to best manage their land and wildlife.

Zoo President Jeffrey Bonner calls the project “one of the most
momentous steps the St. Louis Zoo has ever taken,” and
conservationists praise the effort as a comprehensive approach to
ecology.

“The Zoo is in fabulous condition,” said Bonner, who joined the Zoo
in 2002. “We’ve spent an awful lot of money on infrastructure and
exhibits. We’re now in a position to really make a contribution
nationally and internationally. We have the talent and the
expertise.”

The Zoo already participates in dozens of conservation initiatives,
but Bonner says its efforts “have been a mile wide and an inch deep.”
Zoo scientists hope a more focused approach will lead to lasting
change.

“We went to our people and said pick something you’re really
passionate about, someplace where you think you can make a
difference,” said Dr. Eric Miller, who has been named director of the
WildCare Institute.

Miller, a veterinarian, has served as director of animal health and
conservation for the past decade. “Conservation has always been very
important at the Zoo, but we expect to make a real impact here.”

The Institute’s work, which has started already in some locales, will
span the globe. Conservation centers will be established in a dozen
habitats: the Galapagos Islands, the Ozarks, Mexico, Guatemala,
Nicaragua, Peru, Madagascar, Armenia, the Horn of Africa, southern
and western Africa and Papua New Guinea. Some 40 universities,
conservation groups and zoos will partner with the institute at the
centers.

The institute will primarily focus on species that live at the Zoo,
such as Grevy’s zebras, antelope, Humboldt penguins, echidnas and
cheetahs. On the coast of Peru, for example, uncontrolled commercial
fishing and farming have damaged the breeding ground of the Humboldt
penguin. On the Galapagos Islands, introduced diseases threaten
numerous bird species. And on the Horn of Africa, overgrazing has
pushed Grevy’s zebras off their land. Closer to home, in the Ozarks,
river pollution could be killing off giant salamanders known as
hellbenders.

The strategies to protect these species are as diverse as the
habitats they call home. Typically, conservation biologists will
survey wild populations and assess threats such as disease, habitat
loss and pollution. But scientists are not the only ones who will
assist in conservation. In western Africa, lobbyists will fight for
the ban of uncontrolled hunting. In Peru, guards will protect the
fragile coast.

And at every center, local people will work with scientists and
educators to protect their native lands. The institute will provide
teacher workshops in Papau New Guinea, train park rangers in the
Galapagos Islands and employ local workers to survey animal
populations in Nicaragua and Africa.

“It makes no sense to work with Grevy’s zebras if you are not
working in the classroom with those little kids, ensuring when they
grow up and become decision makers that value Grevy’s and will
continue to protect them,” said Bonner. “In the end, the biological
problems are the easy ones. It’s the human dimension that creates the
most intractable issues.”

Miller said local people valued their native species just as
Americans valued the buffalo and eagle. Still, it’s difficult to ask
societies to consider the long-term good of the ecosystem when their
children need to eat today. In those cases, the institute will appeal
to the population’s pocketbook. For instance, in Kenya, the institute
will install permanent water for the community. In return, ranchers
won’t graze on the zebras’ land.

“At this stage of our development, it’s easy to say, ‘What are those
people doing?’ Well, at this point of our development in the U.S.,
we’ve hunted the passenger pigeon to extinction and we nearly did it
to the buffalo. So we’re trying to help them not follow in our
footsteps,” said Miller. “Most of them don’t set out and say, ‘We
want to trash our wildlife.'”

If indigenous communities struggle to find the relevance of the
Armenian mountain viper or lemurs in Madagascar, why on earth should
St. Louisans care about such species? Because we have as much to lose
as they do, said Bonner. As an example, he cites overgrazing in
Africa, which has led to harsher weather patterns here.

“The Sahara is getting bigger and bigger because there is less and
less vegetation to hold it back. If the desert doubles in size,
everything in our climate will change, and, in fact, everything is
changing because of changes in Africa,” said Bonner. “You cannot be
divorced in St. Louis from what’s happening in Africa. Everything is
connected to everything else.”

That message will be brought home to the St. Louis Zoo through new
exhibits, zookeeper chats, publications and even a new marketing
campaign.

“For years we’ve had the tagline, ‘Can you come out and play?’ and
it’s a fantastic tagline because it helps people understand that this
is a delightful place to come and visit,” said Bonner. “And we want
to always be that. But you’re also going to hear the message ‘animals
always.’ Your concept of a zoo has to change.”

Conservationists applaud the Zoo’s initiative. Though the Bronx Zoo
is the undisputed leader in research and conservation efforts, zoo
professionals and ecologists say the WildCare Institute boosts the
reputation of the Zoo, already an authority in animal contraception
and nutrition.

“Their approach is absolutely correct,” said Nat Frazer, chairman of
the Department of Wildlife Ecology at the University of Florida and
adviser to the institute. “They were one of the first zoos to become
concerned not only about animals in captivity but in the wild. When
they contacted me, I did not hesitate. They are an excellent
collaborator and one of those places that really brings people
together.”

The institute will be funded by a $19 million gift from the St. Louis
Zoo Friends Association, as well as revenue from the Zoo’s
Conservation Carousel, grants, gifts and interest from a new
endowment fund. No tax revenue generated from the Zoo-Museum District
will be used.

Still, Bonner hopes the community will support the endeavor, perhaps
financially but mostly through continued visits.

“When you go talk to Conservation International or the World Wildlife
Fund, they envy us to the nth degree, because no one ever visits the
WWF. It’s a building in D.C.,” said Bonner. “But we have 3 million
people clamoring to visit us. It’s the educational component that
really makes zoos very unique and powerful forces for conservation
and research. We can take the message to the public so they
understand why caring for living things on this planet is such a
critical endeavor.”

Zoo outreach

The Zoo’s conservation initiative will focus on the following species
and habitats:
Cheetah: The world’s fastest land mammal, cheetahs number less than
12,000.
Armenian viper: Farming has led to an 88 percent drop in Armenian
vipers over the past 20 years.
Addax: As few as 200 addaxes may be left in Africa. Hunters consider
them a prize kill.
Hellbender: Hellbenders – an ancient breed of salamander – are
disappearing from the Ozarks, and scientists don’t yet know why.
Lemur: Lemurs live exclusively in Madagascar, where logging has
reduced the forests by 85 percent.
Horned guan: Only 1,000 horned guans remain in Mexico and Guatemala,
where loggers and coffee farmers have destroyed their habitat.
Echidna: The spiky echidna is one of many unique species at risk in
Papua New Guinea.
Humboldt penguin: Farmers have damaged the rocky coastline where
Humboldts breed.
Grevy’s zebra: Unlike the plentiful plains zebras, Grevy’s zebras are
losing their land and water supply to farmers and ranchers.
American burying beetle: The American burying beetle, which once
resided in 35 states, has not been seen in Missouri since 1982.
Galapagos Islands: Introduced diseases threaten the wild birds of the
Galapagos Islands. Though several species are critically endangered,
none are extinct.
Bosawas Biosphere Reserve in Nicaragua: The indigenous people of
Bosawas are trying to stave off settlers who steal parrots, cut
mahogany trees and practice slash-and-burn farming.

Reporter Diane Toroian Keaggy
E-mail: [email protected]

Baku Today, Azerbaijan
May 5 2004

Azeri, Armenian Foreign Ministers To Meet In Strasbourg

Foreign ministers Elmar Mammadyarov of Azerbaijan and Vardan Oskanian
of Armenia are going to meet in Strasbourg, France, on May 12, during
a gathering of foreign ministers of the Council of Europe s member
states.

Azerbaijan s Mammadyarov said the meeting would be attended also by
the OSCE Minsk group s co-chairs, and special representatives of the
both conflicting countries.
Mammadyarov said he would discuss with his Armenian counterpart the
ideas the presidents of the two countries debated during their Warsaw
meeting on April 28.

The foreign minister would not disclose the ideas.

Tehran Times
April 28 2004

Oil Money Trickles Down to Azerbaijan’s Dispossessed

SANGACHAL, Azerbaijan (AFP) — Medanet Mamedova does not know where
she stands in the fierce ethical debate raging around the world
between the oil industry and campaign groups which argue that “Big
Oil” is making its shareholders rich by exploiting the poor.

This 32-year-old mother in the former Soviet republic of Azerbaijan
does know, though, that she is earning desperately-needed cash for
her family by stitching together work gloves for sale to a nearby oil
terminal operated by multinational company BP.

Mamedova is one of 10 women living in the ramshackle Umid refugee
camp who have been given the equipment and training to make the
gloves, which are then sold under a contract to the contractors
working to enlarge BP’s Sangachal terminal.

Mamedova, part of a women-only co-operative, works from her shack,
sitting at an electric sewing machine.

If she makes 15 pairs of gloves a day, in between looking after her
two young children and household chores, she can earn about five
dollars (4.2 euros), or $150 a month.

That might not seem much, but Mamedova’s husband is unemployed and
the family’s only other income is the 20$ a month it receives in
state benefits.

Before now, oil industry contracters imported the gloves because no
manufacturer inside Azerbaijan could qualify for the necessary
quality certificate.

The co-operative only started work last week but it has already got
orders for 3,000 pairs of gloves.

The glove-making project was the idea of BP executive Jacobus
Nieuwenhuijze, the manager of the Sangachal terminal.

With the help of a local non-governmental group, the Small and Medium
Business Support Society, he provided the sewing machines and
training for the co-operative.

He said the project was evidence that ordinary people could feel
real, sustainable benefits from the oil company’s activities in
Azerbaijan. “(This project) is giving work to people, to families,
who did not have any income,” he said. “We are providing them with an
opportunity to start living a real life.” Azerbaijan, an impoverished
state which borders Iran and Russia, finds itself the focus of the
global debate over the ethics of “Big Oil.”

The reason is the $3b Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline being built by a
BP-led consortium which when completed will pump oil from the
Sangachal terminal, through neighbouring Georgia and Turkey, to a
tanker terminal on the Mediterranean Sea.

The debate hit the headlines earlier this month when anti-pipeline
campaigners from Azerbaijan and Georgia were barred from speaking at
BP’s annual shareholders’ meeting in London.

Supporters of the pipeline project, which include the administration
of US President George W. Bush, reject the charge that it will
exploit the region.

Construction on the pipeline and work on related offshore oil fields
is creating thousands of local jobs, while once in operation, the
countries along the route will receive huge sums from transit fees
and, in Azerbaijan’s case, from the export of its oil.

Opponents of the pipeline counter that the new jobs will disappear
once construction is completed. They also say that in Azerbaijan and
Georgia — which rank near the top in global corruption league tables
— there is no guarantee that the cash windfall will ever reach the
people who need it most.

Critics also claim that the pipeline will jeopardise the ecology of
the region, a charge that is denied by the pipeline consortium.

A women’s sewing co-operative with just 10 employees is unlikely to
silence the oil industry’s critics.

But in the refugee camp, where the residents — who fled a war in the
early 1990s between Azerbaijan and its neighbour Armenia — live in
drafty one-room shacks and where the dirt streets are ankle deep in
mud, it is a lifeline. “This will be very good for us,” Mamedova said
as she stitched a pair of gloves together. “I will sew and we will
have an income from that.”

The Russia Journal
Apr 30, 2004, 23:59 (Moscow time)

Armenia denies giving US permission to use its airstrips

DEFENSE :: Apr 30, 2004 Posted: 15:10 Moscow time (11:10 GMT)

YEREVAN – Reports that the United States Air Force has arranged to use
Armenian airbases are false, Col. Seyran Shakhsuvaranian, press secretary of
Armenia’s Defense Ministry, declared Thursday in a statement responding to
reports carried by local media citing the American STRATFOR research center.

The colonel said the agreement reached during the visit to Armenia of Gen.
Charles F. Wald, deputy commander of US forces in Europe, did not include
provisions for basing US warplanes on Armenian bases. ‘The actual aim of the
agreement has to do with the provision of supplies and technical services
between the two sides when one or the other requests it and at the option of
the other in view of its policies and priorities,’ his statement said.

According to the STRATFOR account, agreement was reached during Wald’s visit
on April 25-26 to allow US military airplanes to land at Armenian airports.
It called the agreement part of an effort to isolate Armenia from Russia and
Iran. /Rosbalt/

CYCLE OF REPRESSION: HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN ARMENIA

Human Rights Watch Briefing Paper

May 4, 2004

Summary
Background: 2003 Presidential Election
Prelude to April 12-13
Restrictions on Travel to Yerevan
The April 12-13 Events
Excessive Force
Raids of Party Headquarters
Detentions: Due Process Violations and Torture
Torture and ill-treatment in police custody
Freedom of the Press
International Response
Recommendations

Summary

At the end of March 2004, Armenia’s political opposition united in mass
peaceful protests to force a “referendum of confidence” in President Robert
Kocharian and to call for his resignation. In response, the Armenian
government embarked on a campaign to break the popular support for the
political opposition with mass arrests, violent dispersal of demonstrations,
raids on political party headquarters, repression of journalists, and
restrictions on travel to prevent people from participating in
demonstrations. Hundreds of people were detained, many for up to fifteen
days; some were tortured or ill-treated in custody. Excessive police force,
particularly at an opposition rally on April 12, caused dozens of injuries
among demonstrators. Some of the worst injuries were caused by stun
grenades, which inflicted deep wounds in many protesters. At the same rally,
police beat journalists and confiscated their cameras.

The origin of the opposition’s demands was the government’s failure to date
to redress the deeply flawed 2003 presidential election, which Kocharian,
the incumbent, won. Disturbingly, the government is now repeating, with
increasing violence, a pattern of repression that surrounded last year’s
election. At that time, the international community warned the Armenian
government that its intimidation of the opposition through the use of
arrests and administrative detentions must stop.1 However, in March and
April 2004, the Armenian government not only began a fresh campaign of
detentions, but added to the intimidation with security force violence.

This briefing paper outlines the events of March and April 2004 and details
human rights violations committed by Armenian authorities during this time.
It is based on interviews done by a Human Rights Watch researcher in Yerevan
from April 14-18, 2004. Human Rights Watch calls on the Armenian authorities
to cease intimidating the political opposition, to stop using excessive
force against demonstrators and torture and ill treatment in custody, and to
hold accountable those responsible for these abuses. We call on the
international community to assist the government of Armenia in urgently
addressing this situation and to ensure that further acts of repression are
not repeated.

Background: 2003 Presidential Election2

The antecedents to the events of the past month are to be found in the 2003
presidential election. In the lead-up to the first round of voting, which
took place on February 19, 2003, more than 250 opposition activists,
supporters, and election observers were temporarily detained, many of them
taken to court and summarily sentenced to up to fifteen days administrative
detention for petty offences.3 At the time Human Rights Watch said the
detentions were “an obvious attempt to intimidate and disable the opposition
before the run-off,” which was held on March 5, 2003.

The election itself did not meet international standards and was marred by
“serious irregularities, including widespread ballot box stuffing.”4
Although the government set up a working group to study the election
violations, it issued a report in March 2003, “essentially dismissing all
the facts and conclusions registered by the EOM [Election Observation
Mission].”5

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe [OSCE] attributed
the election’s failure to meet international standards to “a lack of
sufficient political determination by the authorities to ensure a fair and
honest process.”6 It concluded that “[r]estoring confidence in the election
process will require prompt and vigorous action by the authorities, includin
g a clear assumption of responsibility and holding accountable those who
violated the law, particularly those in official positions who did so.”

Stepan Demirchian, the opposition candidate, filed suit with the
Constitutional Court, challenging the election results.7 On April 16, 2003
the court ruled that the election result should stand, but that the use of
administrative detention in the context of the election harmed Demirchian’s
campaign and violated Armenia’s obligations under international law.8 The
court recommended that the government hold a referendum of confidence in
President Robert Kocharian within a year.9 The government rejected the
proposal, arguing that it was not within the court’s authority to recommend
such action. The opposition, on the other hand, demanded that the government
hold the referendum, or that the president resign from his post.10

The government failed to take the action recommended by the OSCE and the
Constitutional Court.11 As the one-year deadline approached in April 2004,
the opposition grew more vocal in its demands, threatening mass protests if
the government did not hold a referendum or take other action. The
government, however, remained steadfast, refusing to respond to opposition
demands. By the end of March 2004, the opposition stepped up its campaign to
challenge the legitimacy of the president, and began to hold rallies and
demonstrations around the country to express its demands.

Prelude to April 12-13

At the end of March 2004, two of the main opposition groups, the Artarutiun
(Justice) Alliance, which consists of nine parties – including the Republic
Party, the People’s Party, and the National Unity Party – joined forces and
announced its campaign of action.12 Following this move, the opposition
intensified its efforts, making further announcements and mobilizing in
Armenia’s provinces. The authorities responded by restricting freedom of
movement, carrying out detentions, and threatening criminal charges against
opposition campaign organizers.

On March 28, approximately one thousand opposition supporters rallied in
Giumri, Armenia’s second largest city. Pro-government supporters appeared at
the rally and threw eggs at opposition leaders. Scuffles broke out and
police arrested up to fifteen opposition demonstrators, but did not arrest
any of the pro-government supporters. Police charged four of the activists
with hooliganism under article 258 of the criminal code and a court remanded
them in custody for two months pre-trial detention. The others were released
without charge.13

On March 30, the procurator general, or attorney general, opened a criminal
case against the Justice Alliance and its supporters under articles 301
(public calls for seizure of power by force) and 318(2) (publicly insulting
representatives of government) of the criminal code. The procurator general
stated that the charges were related to the recent protests initiated by the
Justice Alliance.14 As a result of opening the criminal case, the
authorities began to summon opposition leaders for questioning as
witnesses.15

On April 5, Artashes Geghamian, the leader of the National Unity Party,
addressed a rally in Yerevan, organized by the party, that drew an estimated
3,000 participants. As he was speaking, about two dozen men pelted him with
eggs. Some fighting broke out between the rally participants and these men.
When journalists present tried to film the clashes, the men attacked the
journalists and smashed their cameras.16 Several hundred police stood by
observing the events, but took no action.17 The Yerevan police chief
reportedly defended the police inaction, stating that the police properly
followed their orders to take action only in “extreme cases.”18 Police later
confirmed that following the rally they detained forty-eight opposition
supporters.19

>From April 5, the number of rallies in Yerevan steadily increased, as did
the number of opposition supporters detained or otherwise intimidated. The
Republic Party estimated that from the end of March until April 12, police
had detained, searched, or harassed more than 300 of its supporters.20

Meanwhile, according to the Justice Alliance, on March 22, three unknown
assailants attacked and beat Victor Dallakian, an opposition member of
parliament and secretary of the Justice Alliance, in the street near his
house. On April 3, unknown men beat Aramais Barsegian, a former member of
parliament and head of the Artashat district branch of the People’s Party of
Armenia, near his house. The timing of the attacks on both, together with
the lack of any other reasonable explanation for them, led the Justice
Alliance to believe they were politically motivated.21

On March 30 at 9:00 a.m., four unknown men assaulted Mikael Danielian, a
human rights defender, near his house in Yerevan, as he was returning home
from walking his dog. They punched him repeatedly to the head, and kicked
him after he fell to the ground. Danielian was taken to hospital, where he
remained until April 2. Danielian believed that the attack was an act of
retribution for his human rights work and that he was targeted at this time
in order to stop him from monitoring the growing protests of the political
opposition in Armenia and the associated government abuses.22 Although this
is the first reported attack on a human rights defender, journalists
publishing material critical of the government have been the victims of such
attacks.23

Restrictions on Travel to Yerevan

Police stop our activists who are trying to come from the regions in their
cars,arrest them, scare them, and don’t allow them to come to Yerevan.24

>From the end of March until mid-April 2004, police restricted the movement
of opposition supporters trying to travel to Yerevan to attend rallies by
setting up road blocks, stopping cars, questioning the passengers, and
denying permission to travel further to those they believed were opposition
supporters.25 These actions breached the right to freedom of movement,
protected under international law.26

On the morning of April 5, between 10:30 a.m. and 12:00 noon, police stopped
nine members of the National Unity Party in three cars at a check point as
they were leaving Vanadzor, Armenia’s third largest city, on the main road
to Yerevan. They were intending to participate in a rally at 3:00 p.m. in
Yerevan. Police held the nine men at the Vanadzor police station, reportedly
telling them, “we have saved you from being beaten in Yerevan.” Police took
three of the men to the local court, which sentenced them to five days of
administrative detention for not following police orders. The rest were
released at 8:00 p.m. on the same day.27

In early April, the police presence in Vanadzor increased significantly and
members of the National Police force were brought into the city to help the
local police to monitor the roadblocks. Police told a local human rights
defender that the increased police presence was a result of an order on the
“tense situation.”28 On April 9, police sent a minivan to the outskirts of
Vanadzor and detained people in it who were traveling to Yerevan whom they
suspected were intending to participate in opposition rallies.29

Excessive Force

In spite of the warnings of government authorities, on April 12, an
estimated 15,000 people marched from Freedom Square along Marshal Baghramian
Avenue towards the presidential residence. Hundreds of riot police and
security forces stopped them near the parliament and the protesters did not
attempt to break through the barrier, but continued the protest at that
place in the street.37

On the night of 12-13 April, the protesters on Marshal Baghramian Avenue set
up camp for the night next to the barbed wire barrier and hundreds of
security forces. According to protesters and observers interviewed by Human
Rights Watch, the demonstration was completely peaceful, with protesters
playing music, dancing, and sleeping.38 The opposition leaders at the
demonstration made several demands to meet with the president, the speaker
of parliament, and the chief of police; the authorities did not respond.39

Shortly after midnight an estimated 3,000 protesters remained in the street
when the street lights went out. Then at about 2:00 a.m., protesters heard
an announcement, telling them to leave the road. Police vehicles with water
cannons then drove up and began spraying large volumes of high-pressure
water on the crowds. According to one observer:

We saw a woman over seventy years old under the jet of water. I went to help
her. I stood in front of her to stop the force of the water… I stood with
my side [to the water], facing the parliament and saw police in uniforms
throwing [stun grenades] from the parliament grounds. One blew up about
twenty centimeters from me. My friend had both eardrums broken. The gas made
my eyes water. I could see the police beating women with batons.40

After about ten minutes of spraying the crowds with high pressure water,
police and other security forces, some in black clothing and others in
camouflage uniforms, began throwing into the crowd stun grenades, which are
small explosives that make a deafening noise.41 Other police beat the
protesters with batons and shocked them with electric prods.

Speaking about the stun grenades, a woman told Human Rights Watch: “They
were very frightening. I became deaf, and couldn’t hear anything. I couldn’t
see either from the smoke everywhere.”42

After this initial security force attack, the protesters responded by
throwing plastic water bottles and sticks from their placards; they
subsequently began to run away. The security forces, however, had by this
stage surrounded the protesters and continued to attack them and then chase
them down the street to where other security force personnel were waiting.43
Protesters, observers and journalists were badly injured and beaten. There
were no reports of injury among the security forces.

Three days after the protest, Vazgen Ghazarian, a twenty-two-year-old
protester, told Human Rights Watch he still could not walk from the injuries
he sustained at the protest that night. Twice a stun grenade thrown by
security forces had detonated not far from him. He had nine significant
wounds to his legs and groin, some more than a centimeter deep. Doctors
removed three small pieces of plastic and one piece of metal from his legs.
One of his eardrums was broken.44

Styopa Safarian, a rights activist attending the rally as an observer,45 was
also injured after several explosives went off next to him. “I lost
consciousness for two or three minutes. When I came to, I saw police
violently beating and using electric shocks on the other protesters.”46

Safarian suffered from severe pain to the groin, and his ear, face and legs
were bleeding. He went to the hospital and had his groin area stitched up.
He had open wounds of several centimeters in diameter on his legs, and his
eardrum was broken. There were fourteen other people similarly injured at
the protest in hospital with him.47

Shavarsh Kocharian, an opposition member of parliament, told Human Rights
Watch how masked security force personnel detained and beat him at the
rally:

Then unexpectedly police and special units with batons and electroshock
batons came from the entrance of the parliament. One man in a mask grabbed
me and took me to the parliament grounds. They were beating lots of people
there. I told him I was a member of parliament. He beat me on the shoulders
and face with his baton. He put me in a prisoner transport van where I
waited for two hours… They put a man with terrible head injuries in with
me. They gave him a towel [to soak up the blood], and he waited with me for
two hours.48

At about 4:30 a.m., police took Kocharian and his companion to the Nor-Nork
District Police Precinct and only after this did police seek medical care
for the man with the head injuries. There were others at the police station,
also detained from the protest, with bloody head and ear injuries.

Police held Kocharian at the police station until 7:30 a.m. and then took
him to the Counter Terrorism Department. An investigator came and told him
that he was to be questioned as a witness in relation to an offence of
calling for the overthrow of the government.49 After questioning, Kocharian
was told by the investigator that he was now being held as a defendant in
the case. Kocharian demanded a lawyer, but was not provided with one. Police
searched and fingerprinted him and then placed him in a cell. At about 8:00
p.m. the investigator came to Kocharian and said the charges had been
dropped, and he was released.50

In putting down the rally, Armenian security forces did not abide by the
long-established international norms reflected in the United Nations Basic
Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials.51
The Basic Principles provide that “law enforcement officials, in carrying
out their duty, shall as far as possible apply non-violent means before
resorting to the use of force. … Whenever the lawful use of force … is
unavoidable, law enforcement officials shall … exercise restraint in such
use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offense.”52 The
legitimate objective should be achieved with minimal damage and injury, and
preservation of human life respected.53

Raids of Party Headquarters

That same night, April 12-13, immediately after the attack began on the
protesters in Marshal Baghramian Avenue, security forces stormed the Yerevan
headquarters of the Republic Party, the National Unity Party, and the People
‘s Party, arrested those present, and closed two of the headquarters for
several days.

According to party members present that night, shortly after 2:00 a.m.
security forces in camouflage uniforms came to the headquarters of the
Republic Party. Although they showed no search warrant or other
documentation, they insisted on coming into the office, against the protests
of the party members. They detained several dozen men present and then left.
A couple of men and a group of more than ten women remained, and began
ringing the press and others to tell them what had happened. The security
forces then returned and banged violently on the door. Those inside refused
to open it. Security force personnel smashed a window and entered the
premises. They were very aggressive, swearing at the party members. They
detained everyone and put them into a prisoner transport van. It was very
overcrowded, and police refused to respond when the occupants called for
help in panic from lack of air. Police did not explain to the detainees the
reason for their arrest.

“Then they took us… to an unknown place. There were people in uniforms,
but it wasn’t clear to us who they were. It was some sort of an official
building, and they put us in a cell… Only later we learnt that we were in
the Erebuni Detention Center for administrative detentions.”54

The cell was cold, with metal beds and the authorities refused to give the
detainees mattresses or blankets. The authorities held the party members for
between thirty-six and forty-eight hours, never explaining to them their
legal status. Investigators questioned one of the detainees, Artak
Zayanalian, about the protest, stating that he was being questioned as a
witness.55

After detaining everyone from the Republic Party headquarters, police
occupied the premises for more than two days. Party officials were able to
get back into the building only on April 15. Doors, windows, furniture, and
equipment were broken, documents and other things were lying all over the
floors, and computers, documents, videocassettes, and other equipment had
been confiscated.56

The same night security forces raided the headquarters of the National Unity
Party. No one was at the office at the time of the break-in, however, from
the damage to the door, it was clear that the authorities had forced the
door with crowbars or similar tools. They had forced all the internal doors
open, as well as the doors to safes and cupboards, and had confiscated
documents, including the list of party members, video equipment, and
computers. The authorities then closed the office with an official seal from
the Procurator General’s Office.57

On October 14, party officials demanded that the Procurator General’s Office
remove the seal. After several hours, local government representatives came
and took away the seal and the party officials were able to re-enter the
premises. They reported that documents and other things were scattered
everywhere. They later received a document from the authorities, listing the
things confiscated.58

Between twenty-five and thirty armed police also stormed the headquarters of
the People’s Party on the night of April 12-13. They entered the building
shouting, and holding automatic weapons. They began detaining male party
members. A group of women and other party members blockaded themselves in a
room in fear. The police broke down the door with the butts of their guns.

Vardan Mkrtchian, a member of parliament, detained in the raid, told Human
Rights Watch: “The police were shouting and swearing. They hit the women and
young people. They beat my wife who was here to find out why the police had
arrested me [earlier in the day].”59

They detained more than twelve people, including Vardan Mkrtchian, and his
son. The rough treatment continued at the police station after arrest.
Police confiscated documents and videocassettes. They held the party members
from between several hours to three days, taking some to court for
administrative punishments.60

Police also detained Ruzanna Hachatarian, press secretary of the People’s
Party, from the party headquarters that night. They took her to a police
station where they questioned her as a witness to the criminal case opened
against the Justice Alliance and its supporters.61

Hachatarian told Human Rights Watch: “The investigator had a printed list of
questions… They asked me ‘Why did the Alliance try to overthrow the
government with violence?’… and ‘How did you use military measures to
overthrow the government?’… He questioned me for about two hours.”62

After questioning her, they informed her that she was no longer a witness,
but was now being charged as a defendant in the case. She demanded a lawyer,
who then attended the police station, and she refused to answer any more
questions. After approximately thirty-six hours in custody, she was taken to
the Procurator General’s Office where officials gave her a document stating
that the charges had been withdrawn, and she was released.63

Detentions: Due Process Violations and Torture

It is difficult to estimate the total number of opposition supporters
detained since the beginning of April 2004. By April 17, the Justice
Alliance had documented the detentions of 327 opposition supporters, and the
Republic Party estimated that about 300 of its members had been either
detained, harassed, or searched.64

As of this writing, at least eight opposition supporters are in pre-trial
custody on criminal charges. These include the four people detained in
Giumri on March 28 who are charged with criminal hooliganism and four
detained in April in the case against the Justice Alliance.65 The latter
four are members of the Republic Party: Vargarash Harutunian, on charges of
attempting to overthrow the government, public calls for seizure of power by
force, and publicly insulting representatives of government;66 Zhora Sapean,
a district party leader, on charges of publicly insulting representatives of
government, for allegedly accusing the president and minister of defense of
corruption when speaking at a public rally;67and two others on similar
charges.68

The others were detained and held for from several hours to fifteen days.
Many were held and then released with no documentation or registration of
the arrest ever having occurred. Others were taken to court, and given
penalties of up to fifteen days in custody for petty offences under the
Administrative Code.69

The trials were cursory, flouting all international protections for a fair
trial, and repeating a pattern of abuses with administrative detentions
documented during the 2003 presidential elections. Defendants in
administrative cases were denied access to lawyers, not able to present
evidence, and routinely convicted on the basis of several minutes of police
evidence. Practical barriers to appeal make it virtually impossible to take
the cases to higher courts.70

In the case of the April 5 detention of three people who were attempting to
travel from Vanadzor to Yerevan to attend a rally, a judge refused to allow
them to present evidence in their defense. Police had taken the three – Aram
Revasian, Artur Shahnazarian, and Rezh Makumian – all members of the
National Unity Party, to the local court where they were tried under the
Administrative Code for not following police orders. Revasian requested that
others who were traveling in the car with him be called as witnesses in the
case. The judge refused his request and sentenced all three to five days’
administrative detention on the basis of evidence of one police officer.71

On April 14, the seven people detained at the Republic Party headquarters on
the night of April 12-13 were tried at the Erebuni District Court in Yerevan
for breaching public order under the Administrative Code. The police read
out the charge sheet, the judge asked no questions, and fined the defendants
each 500 drams (approximately U.S. $1). The defendants had been held in
custody for up to thirty-six hours prior to the court hearing, and officials
refused to return their passports until they paid the fines.72

On April 12, police from the Malatia Sebastia police station detained Karen
Shahumian, a member of the People’s Party, while he was in a car with loud
speakers, announcing details of the opposition rally to be held later in the
day. At the local court, he was sentenced to five days of administrative
detention. His relatives, concerned for his health since he suffered from
heart problems, requested the assistance of a lawyer to appeal the case. The
lawyer, however, could get no documentation about the case, and could not
meet with Shahumian. The lawyer was not even able to find out the charges
under which Shahumian had been sentenced. It was therefore impossible for
the lawyer to appeal the case.73

Talking about the obstacles faced by lawyers in administrative cases, Tigran
Ter-Esayan told Human Rights Watch: “We try to help, but there are no
documents. We can’t appeal without documents. The police deny that [a
defendant] is in their custody, say that he doesn’t need a lawyer. They say
that the trial has already happened. We ask for documents and they say
‘tomorrow,’ ‘the day after tomorrow,’ and the time has gone.”74

Torture and ill-treatment in police custody

Human Rights Watch documented several cases of torture and ill-treatment in
police custody during the government crackdown against the opposition in
April 2004. Opposition party officials claim that during this period police
regularly beat their supporters in police custody: “There were lots of cases
of people being beaten at the police stations after detention, especially
those who came from the regions.”75 Armenia is obligated under international
law to prevent acts of torture.76

On the night of April 12-13, Oride Harustanian was detained with a group of
women, including her nineteen-year-old daughter, at the Republic Party
headquarters. Police took them to the Erebuni police station in Yerevan
where the police shouted and swore at them. They were placed in a room.
Harustanian told Human Rights Watch, “Then the head of the Erebuni police
came in. He came up to me and said ‘So you want to take power,’ and slapped
me three times very hard on the face.”77 He then went to each person in turn
and assaulted them, kicking and kneeing them, and punching one woman in the
head. Several of the group had serious bruising to the legs after the
attack. Police did not provide food to the group on the day of April 13.
Members of the group were held for up to thirty-six hours, and were then
released, some receiving administrative fines, others receiving no
explanation as to the reason for having been detained.78

Police also detained a young woman on the night of April 12-13.79 She was
taken to a local police station in Yerevan with a group of opposition party
activists. Police separated her from the group and put her in a room in the
police station. There were four or five uniformed police in the room. She
told Human Rights Watch:

Then someone came in, a high level police officer. All the other police
stood up for him when he came in. I also stood up and he began to beat me,
kicking my body, hitting my face and swearing terribly. I was so scared that
I wet myself. He beat me for about ten or fifteen minutes… I cried the
whole time. I couldn’t speak… Then I heard loud voices in the corridor,
shouting and swearing… It was the head of the [police station]. He came in
and said ‘Ah, it was you who was at the protest.’ I said ‘no, it wasn’t me.’
He began to beat me with his fists and knees to my stomach. I fell and he
kicked me on my back. He said, ‘now all our men will come in and rape you.’
He said worse things… He went on four about twenty minutes. I don’t
remember everything. I remember coming to lying on the table. Then he left.
I was on the floor.80

She was released from custody after eighteen hours in detention. She
received no explanation for her arrest. According to the young woman and a
relative who cared for her after her release, she had bruising all over her
body, and was suffering from severe stomach pains.

Freedom of the Press

In breach of Armenia’s international obligations to protect freedom of
expression,81 the April 2004 crackdown on the opposition brought with it
repression of journalists and media outlets attempting to report on the
events. Journalists were brutally attacked, and their equipment confiscated
and smashed. In some cases this was done by police, and in others,
apparently by civilians, with the government failing to take action against
those responsible despite clear evidence as to the identity of attackers. In
addition, media outlets were restricted from broadcasting during this
period.

On April 5, men in civilian clothes attacked journalists at an opposition
rally in Yerevan. Initially the men attempted to disrupt the rally by
throwing eggs at the National Unity Party leader, Artashes Geghamian, who
was addressing the crowd. Scuffles broke out, and when journalists attempted
to film events, the men began to attack them.

According to The Committee to Protect Journalists, “[T]he assailants smashed
the video cameras of three Armenian television stations- Kentron, Hay TV and
Public Television- and the still cameras of two opposition dailies – Aravot
and Haykakan Jhamanak.”82

The attackers reportedly forced one journalist from the private television
station Shant to hand over his videocassette with footage of the rally.83
Hundreds of police present at the rally observed the attacks, but took no
action. Police officials later defended the police inaction.84 Local and
international press organizations, as well as the OSCE, condemned the
attack, and called for the perpetrators to be punished. Although there was
reportedly evidence available as to the identity of some of the attackers,
at the time of writing the authorities had not made public any action taken
in relation to the attacks.85

On the night of April 12-13, security forces brutally attacked journalists
reporting on the opposition rally and the storming of opposition
headquarters. Media rights groups reported that four journalists were
seriously beaten that night.86 Human Rights Watch documented the attacks on
three of these journalists.87

Levon Grigorian, a cameraman for the Russian television channel ORT,
attended the rally on Marshal Baghramian Avenue on the evening of April 12
in order to report on the rally. According to Grigorian, the rally was
peaceful and quiet. Then at around 2:00 a.m., security force vehicles with
water cannons moved in. He told Human Rights Watch:

I began filming when they started spraying the water on people. People began
throwing things, empty plastic bottles, sticks from flags. The police threw
grenades at people and began to beat them. I filmed. Then people began to
run. I also went with them, filming. I filmed it all. Then four people
surrounded me and tried to take my camera. They couldn’t take it and they
fought with me. They dragged me along the street. Then a special forces
officer in an army like uniform electrocuted me with his equipment, and put
gas in my face. My eyes watered. I couldn’t see. The electric shock
paralyzed me. I fell down. They took my camera and telephone. They
electrocuted me several times. Then about fifteen special forces officers
beat me with batons. They dragged me under a tree, paralyzed, and left me
there.88

According to Grigorian, his clothes were covered in blood and torn. He
suffered a broken nose, swollen arm and hand, and bruising to his whole
body.89

On the evening of April 14, the authorities returned Grigorian’s broken
camera, but did not return the videocassette with the recording of the rally
events.90

The night of April 12-13, Haik Gevorkian, from the opposition daily
newspaper Haikakan Zhamanak, went to photograph the opposition rally. When
the security force attack began, he photographed the water cannon vehicles
and police coming from the parliament grounds and attacking the protesters.
Concerned for the safety of his camera and photographs, he went some twenty
or thirty meters down the road, and found an empty courtyard, where he stood
behind a fence and continued to photograph the events. He told Human Rights
Watch:

Suddenly I saw a group of thirteen or fourteen police, headed by [a very
high ranking police officer]. They were all in uniforms with batons and
helmets. They came straight for me, no one else was there. [The high ranking
officer] knows me well. He’s known me since 1998 through my work as a
journalist. I wasn’t worried. I knew that he knew who I was, that I wasn’t a
protester, but a journalist. He came up to me and took my camera. [I started
to speak], but didn’t have time. All the police began to beat me with
batons…. They shouted and swore. I said, ‘I’m a journalist.’ They said,
‘we know.’ I just tried to protect my head. Then they dragged me, beating
me, to the parliament entrance. Someone grabbed me by the back of the neck
and while the others beat me.91

Police continued to beat Gevorkian, who was lying on the ground at the
entrance to the parliament while he repeatedly shouted out that he was a
journalist. They put him in a police van. He no longer had his bag with his
dictaphone or press card. Gevorkian’s colleague, Avetis Babajanian, from the
same newspaper, was also in the van, and said that police had beaten him as
well. Although Gevorkian had suffered head injuries and was covered in
blood, police did nothing to help him. Only some hours later, after taking
the journalists to the police station, did Gevorkian receive medical
attention. He was released on the morning of April 13. He had bruising all
over his body and a swollen back. Several days after the attack, he was
still having difficulty walking.

Gevorkian demanded that the police return his camera and dictaphone and
requested that the Procurator General’s Office open a criminal case against
the police officers involved in the attack on him. By April 17, the
authorities had not returned his equipment or taken any other action in
relation to the attack.92

Mher Ghalechian, a journalist with the opposition weekly newspaper Chorrord
Ishkhanatiun (Fourth Power), was working in his office on the night of April
12-13, when he received a telephone call saying that police were arresting
opposition activists at the Republic Party headquarters. He took his camera
and dictaphone and went to the headquarters, where he started to photograph
police detaining opposition members. Five police in camouflage uniforms
attacked him and beat him all over his body with batons. He told them that
he was from the press. They arrested him and put him in a prisoner transport
van for six, but which held twenty-four other people. Police took his
camera, dictaphone, and money. They took him to a detention center and put
him in a cell with no mattresses or blankets, with no explanation as to the
reason for his arrest or his legal status. They refused to grant him access
to a lawyer or to make a telephone call. He was released after sixteen
hours, receiving no documentation or explanation for his arrest. Police
refused return his camera, dictaphone, or money.93

On April 5, the Russian television channel NTV had its broadcasting
suspended in Armenia. The official reason given for the suspension was
because of technical problem. NTV had been broadcasting footage of the
opposition protests in Yerevan. By mid-April NTV was still off the air.94

International Response

International bodies responded to the April events in Armenia with
statements of concern and calls for a political dialogue between the
opposition and government.

The Council of Europe issued two statements of concern. Its Secretary
General warned of an anti-democratic decline in Armenia and called on the
government to guarantee “all human rights which are protected under the
European Convention on Human Rights.”95 The United States government made a
statement, calling on “all sides to respect the role of peaceful assembly
and to take all steps to prevent violence.”96

The OSCE made several statements of concern, but blamed both the opposition
and government for the situation. In an interview with Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty on April 13, OSCE Ambassador Vladimir Pryakhin stated,
“[w]e don’t share the opinion that the demonstration was purely peaceful
because all sorts of provocative statements were being made and stones were
being thrown [at police forces]. But that’s not the point. We are against
any kind of violence, and we conveyed our concerns in this regard personally
to [President Kocharian].”97

Recommendations

To the Armenian Government:

Investigate the use of excessive force by the police and other security
forces on the night of April 12-13, 2004. Bring to account all security
officials who used excessive force.

Cease the use of explosives and electric shock equipment for the control of
non-violent public demonstrations.

Provide training to all members of the security forces on international and
domestic human rights standards and hold accountable all members of the
security forces who deviate from these standards.

Investigate all allegations of torture and ill-treatment in police custody
and prosecute those found responsible for such acts.

Comply with Council of Europe’s calls to repeal the use of administrative
detention and cease using arrest as a means of pressuring the opposition.

Investigate the attacks on journalists and prosecute those responsible.

Enact legislation guaranteeing the right to peaceful assembly and
establishing a procedure to ensure that this right is respected. Request the
Council of Europe to review the draft legislation before it is enacted.

Cease the practice of restricting travel of opposition supporters in order
to limit their right to freedom of assembly.

Repeal criminal defamation provisions in the Criminal Code and drop all
current charges against opposition members for criminal defamation. Ensure
the trials against opposition members currently in pre-trial detention
comply with international fair trial procedures.

Comply with the OSCE recommendations made in their final report on the 2003
presidential election, in particular to bring to account those responsible
for election fraud and other violations.

To the International Community:

To the OSCE, Council of Europe, European Union, European and United States
Governments:

Strongly condemn and demand an end to the abuses committed in Armenia
described in this briefing paper, and promptly condemn any new abuses that
occur;

Call for all officials implicated in abuses to be brought to justice;

Continue to press the Armenian government to implement the OSCE
recommendations in the final report on the 2003 presidential elections.

The European Union and the United States should closely monitor any funding
provided to the Armenian government, particularly security-related funding,
to ensure that it does not go towards security agencies implicated in
abuses.

The European Union should make better use of the periodic reviews of the
Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) with Armenia to urge the
Armenian government to bring its laws and practices into compliance with
international standards, with particular attention to the violations
documented in this briefing paper.

To the Council of Europe:

The Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) Monitoring Committee
should send an ad-hoc mission to Armenia to investigate the recent abuses
and present its findings to the Assembly’s plenary session in June,
formulating specific recommendations for steps the authorities need to take
to address the ongoing crisis and setting a specific deadline for meeting
them.

The Council of Europe Committee of Ministers should put the ongoing crisis
in Armenia on the agenda of its upcoming ministerial meeting and call on the
Armenian government take urgent measures to adhere with its obligations
stemming from its membership with the Council of Europe.

The Council of Europe Secretary-General should appoint independent experts
to investigate the serious ongoing abuses taking place and call on the
Armenian government to take urgent measures to address them.

The Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) should
continue to monitor closely torture in Armenia and should consider ad-hoc
visits to Armenia with a particular focus on the places of detention where
those arrested in connection with the recent protests have been held.

To the European Bank on Reconstruction and Development (EBRD):

Take into account the findings contained in this briefing paper when
assessing Armenia’s compliance with Article 1 of the Agreement Establishing
the Bank, and make clear to the Armenian authorities that the nature and
level of engagement will be contingent on measurable progress in human
rights. In so doing, the EBRD should set specific benchmarks for such
progress.

To the World Bank:

The abuses documented in this briefing paper undermine the World Bank’s goal
of eradicating poverty in Armenia. The 2003 Republic of Armenia Poverty
Reduction Strategy highlighted the need to “protect the economic, social,
and legal guarantees of human rights and liberties,” and identified
governance and public participation in the political process as key elements
in eliminating poverty. In its engagement with the Armenian government, the
World Bank should reinforce OSCE and Council of Europe recommendations for
reform that would serve the broader goal of empowering the poor.

—

ARKA News Agency
May 3 2004

Partnership for Open Society initiative speaks in Yerevan on the
occasion of the international Day of Freedom of Word

RA President and Chairman of Parliamentary Commission on Science and
Education announced `Enemies of Press’

Situation with free press in Armenia worsens

Public television of Armenia remains appendage and mouthpiece of
executive power

RA Ambassadors abroad must activate work in economic direction –
Vardan Oskanian

Armenia has no problems with freedom of speech – the Leader of
Ramkavar-Azatakan Party

A rally to support À1+ TV Company held in Yerevan

The Mayor’s Office of Yerevan is to turn down the application of
Justice opposition bloc to hold a rally tomorrow

The Chairman of CBA congratulates ARKA News Agency on the 8th
anniversary since the agency’s functioning

*********************************************************************

PARTNERSHIP FOR OPEN SOCIETY INITIATIVE SPEAKS IN YEREVAN ON THE
OCCASION OF THE INTERNATIONAL DAY OF FREEDOM OF WORD

YEREVAN, May, 4. /ARKA/. Partnership for Open Society initiative
spoke in Yerevan on the occasion of the international Day of Freedom
of Word. `Analyzing the present situation in journalism, we fixed
that the laws on freedom of information and mass media adopted by the
RA NA in 2003 mainly correspond to international standards’. However,
according to the statement of the members of the organization, some
laws, namely that of TV and Radio broadcast are only on the surface
and in fact do not function and are criticized by journalists and
international organizations. According to Partnership for Open
Society initiative, the amendments to the law haven’t solved the main
problem – that of the National Committee on TV and Radio broadcast
(NCTVRB), and the Council of the Public TV Company. `The fact that
the implementation of the law on freedom of word is postponed because
the Government so far hasn’t met its requirements, hasn’t clarified
and approved the order of providing information on the part of state
and local structures self -governance as well as on the part of state
institutes and organizations is upsetting. And, by approving quite
progressive laws in the area of mass media, the Government to make
amendment to other laws bringing them in line with international
standards and newly adopted laws’, according to the statement.
According to the statement, the matter is in the new Criminal Code
adopted in 2003. The code contains articles regarding calumny and
offences (points 135, 136, 318), which threaten the freedom of word
and can put the press under censorship.
`We again apply to the Armenian law-enforcing structures to find and
punish according to the law the people who attacked the journalists
covering the rallies of the opposition in Yerevan on the night of
April 13. We demand that representatives of mass media be able to do
their duties freely. Also, we demand withdrawal of the points 135,
136 and 318 from the criminal Code, as threaten the freedom of word
and can put the press under censorship’, according to the statement.
The members of the organization expressed their readiness to continue
the struggle for improvement of the legislation regarding mass media,
for development of real freedom of word and really independent press
in the country. A.H. –0–

*********************************************************************

RA PRESIDENT AND CHAIRMAN OF PARLIAMENTARY COMMISSION ON SCIENCE AND
EDUCATION ANNOUNCED `ENEMIES OF PRESS’

YEREVAN, May 3. /ARKA/. The National Press-Club of Armenia (NPA)
announced the results of the annual voting of the NPA members,
according to which RA President Robert Kocharian and the Chairman of
the Parliamentary Commission on Science and Education Hranush
Hakobyan became `Enemies of Press’. As stated by Narine Dilbaryan,
Member to NPA, Kocharian is awarded this title for the third time and
this time for approving of the law on mass information, restricting
the rights of the journalists and violating the freedom of speech. As
a result of the voting Hranush Hakobyan also collected the same
number of points for lobbying the law and misinforming the MPs around
positive assessment of the law from the international structures.
According to Dilbaryan, the title `Friend of Press’ again remained
without addressee, although Victor Dallakyan, one of the leaders of
Justice opposition bloc was candidate for this award. She also
informed that Deputy Head of RA Police Ashot Varyan (for personal
support of violence against the journalists) on 13 April in Yerevan),
RA Deputy Justice Minster Ashot Abovyan (author of law on mass
information), Chairman of Yerevan Press-Club Boris Navasardyan (for
active support of adoption of the aforementioned law), Speaker Arthur
Baghdasaryan (for not securing of full discussion of the law), head
of Police Hayk Harutyunyan (officially responsible for the violence
against the journalists on April 13), RA Prosecutor General Aghvan
Hovsepyan (for indifference to organizers and executors of the
violence against the journalists), the Chairman of Council of TV and
radio Alexan Harutyunyan (for using of Public TV of Armenia against
the public interests) also were among the candidates for Enemies of
Press award.
This title is awarded for the third time. T.M. -0–

*********************************************************************

SITUATION WITH FREE PRESS IN ARMENIA WORSENS

YEREVAN, May 3. /ARKA/. The situation with free press in Armenia
worsens, as Narine Lazarian, Chairman of National Press Club of
Armenia said on her briefing. In her words, since the parliamentary
elections of 2003 the journalists’ rights were violated regularly. As
she mentioned in 2003 the RA Parliament adopted the law on mass
information with violations which was opposed by majority of the
Armenian mass media. `As a result, no improvement in professional
level of journalists who were busy with protection of their right,
were recorded’.
She also informed that soon there will be ready a report on the
current situation with the Armenian press.
According to Freedom House international organization promoting human
rights, Armenia is listed among the countries with not free press.
T.M. -0–

*********************************************************************

PUBLIC TELEVISION OF ARMENIA REMAINS APPENDAGE AND MOUTHPIECE OF
EXECUTIVE POWER

YEREVAN, May 3. /ARKA/. The Public TV of Armenia keeps remaining an
appendage and mouthpiece of the executive power, as mentioned in the
statement of Partnership for Open Society NGO on occasion of Press
Freedom Day. As the authors of the statement consider the Public TV
of Armenia follows a policy of support and praising of the current
authorities and slandering the opposition which depraves its
information of impartiality and objectivity and does not secure
pluralism of the opinions. At eth same time, as it is mentioned in
the paper, although the Armenian press mainly delivers their function
related to spreading of various information, however the circulations
of the local newspapers remain small. Besides the newspapers are
mainly sold in Yerevan and regional centers. `The Armenian press
remains polarized and involved in the propaganda struggle between the
authorities and the opposition’, the statement mentions. T.M. -0–

*********************************************************************

RA AMBASSADORS ABROAD MUST ACTIVATE WORK IN ECONOMIC DIRECTION –
VARDAN OSKANIAN

YEREVAN, May, 3. /ARKA/. RA Ambassadors abroad must activate work in
economic direction, RA Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian stated today.
He said that diplomatic missions must contribute to export of
Armenian goods and attraction of foreign investments. According to
him, priority directions in activity of diplomatic service of Armenia
are security problems, development, European integration, Karabakh
settlement and protection of historic rights and values. `The last
one includes international recognition of Armenian Genocide in
Ottoman Empire’, Oskanian said. He said that on May 3 Armenian lobby
organizations in different countries will hold a meeting to discuss
these urgent issues.
Armenia has embassies in 30 countries, regular representations in 9
international organizations. L.D. –0–

*********************************************************************

ARMENIA HAS NO PROBLEMS WITH FREEDOM OF SPEECH – THE LEADER OF
RAMKAVAR-AZATAKAN PARTY

YEREVAN, May, 3. /ARKA/. Armenia has no problems with freedom of
speech, the Leader of Ramkavar-Azatakan Party Harutyun Arakelian
stated today. He said that Armenia has systematic beating of
journalists at the meetings, however press in the country is
developed enough that it does not become an obstacle for its future
activity. According to him, another fact testifying presence of
freedom of speech in Armenia is awarding of title Enemy of Press.
National Press Club conducts awarding of the title Enemy of Press and
Friend of Press. In 2002 and 2003 title Enemy of Press was awarded to
RA President Robert Kocharian. L.D. –0–

*********************************************************************

A RALLY TO SUPPORT А1+ TV COMPANY HELD IN YEREVAN

YEREVAN, May, 4. /ARKA/. A rally to support А1+ TV Company was
held in Yerevan. The rally was organized by the Fund for Freedom of
Word and the initiative group for protecting the TV Company. The
participants of the rally required that conditions be created for the
work of the TV Company and expressed their firm belief in success.
According to Nikol Pashinyan, the Chief Editor of Haikakan Zhamanak
opposition newspaper, all the state authority structures of the
country are to protect the freedom of word, which is de jure
stipulated by the Armenian legislation. `As of today, 90% of mass
media in Armenia are under censorship, journalists are attacked, but
no legal proceedings in instituted about all this. Mass Media
shouldn’t accept the present situation’, said he.
At the same time, the member of the National Press Club Vardan
Vardanyan confirmed that the Fund for Freedom of Word is ready to
render its further support to А1+.
The RA National Committee on TV and Radio Broadcast during its
session on April 2, 2002 acknowledged Sharm Company as the winner in
the contest for the right to broadcast by the 37th decimetric
channel. As a result of it, А1+ opposition TV Company, which
had broadcast for 5 years by that channel, was deprived of the right
to broadcast. This fact displeased the opposition. The TV Company
participated in 8 contests for providing TV frequency for the last 2
years and appealed against the decisions of the RA National Committee
on TV and Radio Broadcast in all Court instances. According to the
initiative group for protecting А1+ TV Company, rude violations
of the law took place both during the contests and when making the
decisions by the Court Instances. All this aimed at making obstacles
for the TV Company to broadcast again.
OSCE and the Council of Europe have expressed their anxiety about
this for several times. A.H -0 –

*********************************************************************

THE MAYOR’S OFFICE OF YEREVAN IS TO TURN DOWN THE APPLICATION OF
JUSTICE OPPOSITION BLOC TO HOLD A RALLY TOMORROW

YEREVAN, May, 4. /ARKA/. The Mayor’s Office of Yerevan is going to
turn down the application of Justice opposition bloc to hold a rally
tomorrow, as the Mayor of the city Yervand Zakharyan stated on a
press- conference. As he said, the application was received in the
morning and is under consideration. Zakharyan noted that the Mayor’s
Office will continue refusing to sanction the rallies, which can
influence on the social and economic processes in the country.
According to him, such rallies will affect negatively the investment
environment of the country, hence, they will negatively affect the
economy of the country in general. At that, according to Zakharyan ,
recently the Mayor’s Office has sanctioned holding some rallies,
mainly devote to May 1, as well as the action to support А1+.
Joint meeting of Justice opposition bloc and National Unity party to
be held tomorrow. A.H. – 0–

*********************************************************************

THE CHAIRMAN OF CBA CONGRATULATES ARKA NEWS AGENCY ON THE 8TH
ANNIVERSARY SINCE THE AGENCY’S FUNCTIONING

YEREVAN, May, 4. /ARKA/. Tigran Sargsyan, the Chairman of CBA, sent
Konstantin Petrosov, the Director of ARKA News Agency, a letter of
congratulation on the 8th anniversary since the agency’s functioning.
In his letter Sargsyan states that ARKA has developed the taste and
skills of professional financial and economic journalism. According
to Sargsyan, the issues and various analytical materials published by
the agency are timely, objective and reliable, what’s the most
important. `Nowadays, when information is one of the guarantor for an
effective professional work, your work requires more responsibility
and gets more claimed’, emphasized Sargsyan. He wished the staff of
ARKA to keep to the traditions it has now and be more success, and
the most important- have a good health and be happy.
ARKA News Agency has been functioning since May 1, 1996. It is
specialized in covering financial, economic and political
information. The Information published by ARKA is received and used
by various organizations, including state and commercial structures,
banks and international financial structures, consulting companies,
Embassies, and mass media.
In 2000, the Central Bank of Armenia recognised ARKA the best
economic agency of the republic. In 2002 and 2003 Business Initiative
Directions International Organization awarded ARKA International Star
Award for Quality in the category of Gold. A.H.–0–