USA/Armenia: VOA starts daily Armenian-language TV programme

USA/Armenia: VOA starts daily Armenian-language TV programme

Voice of America press release
3 May 04

Text of press release by Voice of America on 3 May

Washington, DC, 3 May 2004: Voice of America (VOA) debuted a daily
Armenian-language TV feed today, aimed at providing daily TV stories
to viewers in Armenia and the extensive Armenian diaspora throughout
the Middle East and Europe. For this venture, VOA has partnered with
Armenia TV, which will air the feeds during its weekday newscasts and
present a 30-minute block of VOA television material every Saturday.

“VOA has been an important source of news and information for
Armenians since 1951, and this move to television will help us reach
an even greater audience,” said VOA Director David S. Jackson. “This
is especially important as Armenia faces continued challenges as it
develops toward a more open and democratic civil society.”

VOA’s Armenian service recently ceased its radio broadcasts in order
to focus on providing television news reports and features. The
Armenian Service will be able to build upon its already large radio
audience to reach an even greater number of viewers throughout
Armenia.

A recent survey showed that 97 per cent of Armenians use television
each week as a source of news about current events. Armenia TV reaches
52 per cent of viewers between the ages of 25 and 50 in Armenia alone
and is one of the first private TV companies in Armenia to have such
an extensive reach via satellite. Armenia TV is also available via
satellite subscription in Western Europe and the Middle East,
including the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Switzerland, Holland,
Bulgaria, Romania, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, Greece, Lebanon, Syria and
Israel.

Amerikai Dzain Herustahandes (VOA TV Magazine) is included in each
weekday news programme, broadcast at 3 p.m. and 6.30 p.m. local time
(1000 and 1330 UTC) to audiences in Armenia. A compilation of each
week’s reports will air Saturdays at 11 p.m. local time (1800
UTC). Programmes as well as previews of upcoming shows will soon also
be available on the Internet at

The Voice of America, which first went on the air in 1942, is a
multimedia international broadcasting service funded by the US
government. VOA broadcasts 1,000 hours of news, information,
educational and cultural programming every week to an estimated
worldwide audience of 87m people. Programmes are produced in Armenian
and 43 other languages.

For more information, call the Office of Public Affairs at (202)
401-7000, or E-mail [email protected].

www.VOANews.com/Armenian.

And another dodgy flood story . .

And another dodgy flood story . . .

The Guardian – United Kingdom
May 04, 2004

It was interesting to discover yesterday that there is to be yet
another expedition to Mount Ararat in north-east Turkey to see whether
Noah’s Ark is still up there. A Christian millionaire, Daniel P
McGivern, who lives in Hawaii, is putting up half a million pounds to
send “scientists” close to the 16,000ft summit, to a spot where aerial
photographs suggest something boat-shaped is to be found.

I foresee two problems. The first is that it has been done before. An
Armenian did it in 1903, found something he thought very ark-like, but
couldn’t find his way back. A Russian did it in 1916, but it turned
out to be a hoax. An American did it in 1960, took samples and
artefacts, and then went on to discover (I can’t remember in what
order) the Ark of the Covenant, the Red Sea crossing, the site of the
burning bush on Mount Sinai and both Sodom and Gomorrah.

The second is the disappointing probability that – had there been an
ark – it wouldn’t be 16,000ft above sea-level unless everything except
the Himalayas had been flooded (not a concept that “scientists” would
easily agree with), and that 5,600-year-old wood tends not to keep,
especially atop a volcano that last erupted in 1840.

But, as McGivern told the Honolulu Star: “All three of the
monotheistic religions believe that we are all descended from Noah and
his three sons. In these times it is good to have something that Jews,
Christians and Muslims all agree about.” Even if it is complete and
utter nonsense.

World Music

World Music: Omaggio: Berio Djivan Gasparyan / Tenores di Bitti / Kamkars
Queen Elizabeth Hall London

The Independent – United Kingdom;
May 04, 2004

Michael Church

THE TITLE indicated homage to the recently deceased Luciano Berio, but
the event reflected the homage he had paid to the folk music of North
America, France, Iran, Azerbaijan and the islands of the
Mediterranean.

We began with the folk songs he recomposed for his wife, Cathy
Berberian. Here they were sung by the mezzo Katalin Karolyi, who
handled two American ballads with sweet allure, swung jauntily south
to Armenia, hardened her voice to match the rough edges of a Sicilian
lament, and rang timbral changes for pungent songs from Sardinia and
the Auvergne. Did it matter that the words of the Aze rbaijani love
song which Berberian had originally collected were still
untranslatable? Of course not. Karolyi may not have Berberian’s
raunchiness, but this was a tour de force all the same, beautifully
abetted by musicians from the London Sinfonietta.

One thing Karolyi superbly demonstrated – for those who had forgotten
– was that a proper singer needs no amplification in the acoustically
excellent QEH. Nor do reed instruments, and when Djivan Gasparyan and
his two fellow-dudukists joined in via the stage mics we lost the
sonic intimacy Karolyi had built up. But their magic was still
irresistible: after a slow and meditative improvisation over his
friends’ drone, this Armenian master led them through dances and
laments. With its single-octave range, the apricot-wood duduk might
not be thought one of the world’s most expressive instruments, but
they gave the lie to this. Their slightly flattened harmonies set up
the yearning atmosphere we always associate with Armenia: the land
whose defining tragedy sent half its population into exile.

If this was music to dream to, what followed had us on the edge of our
seats: Berio’s “Naturale”, where viola and vestigial percussion
suffered plangent interruptions from the taped voice of a Sicilian
folk singer. Then we were in Sardinia, courtesy of four middle-aged
gents in matching brown outfits, who gave vent to the most
penetratingly nasal close-harmony I’ve ever heard. Once again,
unnecessary miking removed some of the poignancy, but these Tenores di
Bitti showed what drama could be extracted from minimal gear-changes
in key and intonation. It was a shame we weren’t told what their songs
were about.

Then it was playtime with that most congenial of Kurdish groups, the
Kamkars. Hassan Kamkar and his six children have made it their
mission to preserve the village music of Kurdish Iran, and their
hoof-drumming rhythms got the whole hall clapping along. And that
meant more than just the world-music fraternity, because the audience
was drawn from every kind of musical persuasion. This concert really
was what Radio 3 voguishly terms “boundary-crossing”.

BAKU: Azeri defence chief not to attend Armenia-hosted CIS talks

Azeri defence chief not to attend Armenia-hosted CIS talks

Ekho, Baku
4 May 04

Azerbaijani Defence Minister Safar Abiyev will not attend the 21 May
2004 gathering of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) defence
ministers in Yerevan, Azerbaijan’s daily Ekho quoted the press
secretary of the Azerbaijani Defence Ministry, Ramiz Malikov, as
saying on 4 May.

“Azerbaijan does not knock on the door of its enemy,” Malikov said.
“It is Armenians who are shamelessly keen on visiting Baku”. Malikov
said that this will be a regular meeting and Azerbaijan will lose
“absolutely nothing” from not attending it.

Military expert Uzeyir Cafarov told Ekho that had the gathering been
held in any other country of the CIS, then Abiyev would have
definitely taken part in it.

BAKU: Turkish envoy smoothes Turkish-Azeri relations post-CoE

Turkish envoy smoothes Turkish-Azeri relations post-Council of Europe

ANS TV, Baku
3 May 04

[Presenter] Good evening. Today is the Day of Turks [as heard]. Our
guest is Turkish ambassador to Azerbaijan Ahmet Unal Cevikoz and we
will speak about the region of the Turkic-speaking countries and their
problems. Mr Ambassador, you are welcome. Happy Holiday!

[Cevikoz, in Turkish] Good evening. Happy Holiday!

[Presenter] How do you mark this day?

[Cevikoz ] Naturally, I am very happy to mark this day once in
Azerbaijan, in a state of Turkic nation. I congratulate all the Turkic
world. The Day of Turks is being marked in Azerbaijan and Turkey
today. As a guest on your programme, I wish Happy Day of Turks to all
onlookers both in Azerbaijan and in the whole Turkic world.

[Passage omitted: details of mutual relations between Turkey and
Turkic-speaking countries, the policy to reach the unity between these
countries, the outcome of the voting over the unification of Cyprus]

[Presenter] Mr Ambassador, the Turkish mass media focused for a few
days on the absence of the Azerbaijani parliamentary delegation,
except one person, in the Council of Europe discussions in Strasbourg
over Cyprus. Did you meet some [Azerbaijani] officials and did you
discuss the incident?

[Cevikoz] No. I didn’t. Of course, this was the session of
MPs. Naturally, I do not know who attended the session or what
consequences produced the absence of Azerbaijani MPs. However, the
Azerbaijani ambassador to the Council of Europe, Aqsin Mehdiyev, made
a statement in this regard and I learnt about the incident after
this. If Azerbaijani MPs are concerned over this issue, then I think
that the [Turkish] media will behave in a way that will not give cause
for concern in the future.

[Presenter] The Turkish newspapers wrote that the issue gave serious
offence to Turkey. Is it really the case?

[Cevikoz] In fact, reporters sometimes write such things. In any case
I hope that Turkey and Azerbaijan might not resent each other. If
there is something which caused offence, then I think necessary
measures will be taken so that such behaviour causing offence can be
stopped.

[Presenter] Mr Ambassador, does Turkey understand Azerbaijan’s
sensitivity to the Nagornyy Karabakh problem?

[Cevikoz] I think, wrong parallels are drawn here. Because the Cyprus
and the Nagornyy Karabakh problems are incomparably different.

[Presenter] No, I do not speak about parallels. I mean that Azerbaijan
has a very serious problem. I mean Azerbaijan’s concern that tomorrow
the international public might increase pressure on Azerbaijan
[presumably if it recognizes the Northern Cyprus]. Azerbaijan has a
serious and unresolved problem. I said this not in terms of parallels.

[Cevikoz] Azerbaijan’s problem needs a solution [word indistinct]. Of
course, many mechanisms exist for the Karabakh resolution. They are
being carried out. The Minsk Group co-chairmen have certain activities
in this sphere. There is a direct process of dialogue between
Azerbaijan and Armenia. As Turkey, we are doing our best for the
resolution of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict. As you know, Turkey has
been a member of the OSCE Minsk Group from the day of its creation and
is actively joining the Minsk Group activities. After or before their
visit to the region, the co-chairmen certainly are informing Turkey of
their meetings.

[Passage omitted: plans about the meeting of the Azerbaijani, Turkish
and Armenian foreign ministers in Turkey, views over the Georgian
events]

Newsletter from Mediadialogue.org, date: 27-04-2004 to 04-05-2004

[01-05-2004 ‘Azerbaijan-Turkey’]
————————————————- ———————
RECOGNITION OF NORTHERN CYPRUS MAY TAKE YEARS
Source : “Echo” newspaper (Azerbaijan)
Author: R. Orujev, N. Aliev

Turkey does not press Azerbaijan to solve the question urgently

The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkey, the Vice Prime Minister
Abdullah Gul in the interview to Anadolu news agency made a statement
on the recognition of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus
(TRNC). According to him, there are positive trends in this regard.

Answering the question of whether there is any development of TRNC
recognition by Azerbaijan, Gul announced: `So far there has been no
development on this issue. But strategically, it is to be solved
gradually. We will be active ourselves, first, gaining supporting
promises, and the friendly countries have already done this. There are
positive steps on the problem, mostly coming from Europe”.

Gul was reminded about the statement of the EU expansion commissar
Gunter Ferheugen that until the UN recognized TRNC, European Union
will not do that. `This is normal. Certainly the work must be first
conducted at the UN Security Council. The rest will be done later’.

It is interesting to see how lengthy will the process of Northern
Cyprus recognition be and when the time will come for Azerbaijan to
make its point. The recognition of Turkish Cyprus by our state will
hardly occur as a separate act, political scientist Rasim Musabekov
thinks. “Suppose, Azerbaijan has recognized TRNC and waits for
someone else to do it. As far as I can judge from the last
press-conference of Ilham Aliev in Strasbourg, he made a more correct
statement, saying that when the recognition issue gains more
importance, Azerbaijan will be one of the first’.

Political scientist notes that it is as yet unknown whether the Cyprus
problem will be solved in this very direction, by establishing to
states, or the negotiations process will resume in a certain manner,
to keep the island a unified entity. “However, if the process does
evolve in the direction of dividing the island, and the Northern
Cyprus is firm in its determination to be independent, there will most
probably be an act produced, with the involvement of the superpowers’.

Musabekov quoted an example – `the fact that Taiwan as an independent
state is recognized by 20 or 30 countries of the world does not make
its status as an international subject confirmed. It has no place in
the UN, Taiwan has to limit its contacts with other countries to
economic ones, mostly with US and the same mainland China’.

“I want to say that as long as the super powers, namely, the USA, the
United Kingdom, France, Russia, China do not recognize Northern
Cyprus, its recognition by three, five or even ten Turkic, Islam
states will not change anything in the international status of TRNC’,
the scientist is positive. `Moreover, this process may result in a
situation, where the expected relief of economic embargo on Northern
Cyprus is not realized by the Greece (if it is supported by the
European partners). The sanctions in this case will get even tougher’.

For this reason Musabekov does not think there will be haste in the
issue of TRNC sovereignty, and `Azerbaijan will lead the haste’.

The Milli Meclis deputy Gultekin Gajieva also thinks Azerbaijan should
not haste. “The UN should be the first to react, as the plan of
unification of Northern and Southern Cyprus was presented by the
Secretary General Kofi Annan and is actively supported by the UN’.

Gultekin Gajieva believes that the President Aliev also voiced the
opinion that Azerbaijan should not hurry. “Conceptually we support the
idea of TRNC recognition, but the reaction of the UN Security Council
and the European Union. Azerbaijan has a problem of Mountainous
Karabagh and supporting the friendly TRNC we must naturally keep that
in mind, so that any step on behalf of Azerbaijan does not cause a
negative response”.

In the opinion of the deputy, the process of the recognition of the
TRNC by Azerbaijan will last `long enough at least because the EU
conditions its recognition by the position of the UN Security
Council. And the composition of the Security Council is heterogeneous,
it includes countries of quite differing orientations, such as the
USA, Russia, France, China. The process will not be as easy, as it is
expected now, by the results if the Cyprus referendum. Turkey will
have to make much effort to get Northern Cyprus in these
organizations, since it will be an original step that has no
precedents in the international law. And we must keep it in mind that
Greece will be opposing this step as an EU member’.

[30-04-2004 ‘Karabagh Conflict’]
———————————————————————-
PRESIDENTS SATISFIED WITH WARSAW MEETING
Source : “PanARMENIAN.Net” portal (Armenia)
Author: “PanARMENIAN Network” analytical department

New impulse to Armenian-Azerbaijani dialogue.

Meeting of the Armenian and Azerbaijani Presidents taken place in
Warsaw is the main subject of discussions in both countries. The
statements pronounced in Warsaw allow hoping that a political solution
will be found for the problem; however, it is too early to speak about
a break in negotiations.

The Armenian party was not very willing to disclose the information
about the Warsaw meeting. However, it can be judged from the
statements of the Azerbaijani side that there is a certain
progress. Ilham Aliyev, who used to say that negotiations were in a
deadlock, now assures there were possibilities for finding ways to
settle the conflict.

Everything was more or less clear until the Armenian and Azerbaijani
Foreign Ministers started to do contradicting statements. Eldar
Mamedyarov, FM of Azerbaijan said the Presidents discussed ”concrete
ideas presented by the Minsk group co-chairs in Prague”. Thus, he
confirmed the information of the Russian mediator Yuri Merzlyakov that
the mediators had presented new proposals. Only two weeks ago
Mamedyarov was denying the existence of new initiatives. Vartan
Oskanyan continues to insist that ”no concrete ideas were discussed
during the Warsaw meeting”.

We shall note that after the Paris meeting the Russian co-chair of the
Minsk group made an almost sensational statements saying that the
mediators had presented new proposals that seemed optimistic even to
the FMs of Armenia and Azerbaijan. Oskanyan and Mamedyarov denied
this information while the two other co-chairmen were keeping
silence. So, if up to now there was an evident contradiction in the
statements of the mediators and Ministers, now the conflict parties
contradict themselves. It is difficult to explain it. In Baku they
think that the Armenian Minister does not want to publicize the fact
that there are new proposals because he doesn’t know yet how it will
affect the moods of the opposition.

We think that everything will be clarified at the meeting of the
Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan to be held on May 12-13 in
Strasburg with participation of the mediators. Informing about it,
Vartan Oskanyan noted that the Ministers would arrive at the meeting
having been instructed by their Presidents.

[29-04-2004 ‘Region’]
———————————————————————-
USA CONQUERING ARMENIA
Source : “Zaman” newspaper (Turkey)
Author: Fikret Ertan

The United States are determined to strengthen their positions in the
Caucasus which results in a number of decisive steps. We do notice
some of them, when signing new agreements, and the other go unnoticed.

Among such quiet steps is the agreement on military cooperation signed
by our neighbor Armenia at the end of last week. The brief
announcement of it being signed was made immediately upon the arrival
of the Deputy Commander of ES forces in Europe Charles Wald to the
Armenian capital Yerevan on April 25. On Monday April 26 this
agreement – the first military agreement of the commandment of US
forces in Europe and Armenia was publicized by the head of the RA
General Headquarters of armed forces Colonel Genera Mikael
Harutiunian.

This agreement, prepared during the visit of General Charles Wald to
Armenia, has a logistical nature. According to the document, the US
military forces can enter Armenia, use the Armenian military
facilities, and the US air forces can use the air bases of Armenia.
The United States promise the same conditions to Armenia, but these
are naturally a purely technical detail: why would Armenian forces
enter the US territory?

The agreement has other provisions, too: the US pays for the use of
military facilities in Armenia, covers the expenses on sending and
accommodating an Armenian transportation company in Iraq. Thus,
Armenia plans to send a transportation company to Iraq to assist the
USA. By this Armenia attempts to strengthen its relations with the
USA, balancing the positions of its neighbors, Azerbaijan and Georgia,
that have already sent troops to Iraq (Azerbaijan – 150 soldiers,
Georgia – 180 soldiers).

This logistics agreement between the US and Armenia is one of the most
recent examples of American conquest of Caucasus. The United States,
in their effort to weaken the positions of Russia and Iran in the
Caucasus, signed a strategically important agreement last spring,
according to which the US is free to use the Georgian military
facilities, the American troops can enter and leave Georgia with no
impediments, use the Georgian land and air territory…

The military relations of the USA and Georgia are defined not only by
this agreement; under the recently completed program of military
assistance the USA trained the Georgian special troops. The contacts
with our friend Azerbaijan is nonetheless important, thus, the US
provided different military vessels to the Caspian navy.

Certainly, the recent attack on Armenia, having strong alliance with
Russia, was caused by the wish to gain its support and to weaken the
relations of Armenia with Russia and Iran. Moreover, the United
States now will have a chance to circle Iran, ensuring their military
presence in Armenia.

I hope that those who are to be interested in similar plans have taken
the developments into account.


Yerevan Press Club of Armenia, ‘Yeni Nesil’ Journalists’ Union of
Azerbaijan and Association of Diplomacy Correspondents of Turkey
present ‘Armenia-Azerbaijan-Turkey: Journalist Initiative-2002’
Project. As a part of the project web site has
been designed, featuring the most interesting publications from the
press of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey on issues of mutual
concern. The latest updates on the site are weekly delivered to the
subscribers.

www.mediadialogue.org

HRW: Armenia: Investigate Abuses in Political Crackdown

Human Rights Watch: Human Rights News

Armenia: Investigate Abuses in Political Crackdown

Hundreds of Opposition Members Detained; Protests Put Down by Police
Violence

(New York, May 4, 2004) – Armenian authorities must investigate abuses
committed in the government’s recent crackdown against the political
opposition, Human Rights Watch today said in a briefing paper that provided
new details on the mass arrest and police violence against opposition
supporters.

On Wednesday, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)
held an urgent debate on Armenia, calling on the government to investigate
abuses and to create “fair conditions for the media,” and warned the
government that if no progress on this by September, the PACE may
“reconsider the credentials of the Armenian delegation.” PACE also called on
the opposition to work within the country’s constitutional framework.

In early April, Armenia’s political opposition united in mass peaceful
protests to force a “referendum of confidence” on President Robert Kocharian
and to call for his resignation. The government responded with mass arrests,
violent dispersals of demonstrations, and raids on opposition party
headquarters. Hundreds were detained, many for up to 15 days, and some were
tortured or ill-treated in custody.

“The Armenian government is repeating the same sorts of abuses that called
into question the legitimacy of last year’s election and sparked the
protests in the first place,” said Rachel Denber, acting executive director
of Human Rights Watch’s Europe and Central Asia division. “The cycle of
repression must end.”

Excessive police force, particularly at a nonviolent opposition rally on the
night of April 12, caused dozens of injuries among demonstrators. The Human
Right Watch briefing paper, based on an investigation in Armenia in
mid-April, documents this violence and other abuses. Human Rights Watch
found that some of the worst injuries at that rally were caused by stun
grenades, which inflicted deep wounds in many protesters. Police also beat
journalists and confiscated their cameras.

The opposition protests derived from the government’s failure to redress the
deeply flawed 2003 presidential election won by Kocharian, the incumbent. At
that time, the authorities detained about 250 opposition activists and
supporters in an attempt to intimidate and disable the opposition in advance
of the vote. The Armenian Constitutional Court subsequently recommended that
the government hold a referendum of confidence. The government rejected the
recommendation, while the opposition insisted that the referendum be held.

In its report on the 2003 presidential election, the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) found the vote to be “marred by
serious irregularities,” owing to “a lack of sufficient political
determination by the authorities to ensure a fair and honest process.”

“Armenia has to address the underlying causes of the opposition’s
demonstrations,” said Denber. “A first step would be to implement the
recommendations made by the OSCE following the 2003 elections.”

Human Rights Watch also called on the Armenian government to investigate the
excessive use of police force on the night of April 12, and to cease the use
of stun grenades and electric-shock equipment for the control of nonviolent
public demonstrations.

Armenia’s international partners – including the European Union, the United
States government, the OSCE and the Council of Europe – should closely
monitor the situation and condemn any new abuses that occur, Human Rights
Watch said. In particular, the United States and the European Union should
closely monitor any security-related funding, particularly for crowd-control
equipment, to ensure that it does not fuel human rights abuses.

Human Rights Watch urged the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers to
put the ongoing crisis in Armenia on the agenda of its upcoming ministerial
meeting and to call on the Armenian government to take urgent measures to
comply with its obligations as a member of the Council of Europe.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/05/04/armeni8525.htm

Cycle Of Repression: Human Rights Violations in Armenia

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.

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/eca/armenia/0504/

Georgia: Tensions Continue To Rise Between Central Gov. And Adjaria

Feature Article
Tuesday, 04 May 2004

Georgia: Tensions Continue To Rise Between Central Government And Adjaria

By Jeremy Bransten

Violent clashes broke out in Adjaria today as the head of the renegade
Georgian region, Aslan Abashidze, warned that the situation could
explode into a full-blown conflict. Abashidze defended his decision to
blow up bridges linking his region to the rest of Georgia as a
defensive measure against an anticipated offensive from
Tbilisi. Meanwhile, in the capital, Georgian President Mikheil
Saakashvili called on Russia to restrain some of its military
personnel, who he claimed were helping the Adjar authorities in their
rebellion.

Prague, 4 May 2004 (RFE/RL) — Violent clashes erupted in the streets
of Adjaria’s capital of Batumi today, as security forces loyal to
Adjar leader Aslan Abashidze beat back hundreds of protestors with
truncheons and water cannons.

Reports from Batumi say crowds opposed to Abashidze’s policies took to
the streets in separate protests that were violently dispersed by the
security forces.

The demonstrations took place shortly after Abashidze declared a state
of emergency and a curfew in the region and closed all secondary
schools and universities for two weeks. One protestor, who gave his
first name as Achiko, described today’s events.

“They [security forces] were beating people on the head. I saw people
with bleeding heads and some were nearly unconscious. I saw some women
with blood on their faces. After they dispersed our demonstration,
these madmen [security forces] went to the offices of the ‘Our
Adjaria’ [opposition] movement and demolished everything. Not a single
window was left unbroken. The situation in Batumi remains very tense,”
he said.

Another protestor, teacher Khatuna Tavdigiridze, who took part in a
related demonstration, gave her version of events: “We had just
organized a street march and the police tried to block our way. But
then we started a rally in a school next to the university and the
police tried twice to disperse that meeting. They were able to
disperse us into several groups and my group joined a protest
organized by university teachers. One hour later, we saw people from
the special forces and a fire truck, and they used water cannons
[against the protesters].”

Today’s protesters are another sign of the escalation of tensions
around Adjaria and its rebellious leader. Abashidze today appeared on
local television to defend his decision on 2 May to blow up bridges,
including a rail line, connecting Adjaria to the rest of
Georgia. Abashidze said he undertook the move as a defensive measure
to avoid a Georgian military offensive.

Saakashvili, in the opinion of most analysts, cannot afford to back
down in this test of wills without endangering his own hold on
power.In Tbilisi, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili condemned the
move and he accused retired Russian Major General Yurii Netkachov of
being behind the operation. While being careful not to directly blame
Moscow for the bridge explosions, Saakashvili called on the Russian
authorities to do everything in their power to stop Netkachov from
acting to destabilize the situation even further.

Abashidze has long counted prominent Russian officials among his
friends. But according to Robert Parsons, director of RFE/RL’s
Georgian Service, Moscow’s leverage may be limited in this particular
crisis, especially if Abashidze — feeling threatened by Saakshvili’s
drive to reimpose central authority — feels war is the best way for
him to preserve his personal power. And although relations between
Tbilisi and Moscow are improving, Saakashvili will likely be reluctant
to accept Russia’s mediation efforts, if offered.

“Russia certainly does have leverage with Adjaria, in particular with
Aslan Abashidze. Traditionally, he’s had close ties with certain
sections inside the Russian military and with a number of businessmen
and also the mayor of Moscow, Yurii Luzhkov. These are people who
certainly have influence and certainly they’re interested in a
peaceful resolution of the situation in Adjaria. It’s a different
matter, though, whether the Russians now will be prepared or willing
or able even to persuade Aslan Abashidze to back down. Certainly it’s
unlikely that they’re prepared to use the Russian military forces that
are in Batumi at the moment — about 2,000 men in the garrison there,”
Parsons said.

Parsons noted that Abashidze’s decision to cut road and rail links
with the rest of Georgia significantly aggravates the situation. If
the links are not restored soon, the economic impact for the region as
a whole could be grave.

“The cutting of the road links and the cutting of the rail links are
critically important for everybody in the region, not just for the
Georgians but also the Armenians as well. Armenia is dependent on the
port of Batumi for imports and exports. Without it, the situation in
Armenia, which is critical enough as it is, could become
catastrophic. In Georgia, too, the incipient economic recovery of the
last few months could well be jeopardized if this standoff between
Adjaria and the central authorities is allowed to continue,” Parsons
said.

Saakashvili now finds himself in a very difficult position. Since
coming to power, he has staked his reputation on reimposing law and
order throughout the country and issued a series of ultimatums to
Abashidze, who continues to flout his authority.

Saakashvili, in the opinion of most analysts, cannot afford to back
down in this test of wills without endangering his own hold on
power. Although today’s demonstrations in Batumi are clear evidence of
opposition in the region to Abashidze’s authoritarian rule, Parsons
does not believe Adjaria’s leader will be toppled from within.

“I think at the moment the opposition in Adjaria is not strong enough
to depose Aslan Abashidze from within. He has ruled the province by
fear for the last few years and that still is a very potent force for
him in Adjaria. Some people have been protesting, we’ve seen it on the
streets today and they’ve paid a heavy price. A lot of them have been
beaten, we’ve seen pictures of bloodshed on the streets of Batumi
today. It’s unlikely I think that the people of Adjaria will rise
against Aslan Abashidze to try and overthrow him,” Parsons said.

Ironically, unlike the other separatist conflicts that have rocked
Georgia in recent years, Adjaria’s rebellion is not fueled by ethnic
or religious motives, according to Parsons. “There is no ethnic
component to the situation in Adjaria,” he said. “Approximately 90
percent of the population is composed of ethnic Georgians. The
remainder are a mix of Armenians, Russians, Greeks, and others. There
is a minor religious factor in that a relatively large minority of the
population are Muslims. Traditionally, this has been a Muslim part of
Georgia. However, these days, the greater part of the population is
either atheist or Christian.”

The future of Georgia now appears to be in the hands of two
strong-willed and angry leaders — Mikheil Saakashvili and Aslan
Abashidze, with few venturing to predict how the crisis will end.

(RFE/RL’s Georgian Service contributed to this report.)
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty © 2004 RFE/RL, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Glendale: Mall owner bankrolling referendum

Glendale News Press
LATimes.com
May 4 2004

Mall owner bankrolling referendum
General Growth providing ‘major funding’ for effort to overturn
council’s Americana approval.

By Josh Kleinbaum, News-Press

DOWNTOWN GLENDALE – General Growth Properties, which owns the
Glendale Galleria, is providing most of the funding for a referendum
effort to overturn the City Council’s approval of a $264.2-million
retail and residential development in downtown Glendale.

General Growth formed Glendale Citizens for a Well-Planned Town
Center on Monday. The committee is trying to gather 8,117 signatures
from local registered voters to bring the Town Center issue to a
citywide vote.

“We have been approached by numerous Glendale residents and
businesses, urging us to join their signature-gathering effort to
place the Town Center project before Glendale voters,” General Growth
spokesman Arthur Sohikian said.

Sohikian described the committee as “a coalition of Glendale
residents and downtown businesses with major funding by General
Growth Properties.”

The group has until May 27 to get the necessary signatures, which are
being collected by paid workers all over town.

General Growth has opposed the Town Center, now known as the
Americana at Brand, since buying the Galleria in October 2002,
claiming that it will lose up to $4 million per year in revenue to
the new project. The company also is considering challenging the
project’s environmental impact report, which analyzes the project’s
effect on the city.

“I am very disappointed at them,” Mayor Bob Yousefian said. “This is
going to bring a lot of ill will toward the Galleria, which is not a
good thing for the city. I think it’s pretty obvious, they’ve stepped
in it this time.”

The referendum targets three ordinances approved by the City Council
on April 27 – one allowing housing in the area, one implementing a
specific plan to create the appropriate zoning, and one stating that
the zoning cannot be changed during the construction period.

“Let the Glendalians decide whether they want the project or not,”
said Vrej Agajanian, a member of the committee and host of an
Armenian-language television show. “If they want it, it is fine.”

Agajanian said that developer Rick Caruso prevented Glendale citizens
from expressing their opinions to the City Council by bringing
members of unions to the council meetings and having his people fill
out speaker cards for Americana supporters.

At public meetings for the Americana in the past month, support for
the project has been overwhelming.

“Now we’re in a situation where we’re going to be running a
campaign,” Caruso said. “They’re running a campaign to kill the
project, we’re running a campaign to save the project. Since there
was so much support in the community and on the council, they’ve got
a tough campaign.”