Yesterday in fact the issue of amnesty, which had continued for a long time, was closed and the parliament adopted the bill on amnesty proposed by the president’s office (98 votes for, 1 vote against and 3 abstained votes).
It’s been more than one year that the society is speaking of the amnesty and hoping during any holidays that the president would announce about the long-expected amnesty and would set the political prisoners free, thus stopping the shameful court proceedings of the relative cases. The representatives of all international and political organizations called on the Armenian government for many times to release the political prisoners in order to weaken the tension, make a dialogue with political powers and people.
At least the authorities made this decision but partially, as a result of which they did not weaken the tension but the vice versa. As a result of this amnesty about 2000 prisoners will be set free, but 18 political prisoners out of the 51 ones will continue to be kept in cells. The amnesty will be applied on a part of them partially but on most of them, including Sasun Mikayelyan, the amnesty will not be applied at all. The amnesty will not apply on Zhora and Mkrtich Sapeyan brothers, Mushegh Saghatelyan, Harutyun Urutyan and other 13 people arrested as a result of the March 1 unrest. Before the parliamentary discussion on adoption of the bill on amnesty the Heritage faction suggested to apply the amnesty on all political prisoners. However, the president’s representative in the parliament, Justice minister Gevorg Danielyan took a short break for half an hour and when he returned he said that they did not agree to accept that suggestion. The MPs also asked what were the criteria of selecting the prisoners to be set free. Gevorg Danielyan said that the amnesty would not concern mainly those prisoners who had committed heavy crimes. If yes, we wander why the amnesty should concern real prisoners but not Sapeyan brothers who are political prisoners charged under the article on hooliganism. Or, why doesn’t it concern Hayk Gevorgyan too? What are the criteria based on which they have decided not to apply the amnesty on 18 political prisoners? The impression is that they have taken the list of political prisoners and selected who to set free.
During the discussion at the parliament the coalition MPs were doing their best to make an impression that the president had initiated the amnesty due to humanistic initiative and it was not connected with the events of March 1. Thus, according to them as a result of the president’s humanistic decision some political prisoners will be set free too. “This is amnesty for those who stray from their ways,” said the RPA faction leader Galust Sahakyan. “This is a great occasion and we should approve the bill,” said PA member Aram Safaryan. Besides the Heritage party the only political power to claim that the reason of the amnesty was connected with the events of March 1 and there should be no difference between those who were to be released and the other political prisoners. “The government has made the right decision but it is about a double standard and is not fair. I don’t know why but the amnesty is accepted as a sign of weakness. No. Only strong people can forgive,” said ARF faction representative Armen Rustamyan. Heritage party representative Zaruhi Postanjyan voted against the bill and said that it was a political payback.
They also discussed the issue of MP Khachatur Sukiasyan and Nycol Pashinyan, who were searched. Gevorg Danielyan says that the amnesty will concern them too if they come and show up in the police till July 31. However, Zaruhi Postanjyan believes this is a trap for those people because if they come there is no guarantee that they will not be sentenced to five years of imprisonment. It is not excluded that the law-enforcement bodies may make a decision to sentence them to imprisonment for more than six years, as a result of which they will not have the right to enjoy the amnesty. By the way, it is not excluded that the amnesty may not concern Hakob Hakobyan or Myasnik Malkhasyan either and their term of punishment may increase five years. The prosecutor has suggested the court to sentence them into six years of imprisonment. Gevorg Danielyan agreed to accept only one recommendation developed by Zaruhi Postanjyan, according to which they would include the 200th article in the list of amnesty provisions as well. As a result of this amendment, the amnesty would concern two more political prisoners: Marat Musheghyan and Vanush Davtyan. It turned out that the government did not want to grant amnesty to Sargis Hatspanyan, who was sentenced to 3,5 years of imprisonment. When they said that Hatspanyan had taken part in the war of Karabakh the justice minister got surprised and said, “There are no facts to prove that in his case, if they submit such facts, he will enjoy the amnesty too.”
During the parliamentary discussions the friends and supporters of the political prisoners were protesting near the parliament building and demanding to apply the amnesty on all political prisoners.
There were many speeches on amnesty in the parliament. The speaker spoke too. The speaker said the following, “I believe that all of us are guilty in the events of March 1, everyone has a share of guilt, but I don’t know who is more guilty, the ones who are in freedom or the ones who are in prisons? I think that the events of March 1 will make us think. We should stop somewhere and start everything from a new page; the society should jointly start this new page.” By the way, the Heritage recommended to change the provision on reducing the term of punishment of the political prisoners arrested as a result of March 1 for 1/3 and reduce this term by 1/2. G. Danielyan accepted this recommendation. MPs proposed a lot of recommendations but definitely the justice minister had been allowed to accept only H.Abrahamyan’s and Z.Postanjyan’s recommendations.
“Piloyan, the prosecutor, recommended to sentence Sasun Mikayelyan for nine years. There is no need to ask about Sasun Mikayelyan’s honor and service for the sake of the state, but I want to remind you that Piloyan served well too, and he served during the trial of the case of October 27. He joined the trial as a prosecutor in a later stage and strayed the process, and he respected his interests and changed the process of the trial. As a result, in three years the society did not learn any new information other than they had known before, three years before, on October 28. Eventually the organizers of the awful state terror were not discovered, and the ones who cut the head of our state and terror organizers enrooted in our society so deep that now they are a threat for every person,” said the head of Heritage party board Anahit Bakhshyan.