-The NA oppositional and governmental parties don’t agree with your recommendation to take the provision on broadcasting the NA sessions out of the NA agenda. What else are you going to do to make them calm down besides telling them that this action is not influenced by the president’s office, but was agreed with the European union of broadcasting companies?
-I think this is also in the interests of the European human freedoms, RA Constitution, RA law on “Radio and TV broadcast” and the Europeans standards. We shouldn’t connect it only with the European union of broadcasting companies. At least this is a professional institution, but not a political. I was even surprised at them because I didn’t suggest taking these broadcasts out generally. I just recommended taking it out of the law and come to agreement. That was a rule for parliamentarians before with the radio and TV broadcast state company. This means that generally nothing will change. Even in Belarus, which is considered to be the less democratic state in Europe there is no law saying that the programs of some political parties must be broadcasted on the national TV channel. Sometimes they connect this suggestion with another suggestion that I made saying that the NA sessions have low rating. Yes, this rating is not high, but this is not the reason that I made such a recommendation; I would still make it even if the rating was high. For instance there are no such limitations for the program of the government called “Inknagir”. And the rating of this program is lower, but we decided with the government that people should be informed about the activities of their government.
– Don’t you think that adopting a law is also an agreement with the NA?
– That’s different. It doesn’t depend on whether the publishing party is a TV company, radio or newspaper, they must have editorial freedom. I mean the programs must not be controlled by the government. Now they can broadcast their own program whenever they like and how long they like on the basis of a governmental decision or act. This is the problem. I can’t say that this law is the only thing in Armenia that is an obstacle for freedom of speech. But I think this is the last law that has remained where there are provisions preventing freedom of speech. All the other cases are just problems that are not stipulated by the law. The national TV company has such problems. Also there have been fair critics made both by local and international monitors regarding the work of this TV company and providing fair conditions in pre-election periods. All these things still continue to be actual; I am just recommending taking some provisions that are against the speech freedom and Constitution out of the law. Of course this step may serve a ground for joining the European union of broadcasting companies, but even if we don’t join I think we should take these provisions out.
– Anyway the oppositionists think that before the elections this step is a test for them and if it is adopted they will lose their right for 3 minutes too.
– Why do they think so? My recommendation was attacked less by the oppositional powers than by the governmental ones. This problem is not connected with the opposition, but with the NA powers. But I don’t recommend taking those programs out: I only recommend taking these provisions out of the law and suggest them the same things on the basis of agreement, and sometimes maybe with better conditions.
– But this will enable to cease the contract whenever you like and not to broadcast the programs any more.
– You can’t cease the contract provisions because it is a normative act too which is adopted in different institutions. You can’t press on Media. The National TV company is the one to decide whether it wants to broadcast the work of the NA or not and then apply to the parliament and ask to let it broadcast the NA sessions because it wants to inform people about their work. I don’t exclude that there may be sessions that will interest people much and we will ask them to let us broadcast. For instance if there are open hearings dedicated to the Karabakh conflict, the national TV company will be interested in it itself and will ask the NA to give permission to broadcast. This is the only antidemocratic shortcoming registered by the international organizations, and the other ones are just a result of our internal problems and the lack of formed institutions in civil society.
– Don’t you think that if the National TV didn’t set such limitations for the opposition this recommendation would not be criticized like this because maybe the parliamentary governmental parties are also afraid of being excluded from TV in the future like the opposition?
– This problem also concerns the Media freedom in Armenia. But what you said is not contradicting what I said. If a problem persists it doesn’t mean yet that another problem doesn’t persist.
– Do you think that the NA governmental parties would also criticize your recommendation if this distrust didn’t exist?
– What difference does it make for the NA what kind of law it is? If it is broadcasted it means that it is, if not – it is not. If it was like that, the coalition could decide that the opposition didn’t have to make a six minute speech and would adopt a relative law six months prior to the elections. Who could contradict them? Of course I don’t mean that this is the only problem in Armenia connected with the freedom of speech. To change the law doesn’t mean yet to change a situation de-facto. What I recommend is just turning to another legal act. I don’t want to create extra problems with this issue; I just want to solve this problem, which is an obstacle for freedom of speech and personally for me as the head of the National TV company. If they can solve this problem without any victims I don’t understand why they complain. If they want to appear on TV as they used to do before, they can. First we can make a contract than apply to the relevant law to secure us from any possible problems in the future. And later it will not depend on whether the NA is going to change the law or not, we will do everything on the basis of the law. If it is amended, we will use the amended one. The problem will be solved anyway in the future.
– Artashes Geghmyan says that you have made this recommendation on the threshold of the elections so as not to give any opportunities to the opposition. What would you say about this?
– If they connect this either with me or with the president, please note that neither the president nor I am going to participate in the coming elections. So I don’t have such a problem. I think this announcement is absurd.
– You are not going to take part personally but you may have your close political power.
– No I don’t have any. I don’t belong to any political party. I don’t even know whom to vote for during the coming parliamentary elections. I may not take part either.
– Why?
– Just because. That’s my right.
– Do you mean that you don’t see any power besides Robert Kocharyan?
– No, he hasn’t participated in parliamentary elections before either. I was nonpartisan during the last elections too. As you say, all the powers are against my recommendation and neither of them backs me.
– Has any party suggested you to include you in their list?
– No, I don’t think anyone will make an offer either. Even if they want it would be better not to do so because I don’t want to be included in any list.
– Very often the National TV company is criticized for not broadcasting correct information about tax payers. These critics will increase in the future. Do you think that you may reconsider your approach to the opposition for the purpose of gaining their trust?
– There have been two elections and one rally during my term. During the rally the international observers didn’t make a serious monitoring, but our domestic monitoring is not bad. Yes, after the presidential elections we were criticized much, but this is not a dogma either. As for the parliamentary elections, our activities were evaluated in the best way. The National TV company has other responsibilities too. The fact that our TV company is the first one in the country says a lot about the fact that the money of our tax payers is spent in the best way and is not wasted. Among the CIS countries Armenia is the first one after Russia. Of course we still have a lot to do, one more year and we can already say that we have a good European TV company.
– Don’t the tax payers have a right to claim from the National TV company to give equal opportunities to the opposition too?
– Of course they have, I just don’t know what kind of mechanisms there are for that. If the international observers assume that we have done our responsibilities well this will mean that we have gained their trust. Besides that the National TV company and radio have high reputations. This is a standard too. So why do they watch our programs most if they don’t trust us?
– During his press conference, Artashes Geghamyan said that you are very careful and asked why you don’t reconsider your approach to the opposition. According to him, the time has come already. Why don’t you follow the opposition in order to gain their trust as Artashes Geghamyan advised you to do?
– First, I never connect my political approach with change of authorities, and in spite of whether there will be change of authorities or not (anyway it will happen in 2008) I always make my approach on the basis of the existing political situation. I don’t think my position is political, but anyway if there are people who think that I am going to change my team I have to make them disappointed. This is not going to happen. I wasn’t a communist during their period. And if they mean the fact that I worked with the first president, they should note that his team was the same, but only some time later it divided into two parts and I entered the second one. I haven’t changed my team.
– Do you think that the present day authorities and the previous ones are the same team?
– No, there was a president before, and there was a prime minister too… A part of that team remained in the first part with the president, and I remained in the second part. This is a normal political process. As for Artashes Geghamyan, he’d better note that I have never changed my team and I am not a person that changes his approach whenever the wind blows from another side. As for his advice to listen to some people, he should note: the management of the National TV company is not held accountable to anyone except the board and me and doesn’t get any instructions from anyone. Everything is very simple and he knows this too. I have worked in different positions since 1990 and I am not going to continue that my whole life. I will never change the team that I have now. Is this clear? As for the change of government, there will not be such changes until 2008.
– Are you going to quit after these authorities go away?
– There are a lot of different jobs that I can do. I have had a lot of good jobs in my life, but that doesn’t mean that I am always going to have good ones. Besides that, my term ends in January, 2007, so I will leave my position before the coming presidential and parliamentary elections anyway. So Mr. Geghamyan was wrong about this too.