The office of the human rights defender Armen Harutyunyan is sure that the amendments to the law on meetings, rallies, demonstrations and marches passed on March 20, were made in a rush and without serious expertise.
This was said in a statement made by the Ombudsman’s Office regarding the law on rallies, meetings and demonstrations. Harutyunyan thinks that in close future there will be the necessity of new changes. According to him there are all the legislative and grounds and opportunities to provide legality during public actions. “In regard to this it is important to take into account that for deletion of the present polarization issues not only measures of legal nature, but a complex program of political, economic, social and cultural improvements directed to the democratization of social life should be developed and applied by the State authorities.” The Ombudsman also spoke about the restrictions mentioned in the law. Specifically, the new law says that the law-enforcers may prohibit the rally if they have grounds to assume that those actions are aimed at violently disorganizing the constitutional order, instigation of national and racist hatred, preaching war or violence or if those ay create public disorder or crimes, harm the health and safety of citizens or violation of the rights of other citizens. According to Harutyunyan new norms of limitation are defined in a number of European states, such as France, Germany, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, etc. It also states that the opinion of the ombudsman is mainly similar to that of the Venice Commission. “In this context, it should be taken into account that in order to eliminate the cause of the current polarization the government should not only take legal measures but also work out and implement a hookup of political, economic, social and cultural reforms aimed at the democratization of the life of the society,” runs the release of the office of the human rights defender. The statement says that Ombudsman’s stance on the amendments to the RA Law on assemblies, demonstrations and processions mostly coincides with the resolution of Venice Commission. To recall, the parliament approved the amendments on March 17. At the request of the parliamentary speaker, the OSCE/ODIHR Expert Panel on Freedom of Assembly and Venice Commission studied the amendments. Their preliminary resolution does not consider the amendments admissible since they considerably restrict the freedom of assemblies and the possibility of considering the decisions to hold assemblies implying violation of public order by independent court. The joint resolution of the Venice Commission and OSCE/ODIHR was submitted to the Armenian Parliament on March 28 and will be discussed with parliamentarians on April 15-16 in Yerevan. “The negative role of the state contradicts Article 11 of the European Convention. Therefore according the Convention norms it is required that the state demonstrate positive mediation. As of the rallies the Convention defines that the state must undertake means to make sure that the rallies proceed peacefully. It is obvious that despite the clause in the Convention, which defines that in extreme cases the state can apply force lawfully it should nevertheless not be viewed as a guarantee. There can always be applied preventative methods on part of the state; however those shouldn’t be directed at restricting rallies and peaceful protest actions. And the government in fact has a wide variety of options how to resolve conflicts within the society,” emphasizes Harutyunyan. Three aspects of the amendments passed by the Armenian parliament on 17 March 2008 to the “Law on conducting meetings, assemblies, rallies and demonstrations” raise particularly serious concerns, runs the joint conclusion of the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR. The conclusion of the Venice Commission holds that the amendments to the law restrict the freedom of rallies and should be repealed. On April 15 the European experts will discuss this problem with the representatives of the National Assembly of Armenia. “Since according to an official release on April 15 and 16 the members of parliament and the international experts will be discussing the given articles at the National Assembly, the Human Rights Defender finds it expedient to deal with the issue of appealing to the Constitutional Court after learning about the result of the discussions,” runs the release of the human rights defender. It also states that the opinion of the ombudsman is mainly similar to that of the Venice Commission. “In this context, it should be taken into account that in order to eliminate the cause of the current polarization the government should not only take legal measures but also work out and implement a hookup of political, economic, social and cultural reforms aimed at the democratization of the life of the society,” runs the release of the office of the human rights defender. “It is important to take into account that for deletion of the present polarization issues not only measures of legal nature, but a complex program of political, economic, social and cultural improvements directed to the democratization of social life should be developed and applied by the State authorities.” “Taking into consideration the importance of tolerance for any democratic state it is necessary to define a high level of permissibility, after the violation of which will it based to apply force or preventive methods to fix the disorder.” The statement also emphasizes, “Any limitation that is put on the freedom of rallies, must not violate the essence of that right. The religions or ideological contradictions cannot become reasons for the application of preventative actions.” Therefore, according to the human right watch of Armenia it is unacceptable to have the 6 Clause of Article 13 of the law, which defines, “In cases when the peaceful rallies turn into mass disorder, which cause human casualties the authorized body prohibit the rallies or mass demonstrations to exclude the attempts of new casualties and thus investigate the ones, who instigate those illegal actions.” According to Harutyunyan as a result of that change a situation is formed when the state of emergency is cancelled but one of the restrictions defined by it still continues. “Moreover, if anyone may become a reason of such a limitation then the others will automatically be deprived from right of conducting peaceful rallies. We think it is unacceptable and it doesn’t conform to the requirements of the European Convention. The European Court of Human Rights specifically mentions that in the event if one of the demonstrators demonstrates violence or creates disorder the other participants of the rally do not have to be punished for that and must not be deprived of the right o continue their peaceful rally,” added the Ombudsman. “Moreover, before planning anything like that it is necessary to take into account Article 3 of the Constitution, which states that the man, his/her dignity, his/her basic rights and liberties are highest values. The state must protect the basic rights and liberties of its citizens and assure that hose are protected in foreign counties as well. The state is restricted to undertake any steps, which limit the basic rights and freedom of its citizens.” He also reminds that the Constitution of Armenia offers two mechanisms of expression of people’s rights and liberties (including organization of peaceful rallies). The first one in normal conditions if it is necessary to do it in peaceful conditions to protect the reputation, dignity of citizens from other country mediation, security, cooperation, etc (Article 43). The second one is to be applied during the state of emergency. Specifically Article 44 of the Constitution states that during states of emergency certain human rights and liberties maybe limited for a short period of time and in the framework of the legislation of the countries. The same thing maybe applied during military situations. The second part of Article 43 of the Constitution reads that the limitation of the basic rights and liberties cannot exceed the requirements of the international obligations of the country. In this regard it is worth mentioning that the norms defined by the European Court of Human Rights bring up the mentioned clauses not to restrict the human rights by the desire of the state of authorized bodies. They outline the methods of the permissibility of limitations. In the meantime Harutyunyan thinks that it would be right to speak of certain provisions of the law, which the police adverts during mass actions. According to the law the Police has to prove the peacefulness and legality of mass demonstrations and has to isolate those people, who provoke the people or perpetrate other illegal action, thus allowing the other participants of the peaceful demonstrations continue it.
P.S. By the way on April 15-16 discussions will be held in Yerevan around the mentioned law, where international experts will also take part in.