Yesterday a standing committee of the Armenian parliament held hearings on a major voting reform on transitioning to 100% proportional voting, which the country’s leading opposition forces Heritage and ARF say would make the upcoming parliamentary elections more democratic.
Let us remember that the theme of transitioning to 100% proportional electoral system has been on the agenda for over a month now. It gained vocal discussions in the public and political lives. It is noteworthy that the whole parliamentary and non-parliamentary opposition of Armenia supports this idea. Even Prosperous Armenia weeks ago stated that it would support the initiative. That is the reason why this initiative gained the title “Consensus minus 1.” Only the RPA is against the initiative. Indeed the RPA expressed the same standpoint yesterday. Moreover, the RPA was not against the idea but stated that it was not expedient to touch the election code several months prior to elections. And the opposition is against the majoritarian because in the 41 single mandate districts elections proceed in the most corrupt manner and the running candidates apply the methods of bribery in local districts. Besides that the majoritarian MPs hardly ever deal with legislation. They rarely show up in the parliament and don’t participate in discussions. They merely resolve minor social issues of the constituents of their districts. These MPs confess this as well. And most importantly, most of the time the majoritarian MPs are local oligarchs and rich ones and they provide the majority of the RPA in parliament. It means that if the RPA loses seats on the proportional list the majoritarian seats fully compensate for the loss at the expense of the number of elected oligarchs. This is the reason why the majoritarian system is so essential for the government and deniable on part of the opposition. In accordance with Armenia’s existing Electoral Code, 90 of the 131 parliament seats were contested under the system of proportional representation in the last legislative elections. The remaining 41 deputies were elected in single-seat constituencies across the country. Opposition leaders say voters are more vulnerable to bribes and intimidation when they pick individual candidates. The RPA denies this and says the single-mandate districts are needed because most Armenian parties do not have strong branches outside Yerevan. Yesterday during the hearings the opposition parties slammed the system and justified the need of transitioning of the 100% proportional system. During his speech, one of the co-authors of the bill, an ARF member Armen Rustamyan mentioned that if the people ever wish to change the government through elections it will practically not be possible. “Because the simple calculation shows that even if the RPA gains double of the previous votes it cannot bring as many parliamentarians as it would bring from the single-mandate districts. The government always has a guaranteed 70% majority in the parliament. This is the reason why the RPA does everything to maintain the majoritarian system,” reiterated Rustamyan. One of the apologies that the RPA brings up in order not to eliminate the majoritarian system is the reduction of the MP-voter communication. This means that the single mandate MPs constantly communicate with their constituents. They have the opportunity to learn their issues and raise those in state structures. If we transition to the full proportional system this link won’t be possible. “Nobody will be oppressed to have been elected based on the proportional list and if they go to Syunik marz – Meghri, Agarak, Kapan – to present the interests and rights of the local constituents. Many majoritarian MPs don’t have any connection with the voters. I am sorry but I see this all the time during my regional visits. Many people wish to speak to their MPs but they are not available. They say that they have seen their MPs only once during elections,” stated a member of the Heritage faction Zaruhi Postanjyan. The non-parliamentary ANC and Free Democrats are also for the 100% proportional system. During the hearings the member of the party board Garnik Gevorgyan mentioned that one of the provisions of the party platform of Free Democrats is the transition to 100% proportional system. “We are very happy that the key provision of our party platform has gained so much resonance today and has built grounds for the unification of the opposition on the issues, which seemed impossible in the past. The government brings up many counter-arguments to our initiative. Mostly they focus on the link with the voters. By this, we diminish the role of the NA as a venue for the ruling party. Here the link with the voters is only seen at lowest level, which can fully accommodate the executive and the local governments. The government always says that by have majority at the local level they work very well. The second counter-argument is that the annihilation of the majoritarian system is the violation of human rights because by doing that the individuals won’t be able to run as deputies and cannot present their platforms and ideas to the voters. Luckily we don’t have any ideological stream that wouldn’t be represented in Armenia. All the parties have the so-called institute of supporters and they are included on their party lists. Of course, in this case we only need the political will of the government. The latter should either confess that they benefit from this system or accept the will of the reform,” stated Gevorgyan by expressing skepticism that the government would do that. And in order to maintain this, it is at least necessary to rename the provision in the code by calling it, “system providing majority for the government.” Senior members of other opposition groups not represented in the current parliament, notably the Armenian National Congress (ANC), also took part in the discussion. Levon Zurabyan, the ANC coordinator, said that elections in the nationwide constituencies are usually swept by rich individuals with dubious reputations. He said they “invest financial, physical and criminal resources in bullying and bribing voters.” "It really has become a symbiosis for oligarchs or the local authorities and the ruling party, which operates in the following simple scenario. The government is sponsoring the local authority and the administrative resources The falsification within the committees, help to the majority of the constituency, and the local authority for that service or oligarch invests in financial, law enforcement and criminal resources to intimidate and bribe the voters, the majority electoral system, elimination of corruption in this key ring," said Zurabyan. MP Lyova Khachatryan (no party affiliate) added that no majority system is worth even two people to become hostile toward each other. “The consequence of majority-system elections is hostility among people,” he said. He mentioned that he was elected on the majority ticket and put forth several bills which weren’t passed because, in his opinion, he doesn’t represent any political party. Thus, Khachatryan concluded that the majority system is ineffective as it is the political party that is the determining factor. “As for whether we will lose the connection with the voters, I do not agree with it, I know my district not only villages, I know the names of other villagers, and if he wants to engage in any of the issues, it depends on human character,” said the deputy. So it came as no surprise that RPA MP Davit Harutyunyan came out against the bill, arguing that it would weaken the direct link between voter and the voted MP. According to Harutyunyan, those who are in the top of the party list in the proportional system often withdraw their parliamentary mandates and then those who are not so well known get into parliament. “Are we going to support this initiative? The simplest answer is the following. No, because it is not right to change the election system months before elections,” stated the moderator of the hearings Davit Harutyunyan.