“Public opinion in Armenia hasn’t changed after Tsomak”, Sakunts
09:04, August 28, 2013 | News | Right to liberty and security
Amnesty International has released its report on freedom of human rights in Armenia. The opinion of chairman of Helsinki Association of Armenia Mikayel Danielyan was shared in the foreword, pursuant to which there are still certain restrictions in terms of freedom of expression in Armenia.
1in.am talked with human rights defender Artur Sakunts, Chairman of Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor over several provisions of the report. The report reads that “traitor” label threatens the one, who used “territories occupied by Armenia” expression. According to Artur Sakunts, addressing it is quite adequate and well grounded. At the time of Mister of foreign affairs when Vardan Oskanyan made the “occupied territories” expression”, a true attack commenced against him in the news field, weren’t they threats, according to you?
As to the aggressive attitude towards persons with different sexual orientation and persecution against the representatives of LGTB organization, our interlocutor brought up the example of DIY club, “The arson of the club, the protest actions against showing of Parada film, encroachments against the demonstration participants, moreover, patronage of implementers of violence by the authorities directly show another image, especially when changing for bail as a preventive measure was already being motioned. Later they publicly expressed their positive dispositions regarding arsonists and exploders. I certainly find the failure to give legal evaluation to the actions carried out by the implementers of calls for violence and violence users along with failure to subject them to liability as presence of hatred against persons with different sexual orientation and patronage by the authorities.”
To the remark whether or not there has been any change if not at the state but at public level, our interlocutor responded, “The fact that Tsomak was forced to leave the RA borders doesn’t at all hint on change of mentality regarding different sexual orientation, the physical existence of such persons isn’t safeguarded in this country, moreover, having undertaken the commitments both in the field of human rights and sexual orientation, religious affiliation and protection of citizens, the authorities, that is Armenia, doesn’t properly inform the public regarding the core meaning of the undertaken commitments. Even upon approving of the RA law on gender equality, via automatic voting they didn’t bear responsibility for its contents and the wave of accusations is directed via controlled Mass Media against those organizations or individuals, who are engaged in the protection of the interests of sexual minority representatives.”
By addressing the opinion stated in the report, whereby, the press in Armenia isn’t so free and there is restriction of freedom of expression and taboo regarding certain issues, Artur Sakunts noted, “The internet is certainly the sphere regarding which there is no censorship, there is more of censorship before the public TV, which operates at the expense of the duties paid by us, but in fact it doesn’t carry out its activities based on public demand, it has remained a state TV serving the interests of political authorities. Whether online or in print, advertising should become the main revenue source for Mass Media, but the market has also monopolized it, media outlets depend on this or that political force, oligarch, and the freedom of press doesn’t actually exist with the exception of several media outlets, which, however, cannot ensure all of the information demands throughout the republic since the number of internet news users is limited.
Even “Azatutyun” seemed to be accessible to everyone, but in fact it isn’t so, whereas, the copies of the printed press are limited, one can distinguish the reality upon reading several newspapers.”
By Sakunts’ words, the policy of media outlets and sticking to norms of ethics by journalists are also concerning. “A great number of media outlets don’t stick to diversity as a cornerstone of news policy, the semi-truth but not the lie is dangerous”.
To our question whether the press is freer now during Serzh Sargsyan’s presidency than it used to be within Robert Kocharyan’s office years, when the same “Azatutyun” radio station was silenced, Sakunts replied, “Serzh Sargsyan’s was the prime minister on March 1, did he undertake any measures? Thus, the tool used during Robert Kocharyan’s office years wasn’t punished by Serzh Sargsyan, that is why I am not sure that the same tool won’t be reapplied. Did he come to inquire what Robert Kocharyan was doing?”
By wrapping up his standpoint over the report of Amnesty International, Artur Sakunts highlighted that it was objective and confirmed the current situation in Armenia in the field of human rights.
“I don’t know how much the authorities will get engaged in the resolution of the issues recorded in the report, but at this point I come to state that their disposition regarding our proposals in the action plan of human rights strategy already shows that the authorities are reluctant to change the current situation”.