Human Rights Watch Considers those Responsibility for March 1 events Should be accountable for Liability
00:00, May 27, 2011 | News
www.1in.am had an interview with Giorgi Gogia, a representative of Human Rights Watch in the Southern Caucasus.
How do you assess the decision to hold an amnesty in Armenia which was adopted by the Parliament and by President Serzh Sargsyan’s proposal which will grant freedom topolitical prisoners arrested after the events of March 1, 2008, and who have been in custody for three years?Is it only a display of good will, or there are other reasons?
I can only welcome the general amnesty as these people were not supposed to be in prison in the first place. If the amnesty is conducted and those arrested after the March 1 events are released, it would be a step forward.
How do you assess President Serzh Sargsyan instruction’s to law enforcement agencies to provide new impetusinto the investigation of the March 1 events? Many are pessimistic about it saying that law enforcements agencies are unable to conduct an unbiased investigation. What do you think should be done for full disclosure of events?
The President’s instructions suggest that the previous investigation was not detailed enough and therefore there was no public confidence in the results of the investigation. However, we must wait for the outcomes of the new investigation. It is very important for society and political forces to be involved in the process. Human Rights Watch issued a report on the events of March 1, 2008. For us, it is crucial that the new investigation answers the questions raised in that report.Those responsible for the wrongdoings should be held liable.
Mr. Gogia, the reports released by you and other international organizations are famous; however, it is also known that Armenian authorities believe that organizations apply double-standards in their reports and criticize the authorities for their own interests. Do you agree with this estimation or do you share the opinion that the reports of international organizations are always objective?
If we are talking about inter-governmental international organizations such as OSCE or the UN, I cannot make a generalization whether there are double standards in their decisions or not. However, I can speak in the name of the organization that I represent. All the countries that we work with have undertaken commitments to follow conventions relating to human rights and fundamental freedoms. In case the authorities of the aforementioned country do not carry out their obligations, we report in this respect.
It is a well-known fact that the provisions of freedom of press are also included in the commitments. However, this issue has been aggravated, particularly because of the decriminalization of laws on slander and insult. Today, political leaders don’t miss an opportunity to file criminal cases against mass media in order to sue for large sums of money. Currently, there are dozens of criminal cases initiated against the media. How do you evaluate the current situation, and in the lack of independent judiciary, how can Armenian mass media operate?
No punitive measures should be applied against journalists. Fines for slanders and insults should coincide with the reality. I totally agree that this issue exists in Armenia, and I give a negative estimation of the situation.
The issue is more obvious in the sphere of broadcasting mass media as there is a lack of pluralism. A working group adjacent to Human Rights Defender was established which recommends to make amendments in the RA law on “Television and Radio” adopted in 2010. Considering the fact that Human Rights Watch criticized the bill ratified in 2010, how do you assess this new initiative?
I am not familiar with the new draft law, but it is evident that the law will promote pluralism of mass media. Pursuant to the bill ratified in 2010, the number of television agencies decreased, instead of increasing. Digital broadcasting brings about pluralism of media and an increase in their number. I hope the expected limitations as a result of proposed amendments will be eliminated.
Mr. Gogia, overall, do you think a most perfect law can run in a country where there is no political will to implement it?
It is a well-known fact that the laws should be improved. If there are no perfect laws to cover the issues in general, then the violations of human rights will be numerous. While, if the laws are perfect, the citizens have greater opportunities to be protected, of course with the condition that political will exists.
The blog was atblousely fantastic! Lots of great information andinspiration, both of which we all need!b Keep ’em coming… you all dosuch a great job at such Concepts… can’t tell you how much I, forone appreciate all you do!