Interview with Artur Sakunts
00:00, March 30, 2011 | News | Electoral Rights
How do you evaluate the outcomes of the elections of Armavir LSGBs held on March 20, 2011? The elections, in fact, evoked numerous complaints, as the voters, in demonstration, blocked the main road to Armavir.
I didn’t directly participate in the elections of Armavir LSGBs and this is why I cannot provide a complete assessment. Nevertheless, it can be inferred from the press publications that the elections didn’t quite differ from previous Armenian elections. I would like to point out a very important fact that the voters demonstrated their fervent revolt and disaccord even in such a small community as Armavir, which was manifested by such public actions as blocking the highway. It should serve as a “red flag” to the authorities that the Armenian Society has changed and will no longer tolerate degradation of their dignity.
During their four-day meetings, the National Assembly Lawmakers debated the draft law on Coalition of Electoral Code. According to some authorities, the bill on amendments of Electoral Code will not eliminate electoral violations. However, do you think the draft law will somehow contribute to holding free, fair and transparent elections?
None of the bills on Electoral Code have ever promoted free, fair and transparent elections. The amendments on the Electoral Code have always been proceeded by massive demonstrations before each election.
As a representative of a non-governmental organization, I would like to point out that the amendments proposed in the current Electoral Code can seriously limit the participation of organizations carrying out monitoring of elections. I refer to the provision of the bill, which states that NGO representatives must be accredited by the Central Electoral Commission, receive professional training and take an exam, in order to carry out monitoring during elections. In my opinion, this provision is a legislative control mechanism which the Central Electoral Commission can then use to prevent any “unwanted” NGOs from conducting monitoring. The opportunities of recording electoral violations and appealing them are becoming limited with this proposed draft law. In reference to this provision, I can assure that the Bill of Coalition does not promote free, fair and transparent elections at the legislative level.
What is the cornerstone of holding democratic elections? Is it a determination on the Government’s part that such elections are never held? It is a fact that election outcomes are falsified by the authorities unfortunately, almost a directive. But do you think holding legitimate elections is only conditioned by the Government’s determination?
I cannot agree with such a statement because a number of oppositional parties, political powers and specifically their proxies are also held responsible for preventing electoral violations. A number of organizations are also responsible for eliminating electoral violations whether they participate in elections or not. In order to hold democratic elections, civil society institutes and oppositional political parties should manifest determination to abolish violations when the Government takes no measures. Unfortunately, a number of political parties are unable to appoint a dedicated and unbiased proxy in RA election precincts during elections.
Do you think we’re running for urgent or subsequent elections? I am not even interested if it is urgent or subsequent, that isn’t the issue. The fact that we are running for the coming elections with an absolute electorate is of utmost importance. Of course, this is not completely sufficient to hold democratic elections, however, as compared to the 2007-2008 elections; the electorate for the coming elections has gone through exceedingly disturbing experience. Also, the changes occur not only in the oppositional field, or during rallies and other public demonstrations initiated by the oppositional party, but also during unprovoked public protests like outdoor trading, Georgian state-licensed cars, social and ecological issues. The electorate is less controlled by the authorities; therefore, we must not think of urgent or subsequent elections, but of improved or better-quality elections.
After each election, the opposition party complains of electoral violations. On this point, discontent from citizens over the authorities is increasing. However, change is difficult and as usual we are running for subsequent elections even though there is mounting discontent. What do you think is necessary to alter the domestic political situations and what measures does the current opposition take regarding it? It is already stated in the question that the dissatisfaction with the authorities is rising and growing. Moreover, the scope of dissatisfaction is expanding regarding an increase of cases of violations in the armed forces and in the police departments as well as the consistent attention of the public towards the rise of complaints in death cases. Are any changes registered? Yes, I think yes.
I see a change in accountability level increasing, which previously didn’t exist. I was always of the opinion that if the political will of the authorities and opposition is missing, then civic challenges should and need to take place. I believe it is not political powers, but public demand, that should initiate situational changes. In fact we have two oppositional powers: Armenian National Congress and “Heritage” political party. Two of the powers are held responsible to carry out public demand directed at situational changes. It hard to foresee who will succeed in meeting the demand. Having a choice is far more important, which is also one of the guarantees determining situational changes. Of course, the demographic situation in RA is another alarming factor. This is conditioned by a carefully planned organization of population emigration.