The ruling of the Administrative Court: “HCA Vanadzor has the right to submit a petition, and the CEC had to provide a proper response to it”
18:19, January 17, 2018 | News, Own news | Electoral Rights
On December 5, 2017 the RA Administrative Court rejected HCA Vanadzor’s claim against the RA Central Electoral Commission.
On April 2, 2017 the Organization turned to the Court in regard to receiving a proper response to the application-proposals submitted to the CEC on March 18 pertaining to the violations recorded during the campaign prior to the elections to the RA National Assembly of April 2, 2017.
HCA Vanadzor’s proposals concerned the pre-electoral campaign being run by RA Prime Minister Karen Karapetyan during his working hours, Gagik Tsarukyan’s and Arakel Movsisyan’s pre-election pledges and a Republican Party campaign office being deployed in the building of Tsaghkahovit’s Community Council in Aragatsotn Province.
The CEC found that none of the rights of HCA Vanadzor had been violated, and the Organization had no right to turn to the CEC in regard to the aforementioned violations, and on this ground the CEC refused to initiate administrative proceedings on the basis of the application-proposals. On the same day, the CEC under its own initiative initiated administrative proceedings pertaining to the violations pointed out in the aforementioned application-proposals of HCA Vanadzor, and, as a result, no violation was found in the actions of the candidates.
The Organization found out about these decisions through the CEC website.
Under the decision of December 5, 2017 made in regard to providing a proper response to the application-proposals of HCA Vanadzor, the Administrative Court found that HCA Vanadzor has the right to submit a petition, and the CEC was obliged to provide a proper response to the Organization.
The Court found that the proceedings initiated under the initiative of the CEC and the rulings made as a result of it in essence contained responses to the petitions of the Organization. However, the Court found that “the right to petition presupposes the factual receipt of a response”. Thus, the Court ruled that the opportunity to get familiarized with the decisions on the CEC webpage was not considered as a proper provision of a response.
Nevertheless, given the fact that HCA Vanadzor has already had the opportunity to get familiarized with the aforementioned decisions of the CEC, the Organization did not see any need to oblige the CEC to provide information on the decisions.
However, HCA Vanadzor did not receive a proper response to the application-proposals submitted by it, and the Court, though recording that fact as well, nevertheless, misinterpreted the content of the claim and rejected it.
The Organization will appeal the decision of the Court on this ground upon receiving it.
It should be noted that HCA Vanadzor has not received the court ruling so far.