(Saturday, December 10)
“Aravot” believes that the trouble with Armenian human rights campaigners is that they are too politicized. “Most of them are in opposition, although some of them are pro-government,” writes the paper. “But it is nonsensical to use those characterizations with respect to human rights activists. Their beneficiaries must be [ordinary] people, rather than one or another party figure.” The paper argues that those activists usually speak out on issues having a public resonance because “that way it’s easier to gain dividends and the reputation of a brave human rights fighter.”
“They usually don’t care much about ordinary people who live in a remote village and are treated like slaves by the village mayor,” continues “Aravot.” “The other trouble with human rights activists is foreign grants. Sometimes they are given for unclear purposes.”
“Hraparak” says that while there are certainly differences between the governing Republican (HHK) and Prosperous Armenia (BHK) parties but they may well contest the May 2012 parliamentary elections with a common list of candidates. “But let us look at that issue from another viewpoint,” editorializes the paper. “What will change for our country and society if the HHK and BHK act together or separately? What will the country and its citizens gain from that?” The paper says it will be meaningless to discuss tensions between the two parties “until they part ways and change their behavior.”
“Yerkir” expresses concern over what it sees as a lack of legal protection enjoyed by Armenian civil servants and other public sector employees. The paper says that newly appointed senior officials routinely replace their subordinates at will after taking office.