(Saturday, September 13)
“Hraparak” writes that “there is a speculation among the families of political prisoners and opposition activists themselves that no bad reports on Armenia are written at European institutions because the Armenian authorities have promised to Europe that they will amnesty the majority of political prisoners and release them from jail until the end of September.”
“Chorrord Ishkhanutyun” suggests that it is up to the Europeans to see what is happening in Armenia or turn a blind eye to everything. “There are 75 political prisoners in Armenian prisons now, police terror is getting worse and worse, the ban on A1+ to return to the air is now stipulated legislatively. It is 1937 [the year of Stalin’s fiercest crackdown on dissidence] in courts… and we can feel this situation on our own skin every day,” the opposition paper writes. “It is up to the Europeans -- if they do want to see all this, let them see it. If they don’t, let them register progress. It changes nothing for us.”
The same paper continues: “Even if [Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights] Thomas Hammarberg declares that angel wings have begun to grow on Serzh Sarkisian’s back, we still won’t see the number of political prisoners reduced, nor will their situation become easier and nor will those responsible for ten deaths turn themselves in.”
“Golos Armenii” thinks that “Hammarberg’s report reflects the reality and what has been done to overcome the internal political crisis after March 1 and what still needs to be done.”
“Haykakan Zhamanak” writes: “After the video material prepared by the public committee looking into the March 1 events was published on September 10, Armenia’s authorities, and especially law-enforcement bodies, have naturally kept silent.”
And “168 Zham” carries the statement by Armenia’s Ombudsman Armen Harutiunian: “It is urgent and very important to carry out an inquiry in connection with the particularly brutal and inadequate actions of law-enforcers presented in the video in order to identify and bring to justice those who gave the orders to take such actions and those who immediately committed them.”
“Aravot” editorializes: “Finally, the Armenian government has found an occupation for its citizens who otherwise, as it believes, stay idle. Now we must demand receipts when we do the shopping in order to solve the social problems facing the country. In fact, this is the uniting national idea that our intellectuals and politicians have been searching for during many years.” The editor, for his part, continues by setting demands to the government as a citizen: “I, in particular, demand that people should not be imprisoned for their political views, that the authorities should allow citizens in Northern Avenue to hold peaceful protests and should stop spreading lies about the March 1 events, that elections in Armenia at any level should not turn into beatings and knife-stabbings. If the prime minister calls upon us to be worthy citizens in the matter of shop receipts, then why shouldn’t we prove as worthy in other, more important matters?”
In an interview with the same paper, well-known political figure of the 1990s Samvel Shahinian considers the influence of opposition protests on the authorities as unequivocally positive and says: “The government was already turning into a totalitarian system. [First President] Levon Ter-Petrosian came as an irreconcilable, uncompromising force, although not unselfish again, but a force with which the authorities cannot find common grounds for bargaining, cannot cajole it, bribe it or cheat it. That was the only opposition in 15 years that managed to become a viable force and sober the authorities.”
Analyzing the vote on the amendments to the Law on Television and Radio in the National Assembly, “Hraparak” opines: “It has been known for a long time that our legislative body is a group of people engaged in pressing buttons, a body ready to rubberstamp any law. The quality of this body has been on the decline for years, now reaching a disastrous low. It seems that there is no government-proposed draft legislation that can be rejected by the National Assembly. The stamp of approval at times is provided even by those whom one would expect to be different from this gray mass.”
“Azg” writes: “One week has passed since the governing Republican Party’s executive body made a decision on replacing the current speaker of parliament, but there is still no answer to the question about the reasons behind this move.” “There is nothing worse than a party secret,” the paper continues. “It is only when the party wants it that the public will know the reasons for which the decision to change the top legislator was made.”
(Hrach Melkumian)
“Hraparak” writes that “there is a speculation among the families of political prisoners and opposition activists themselves that no bad reports on Armenia are written at European institutions because the Armenian authorities have promised to Europe that they will amnesty the majority of political prisoners and release them from jail until the end of September.”
“Chorrord Ishkhanutyun” suggests that it is up to the Europeans to see what is happening in Armenia or turn a blind eye to everything. “There are 75 political prisoners in Armenian prisons now, police terror is getting worse and worse, the ban on A1+ to return to the air is now stipulated legislatively. It is 1937 [the year of Stalin’s fiercest crackdown on dissidence] in courts… and we can feel this situation on our own skin every day,” the opposition paper writes. “It is up to the Europeans -- if they do want to see all this, let them see it. If they don’t, let them register progress. It changes nothing for us.”
The same paper continues: “Even if [Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights] Thomas Hammarberg declares that angel wings have begun to grow on Serzh Sarkisian’s back, we still won’t see the number of political prisoners reduced, nor will their situation become easier and nor will those responsible for ten deaths turn themselves in.”
“Golos Armenii” thinks that “Hammarberg’s report reflects the reality and what has been done to overcome the internal political crisis after March 1 and what still needs to be done.”
“Haykakan Zhamanak” writes: “After the video material prepared by the public committee looking into the March 1 events was published on September 10, Armenia’s authorities, and especially law-enforcement bodies, have naturally kept silent.”
And “168 Zham” carries the statement by Armenia’s Ombudsman Armen Harutiunian: “It is urgent and very important to carry out an inquiry in connection with the particularly brutal and inadequate actions of law-enforcers presented in the video in order to identify and bring to justice those who gave the orders to take such actions and those who immediately committed them.”
“Aravot” editorializes: “Finally, the Armenian government has found an occupation for its citizens who otherwise, as it believes, stay idle. Now we must demand receipts when we do the shopping in order to solve the social problems facing the country. In fact, this is the uniting national idea that our intellectuals and politicians have been searching for during many years.” The editor, for his part, continues by setting demands to the government as a citizen: “I, in particular, demand that people should not be imprisoned for their political views, that the authorities should allow citizens in Northern Avenue to hold peaceful protests and should stop spreading lies about the March 1 events, that elections in Armenia at any level should not turn into beatings and knife-stabbings. If the prime minister calls upon us to be worthy citizens in the matter of shop receipts, then why shouldn’t we prove as worthy in other, more important matters?”
In an interview with the same paper, well-known political figure of the 1990s Samvel Shahinian considers the influence of opposition protests on the authorities as unequivocally positive and says: “The government was already turning into a totalitarian system. [First President] Levon Ter-Petrosian came as an irreconcilable, uncompromising force, although not unselfish again, but a force with which the authorities cannot find common grounds for bargaining, cannot cajole it, bribe it or cheat it. That was the only opposition in 15 years that managed to become a viable force and sober the authorities.”
Analyzing the vote on the amendments to the Law on Television and Radio in the National Assembly, “Hraparak” opines: “It has been known for a long time that our legislative body is a group of people engaged in pressing buttons, a body ready to rubberstamp any law. The quality of this body has been on the decline for years, now reaching a disastrous low. It seems that there is no government-proposed draft legislation that can be rejected by the National Assembly. The stamp of approval at times is provided even by those whom one would expect to be different from this gray mass.”
“Azg” writes: “One week has passed since the governing Republican Party’s executive body made a decision on replacing the current speaker of parliament, but there is still no answer to the question about the reasons behind this move.” “There is nothing worse than a party secret,” the paper continues. “It is only when the party wants it that the public will know the reasons for which the decision to change the top legislator was made.”
(Hrach Melkumian)