Interview with Artur Baghdasaryan, NA Speaker
- Soon we will celebrate the 2nd anniversary of NA activity. As NA Speaker you have, of course, envisaged a certain program for this period, did you succeed in realizing it fully?
- As NA Speaker, I naturally have had some program. I think that part of those programs were possible to realize. The Parliament has become more open for the society: during those two years representatives of different social groups, students, doctors, lecturers, scientists, invalids, refugees visited the National Assembly. The National Assembly has become nearer to the people, every month NA representatives organize reception in different parts of the republic. As to the NA legislative activity I should mention that it was quiet active, many laws have been adopted, agreements and conventions have been ratified, which gives us basis to say that the parliament functions regularly. Of course, we could do more but with the opportunities that today NA has we do the maximum, because 25% of MPs generally boycott against the legislative activity, 25%, being businessmen MPs are not able to fully deal with the legislative activity. I think that time will come and a clear report will be given. I have already put basis for a good initiative of having an annual report on the NA activity and I will continue this tradition.
- The coalition majority of the parliament is also two years old, though from the first day of its birth various forecasts are made about its “premature death.” In your opinion, what is the secret of vitality of the faction OYe (Rule of Law), RPA and ARF, having various ideologies?
- Armenia is a small country to have big secrets. Parliamentary elections showed that no party has the vast majority – 66 votes, to solve the issues in before themselves. And as in many countries of the world in Armenia as well a coalition government was formed. From the birthday of the political coalition since now there is no lack of forecasts of “premature death.” I think that the issue concerns not the very coalition and the disagreements or unity of coalition member parties, but the problem is in the very political field, where everybody: the authority or the opposition, inside the Parliament or outside it, speaks about changes. The problem is the type of those amendments or revolutions. Here is the borderline. I don’t think that the parties of the coalition are of different ideologies, in reality, ideology is a very serious and weighty conception to be estimated so lightly, to be so many and different in one country. As to the programs of the parties and the mechanisms of their implementation, different estimations of the same events, it is natural and well formed, otherwise there would be one party. I think that with its various opinions the coalition has agreed and agrees in the issue discussed till now and that not only witnesses the vitality of the coalition but the responsibility towards the country, the people. This also prompts once more that we should unite not around the idea of revolutions but - the idea of amendments.
- Nearly one and half of two years of parliamentary work the Ardarutiun (Justice) bloc said the Azgayin Miabanutiun (National Unity) spent their time for working out a “concept” of the constitutional struggle for changing the power. Partial boycott continues up to today and it may be extended till the next parliamentary elections. Do you consider normal the NA legislative and political activity without the opposition bloc?
- Each party itself decides the strategy and tactics of its activity. As NA Speaker I have invited and organized dozens of political discussions for bringing back the opposition to the legislative activity of the parliament. First, if the opposition has changed the mandate received from the people into a mandate of boycott, it is itself responsible before its elections, but I should mention that in reality different MPs from the opposition participate not only in the work of standing and ad-hoc committees, which is a legislative activity, but are in the sittings’ chamber and make speeches during the discussions that are important for them. Finally, when the draft Constitution worked out by Arshak Sadoyan, MP from the opposition, is discussed it is hard to say that the MP from the opposition boycotts NA activities. I have repeatedly called on that the laws and decisions adopted by NA may become more perfect in case of the interested participation of MPs from the opposition, so we see their place in the parliament, and we do not understand the policy of partial realization of partial boycott.
- Till autumn CE experts amended packages of the Constitution and Electoral Code from Armenia, which would fully comply with European criteria. According to you, do these important packages that are in the stage of discussion, meet the demands presented by CE?
- I think that we should be able to adopt such a Constitution and Electoral law that would fully comply with CE demands. We have a complete agreement on making amendments in Electoral Code. Electoral amendments should pass a process of serious discussions. I, as NA Speaker, and the party that I present, tend to do everything possible to have the Constitution and Electoral Code deserved high estimation. In the contrary, if we have various opinions, I don’t think that we will have a good Constitution and Electoral Code.
- Your partners of the coalition RPA and ARF are not inspired with the active work of the councils affiliated to NA Speaker, reasoning that they have a long-range aim of making it a “pre-election headquarters” of the faction “Rule of Law.” Can you suppose that this is a simple manifestation of political jealousy?
- Numerous discussions have already been on this issue. The councils haven’t been created for any particular reason and they do and will continue for doing their role of solving the legislative and practical issues of the spheres.
- The visit of Vladimir Putin, RF President, to Armenia gave birth to various comments. Nevertheless, was it a usual, “protocol” visit or a diplomatic tour for “touching the positions” of the strategic allied union in CIS territory?
- I do not consider the question proper. A president of any country doesn’t make his/her official or business visit either with the aim of “protocol” or “diplomatic tours.” During the visit of Vladimir Putin, RF President, a wide framework of issues concerning Armenian-Russian relations was discussed, as well as day of the Russian Federation in Armenia were officially opened.
- Western analysts are sure that “a ghost wanders” in CIS countries “a ghost of coloured revolutions” whose next “shelter” will be Armenia. What is your attitude towards these forecasts?
- Not only Western analysts speak about the future fate of CIS formed after the collapse of the USSR. In the republics of former USSR, that are already independent republics today, the revolutions that have taken place make evident their unfinished status of the process of the establishment of statehood in those states. It is evident that CIS also faces certain changes. The time will show in what country that “ghost” will be? I think that the next shelter won’t be Armenia.
- At the end of 2004 you were granted the order of “The Legion of Honor” by Jacque Chirac, President of France. Was it for your active role in Armenian-French relations?
- I think that the fact of awarding is the answer.
- The next presidential elections in Armenia will be held in 2008, but today the names of the possible candidates for the next RA president are actively circulated and your name as well. What would you say about it?
- I’ll say, as the next presidential elections in Armenia will be held in 2008 you’d rather refer this theme, perhaps, in 2007.
