Avetik Ishkhanyan: “Only in a nightmare can one imagine that the leadership of Artsakh can hand over certain territories in a certain way”
In an interview with 168.am, human rights activist Avetik Ishkhanyan touched upon Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s statement on closing entrances to courts and some thoughts that he expressed in his speech that followed the statement. According to the human rights activist, Pashinyan’s demand is about punishing disobedient judges, not judicial and legal reforms.
168.am: Mr. Ishkhanyan, as a human rights activist, how would you assess the call that Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan made yesterday to close the entrances to and exits from all courts, saying that he will declare the reason for this step at 12:00?
Avetik Ishkhanyan: I would like to comment on this as a person not as a human rights activist. Even if I wasn’t a human rights activist, I would still have my personal opinion on this.
Nikol Pashinyan is still in the mood of a revolutionary. Although he possesses the constitutional majority in the National Assembly, the noncoalitional, homogeneous government and, in this case, based on my impression, with the same mood of a revolutionary, not within the scope of the power he has, he wants to make courts obey him.
I would simply like to bring an example. In the period of the former, as they say, regime, there were politically resonant trials (trials over “Sasna Tsrer” (Daredevils of Sassoun), Samvel Babayan and the Act of Nork), and you might remember how those courts acted, which courts were considered the courts supported by the former regime, how attorneys were removed from the courtroom, the tense atmosphere in which the trials were always held, etc. A shift of power took place. If we’re talking about the judges of the former regime, those judges would continue with those trials in the same way, but suddenly, those same judges changed preventive measures, released people, etc. In other words, in this case, the courts felt that the authorities have changed and adapted to the new government. This is our judiciary, which was established in 1995.
From this perspective, it seems as though Nikol Pashinyan had no problems, but he factually threatened courts twice — once when Azaryan changed the preventive measure for Kocharyan and again when Grigoryan changed the preventive measure for Kocharyan.
This means there are still judges who are either trying to act independently or there hasn’t been any direct pressure on them yet, and this has frustrated Nikol Pashinyan. Basically, this is not about judicial and legal reforms, but about punishing disobedient judges.
How was it that the Prosecutor General who used to defend the same allegations in courts and had instituted a case against Nikol Pashinyan suddenly expresses the will of the people?
168.am: So, the Prime Minister felt the need to take such a drastic step after the preventive measure for Robert Kocharyan was changed?
Avetik Ishkhanyan: Yes, I’m sure this was the problem.
168.am: Many viewed the Prime Minister’s call and the events that followed as overthrow of constitutional order. How would you assess all this?
Avetik Ishkhanyan: People don’t judge winners, and since the entire judicial and legal system is under the control of one person in power, we can’t talk about the consequences.
168.am: In his speech today, Nikol Pashinyan also talked about Artsakh and said that as he had said during the election campaign preceding last year’s parliamentary elections, analyzing all this, he sees a far-reaching goal to provoke a conspiratorial war, even hand over some territories and place the responsibility for what happened on the Government of Armenia. If he declared it last year, why haven’t actions been taken until now?
Avetik Ishkhanyan: This was a very dangerous and groundless statement by Pashinyan because only in a nightmare can one imagine that the leadership of Artsakh can hand over certain territories in a certain way. I think what frustrated Pashinyan was the fact that the leadership of Artsakh is acting independently and isn’t obeying him. This was a statement by a person who is frustrated and, I repeat, it is very dangerous.
Zaruhi Dilanyan
