Parliament tightens law on rallies and demonstrations

by Armen Hakobyan

Published: Saturday March 22, 2008

Protestors taking part in a silent, unsanctioned demonstration in Yerevan on March 21, a day after the expiration of the state of emergency. Security forces in riot gear prevented a crowd from forming. Armen Hakobyan / Armenian Reporter.

Armen Martirossian. Armen Hakobyan / Armenian Reporter

Yerevan - The 20-day state of emergency declared by President Robert Kocharian on March 1 expired on schedule without incident. A special session of parliament was convened on March 17 to consider amendments to the law "On Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies, and Demonstrations." The amendments, which will make it more difficult for opponents of the government to hold lawful mass rallies in the near future, were adopted 90-6 and signed into law the next day by Mr. Kocharian.

Armenia's law on rallies was previously very liberal: organizers simply had to provide the authorities with three days advance notice of their intention to hold a rally. Under Article 9 of the law, responsible authorities could restrict the organization and holding of public gatherings if they had information that "these rallies call for the violent overthrow of the constitutional order of the country, the instigation of national, racial or religious hatred, violence, or calls for war."

Under the amended law, notification is not sufficient; organizers of public gatherings or events have to apply for permission to the City of Yerevan five days in advance of their event. The city then has to inform the police or the National Security Service, which must give or withhold their consent within 72 hours. Under the old law, the authorities had until noon the following day to raise objections.

Permission can now be withheld if, "according to reliable sources, these gatherings call for the violent overthrow of the constitutional order of the country, the instigation of national, racial or religious hatred, violence or calls for war or can cause mass disorder or criminal activity, threaten state security, social order, public health or the distortion of morality, and the violation of the rights and freedoms of others."

Armen Martirossian, a member of parliament and part of the Heritage Party bloc, voted against the amendments to the law. (Mr. Martirossian was injured on March 1 when he tried to protect a police officer who was being attacked by rioters in front of Yerevan's City Hall.)

"From now on it is possible to call it the law ‘On Not Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations,'" Mr. Martirossian said. "These new amendments in reality limit people's constitutional rights. This new law gives the representatives of the authorities, the police and the National Security Service, the ability to prohibit events that they don't want. In other words, everything was done so that our citizens cannot hold rallies, meetings, or processions. Even if we put aside the technical side of the law, in reality this process was not a legislative demand, but a political one. In other words, this was a reaction to the situation on the ground."

Mr. Martirossian, speaking to the Armenian Reporter, added, "What is important here? This is going to deepen the chasm between the people and the authorities. It will add to the suspicion, to the deteriorated mood that exists in society. Instead, the parliament, the country's legislative body, could have taken the first steps toward dialogue; it could have rejected the amendments or could have voted against them to show that it is interested in dialogue. The parliament didn't take that route; it did the exact opposite. It was successful in showing its muscle to society."

One of the authors of the amendment, member of parliament Rafik Petrosyan, of the Republican Party bloc, held an opposing view. "The proposed amendments to the law laid the groundwork for us to once again re-examine our legislation, to clarify what was wrong with the laws in the first place that allowed the development of this situation. That examination showed us that international rights and articles enshrined in our own constitution were not expressed in that law on conducting meetings, assemblies, rallies, and demonstrations."

The legislator cited Articles 11 and 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which makes provisions for certain limitations in the freedom of assembly; these are reflected in Article 43 of Armenia's Constitution. According to Article 43, the freedom to hold rallies and demonstrations can be limited by law where it "is necessary for the national security of a democratic society, for the protection of social order, to stop criminal activity, protect public health and morality, for the protection of rights and freedoms of others," said Mr. Petrosyan.

Mr. Petrosyan said that they also took into consideration the experience of and legislation in EU countries such as Germany, Italy, Denmark, and the Baltic countries, whose clauses are in sync with the amendments passed in Armenia's legislature on March 17. "The legislation in those countries is written almost exactly like the new amendments."

Mr. Petrosyan also made the following point: "My opponents are mistaken on one point. They think that [I believe] the passing of this law will solve all the problems. I stress, that to come out of this situation, political steps are required to establish civil accord and solidarity. To achieve that, aside from the law, we must seek resolutions to economic and social issues, ensure the establishment of justice in the country, the lack of which everyone is talking about. Also, improvements in the judiciary are necessary, which is in bad shape today."