The agitation campaign in Armenia ahead of the referendum on constitutional reforms on December 6th is being held in the context of the usual difference between the resources of the authorities and the opposition. The point is, for example, in the use of so-called administrative resources by the authorities. The board of the campaign staff of the ruling Republican Party of Armenia is a bright example of this.
Even though the Law on Referendums forbids the participation of officials in an agitation campaign, the RPA’s staff is headed by Premier Hovik Abrahamyan. Four of six deputies are top officials – the head of the Apparatus of Employees of the President, Vigen Sargsyan, the head of the Control Service under the President, Hovik Hovsepyan, the deputy chairman of the Control Chamber, Levon Yolyan, and the Minister for Territorial Management and Emergency Situations, Armen Yeritsyan.
Explanations by representatives of the RPA, that the officials are involved in campaigning in their spare time rather than at work, seem ridiculous. Speaker Galust Sahakyan called the administrative resource a political capital of the RPA, i.e. he didn’t deny accusations by the opposition of authority abuse.
Another important circumstance which concerns the opposition is the situation with the electoral rolls, where a lot of repeating names have been found. The minimal difference between the number of voters and the overall number of the country’s residents causes bewilderment. According to a detailed analysis by Helsinki Citizens' Assembly's Vanadzor office, despite the fact that the population is falling, a growth in the number of voters is occurring. The report by the human rights organization states that, according to the National Statistics Service, the number of Armenian residents in 1991 was 3.5 million people, 58% of whom had voting rights. In 2013 the population of the country was 3 million people, while the number of voters was 83% of the total number of residents. It means that over the past 22 years the country’s population reduced by half a million, and the number of voters grew by the same figure.
Meanwhile, according to the average annual index of population age distribution of the NSS, 25-30% of the population are people under 18. In 2005 the total number of voters in Vanadzor was 101,205 people, while according to the NSS, 105,700 people were permanent residents of the city in 2005, i.e. 96% of the population had voting rights. It seems that the trend of the incredible growth of voters is a result of artificial interference or manipulation with figures.
One more factor that demonstrates abuse of authority was the draft of the Law on Amendments to the Electoral Code and the Law on Identification Cards, which was adopted by the parliament on October 29th. The draft legalizes the right to participate in elections by owners of identification cards (IC). The initiator of the project on the amendments is the parliamentary faction of the ruling RPA. The law enables citizens with ICs to participate in the referendum on December 6th.
Today there are three types of documents which prove identity in Armenia – a common passport, a biometrical passport and an IC, which is used instead of biometric cards and is a new internal passport. Even though the reforms of recent years allow citizens get biometric passports and ICs, the election system recognized the only document proving identity – a common passport. Today the country has 183,391 owners of ICs.
The whole procedure of presenting, discussing, and adopting the draft took place in an accelerated mode. It is planned to adopt the document in the second reading on November 10th.
The draft which eliminates the possibility of making any voting mark on ICs caused indignation from the opposition, but none of the suggestions put forward by the opposition was adopted by the parliamentary majority. Members of the RPA faction rejected a similar draft which was presented by Tigran Urikhanyan, an MP from Prosperous Armenia. Urikhanyan’s project required that after voting an electronic mark should be made on an IC. The parliamentary majority also rejected a suggestion by Country of Law on issuing common passports to owners of ICs by the state. Therefore, the parliament adopted in an accelerated mode a draft which required that no marks should be made on plastic ICs, and members of electoral commissions must not check a stamp on cards, unlike checking stamps on passports. Moreover, there is no information of residential registration on an IC.
This makes the opposition accuse the authorities of creating a new instrument for falsifications, which is aimed at providing repeating voting. However, even though the authorities control all TV companies, the opposition doesn’t believe that the results of the referendum are predetermined and the situation is hopeless. Representatives of the 'No! Front' think that meetings with voters all over the country could be an element of the struggle against possible predeterminacy. Another important mechanism of the struggle against falsification is mobilization of all human resources which the opposition has to prevent repeated voting. The third factor is holding campaigns against constitutional changes on the internet. According to the head of the campaign staff of the 'No! Front', Levon Zurabyan, meetings in the regions demonstrate not only a negative attitude on the part of the majority of citizens to the constitutional changes to reproduce the current authorities, but also high awareness of citizens about many processes through internet resources.
Representatives of the opposition are sure that an atmosphere of mistrust in the constitutional reforms which are bew initiated by the authorities prevails in the country, and it should be used for the referendum to fail. The opposition intends to consolidate all political and social forces and ordinary citizens who stand against constitutional reforms.
