The Political System in Armenia

By Diana Ter  Stepanyan

	Under the circumstances of the absence of statehood throughout several centuries the Armenian nation adopted mechanisms and institutes of a protective way of living and specific national development. Particularly, the “family” was the “core” of social reproduction and the most solid value of national totality, the church was a center of supra-state governance, and the culture was a code of inheritance and national myths.  Being located in a zone of Eurasian contacts, in the cultural sense Armenians were oriented towards the European Christian environment. As opposed to this, the Armenian territory was always located in the zones of Oriental Empires – Arabic, Turkish, Persian, Russian, i.e., outside of the zones where democratic theory and practice were developed and implemented. Though in contrast with  this it should be reiterated that in the traditional Armenian system of governance there was a practice of forming a governing body through elections, e.g., the elections of the Catholicos. If we take into account that the Armenian Apostolic Church has also performed some non-spiritual, that is to say national government functions, it is possible to say that the outlook and the living philosophy of the Armenian nation incorporated some democratic components. 

The short two-year biography of the First Armenian Republic (1918-1920) does not allow us to make full judgements about the democratic governance, since at that time survival tactics were adopted. Although the First Republic was Parliamentarian, this system did not work as a state governance structure in both time and conceptual terms. The primary objective of the new state was the resistance to the constant changes of the borders and periodic humanitarian disasters.

	The case of the Second Republic (1920-1990) was essentially different. During the Soviet period in the framework of the Constitution a legislative body existed – the Supreme Soviet. However it was of a symbolic nature. The elections to this body were conducted according to a preliminarily established scenario. Moreover, this scenario was preserved throughout the decades. In reality, the Armenian nation did not have an exemplary experience of forming government though elections.

After the declaration of independence, in the beginning of the 1990-s in Armenia as well as in all other parts of the former Soviet Union, mass public movements and the political structures first of all replacement the centralized authoritarian model with a democratic, representational. The implantation of new ideas took place as a result of devaluation of the communist ideology on the one hand, and the struggle to acquire the experiences  of  Western free markets and democracies with all their social, economic and security aspects, on the other.

 The experience in reality has proven that democracy building is not a sequence of some steps and it does not have a direct impact, automatic self-evolution, as it was presentingduring the first years after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The existence of traditional perceptions, the dominant experience and practices of the autocratic system, as well as the absence of democratic-civic resources in the paradigm of national values are all proportionally opposite to the declared  objectives of establishment of democracy. Simultaneous with the adoption of the new electoral systems, new technologies of electoral fraud were being elaborated..

The  first parliamentary elections of independent Armenia took place in 1995 as formally the 1990 elections of the Supreme Council were under the jurisdiction of the Soviet government.  Regardless of the different evaluations, those elections were unique for Armenia: first, as a result of a referendum the Constitution was adopted, and second, a new legislative entity was formed – the National Assembly .           
(According to the Constitution, the National Assembly is a one-chamber parliament and has 131 elected deputies. The laws are adopted by majority vote of the deputies present at the sessions (Chapter 4). The parliament of  1995 was elected for the transition period and had  190 members (150 majority and 40 proportional votes). 

A draft resolution expressing a  vote of no confidence towards the government may be proposed by not less than one third of the total number of deputies and be adopted by the majority of the deputies present. The National Assembly may declare war, shall ratify or revoke the international treaties signed by the President of the Republic after the recommendations of the President. The President of the Republic may dissolve the National Assembly and designate extraordinary elections. The Parliament can initiate President impeachment procedure.

The parliamentary elections in 1995 were significant for two important and, in the sense of their content, contradictory realities, Those elections occurred under the cloud of the banning of the principal opposition party, the Armenian Revolutionary  Federation (ARF) whose media facilities were also shut down, but on the other hand these were the first multiparty elections.  Though the elected National Assembly was characterized by party homogeneity and absence of strong opposition, it was unique for both its positive as well as negative practices.   

The analytical studies based on several sociological studies illustrate that none of the  parties attained complete public confidence. Instead, public apathy  and unimportance of the activities of the parties were predominant.   Given these data, it can be stated, that the process of filling the seats in the representative body of the country was a competition between the strong and weak elite, as opposed to being a result of the participation of wide layers of the society.

“The prospects of the newly elected governments in the post-Soviet states were to go toward Western living standards.  In reality, the upper level  arranged clannish  distribution of the property and used the power for their own prosperity. The non-existence of means for social pressure   (“interest group” lobbying and strikes, complaints  through mass media), and the absence of civil control mechanisms   (which favors the corrupted state) ensured permanent public tension and the likelihood of public outbursts or   revolutionary situation.

The adoption of the Constitution and the parliamentary elections enhanced the possibility for the rule of law, yet provided strong  levers  to the President.  The constitutional statements on separation of powers, principles of the citizens’ participation in governance, and democratic freedoms remained more as norms that politically were inapplicable. After the  Constitution came into force, the aim became to establish a centralized governing system. The powers vested to the President were used to centralize the power on the presidential and executive levels as opposed to separation of powers and balance control.

           The mass violations that took place during the 1995-1996 electoral processes made the role of the parliament inefficient  for society, discredited the presidential power, and weakened the trust in the   formation of the government through elections.  
The operations of the first parliament of independent Armenia illustrated that the ideological, party and social motivations  are still secondary in  parliamentary activities.  After the resignation of the first President the new majority followed his behavior as well as political everlasting  model, which now was headquartered differently. The government structure encouraged business, clannish, party-based and criminal  groups to be motivated in participation in the election processes.The interests in the distribution of property, privatization, the deputy immunity was promoted competition for access to the parliament.  All possible legal and illegal means were applied to guarantee the requisite number of votes.The executive government, using full capacities, was interfering in the election processes in order to establish a legislative body in accordance with their own power concept.    

The presidential elections that took place on September 22, 1996  were an imitation of the 1995 parliamentary elections. The amended electoral tools were used during the pre-election period, though during the final stage mass disorders took place and force was applied.   

It is worth speaking about a new political arena, although during1991-97 the same political organizations were in place in the arena. The difference of the parliamentary elections in May 1999 from the previous ones was the fact, that there were many more participants, who in a short period of time occupied new niches in the intra-political sphere.

Another characteristic feature of those elections was the large number of businessmen candidates. Many famous businessmen were introduced through both proportional and majority representation systems. They were not united into a political  organization to protect their financial-economic corporative interests; however, the businessmen did form the political targets of their ideology. The main leitmotiv was to enter the Parliament to protect business interests, which did not necessarily mean  personal interests, as for the financially sustainable layer of the population global development of economy was an insensitive. While socially characterizing those candidates, the phrase “district authority” is commonly used. Generally people with nicknames fall under this category.  In fact, the nicknames are mainly of economic origin, mostly related with having  a monopoly over a certain type of commodity in the market. Those individuals are generally businessmen and managers of large enterprises.  None among them has a strictly criminal biography. Consequently, they can be classified in the businessmen group, especially considering the reality that  a civilized market is yet to be formed in Armenia and the Armenian businessmen introduce themselves as “new Armenians”, carriers of the mixture of western businessmen and the subculture of “district laws”.     

           Having discussed the electoral processes in Armenia since independence, it is possible to outline their dynamics.