|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||
|
August 24, 2005 National Citizens’ Initiative Starts Examining Violation of Property Rights in Armenia Yerevan —The National Citizens’ Initiative (NCI) today convened the first of its roundtable series on “Human Rights, State and Communal Necessities.” The meeting brought together policy makers, lawyers, jurists, analysts, experts, media representatives, and some former residents of Yerevan’s Kentron district whose ownership rights have been breached while implementing Yerevan’s construction investment plan. NCI coordinator Hovsep Khurshudian welcomed the audience with opening remarks and wished the participants fruitful work, while stressing this matter’s importance for the Armenian society and the state. “The institution of a market economy in Armenia is unimaginable without property rights. It is impossible to build democracy without human rights, including the recognition, respect, and defense of ownership privileges. Consequently, when the possessions of the citizen of the Republic of Armenia is being alienated, that must occur exclusively within the frameworks of honoring human rights, the laws of the Republic of Armenia, and international approaches and norms. Our task today is to examine the legality and grounds for the proprietorship alienation of hundreds of families previously living in downtown Yerevan. From that vantage point, by taking into account the fortune threatening Kond, the area near the wine factory and other neighborhoods, and the similar procedures that have gotten underway in different communities of Yerevan, in the city of Vanadzor and elsewhere, the alienation of the estates of former dwellers of Lalayants, Pushkin, Buzand, Aram, and other streets, therefore, is not the final serious test for us all,” Khurshudian said.
The opening remarks were followed by NCI’s 10-minute “no comment” video clip, which aims to apprise the public roundtable participants with the essence of the problem, from the infringements upon ownership rights to protests and massive operations toward protection of personal rights, all of which have been met with either the authorities’ silence and apathy, or insufficient answers. And in order to obtain explanations for the unanswered questions, representatives from the corresponding authoritative bodies were also invited to the event. The first roundtable on alienation of property started with a policy intervention by Armen Tadevosian, a specialist from the staff of Armenia’s ombudswoman. According to him, the human rights defender’s office is dealing with this matter for a long time now. In the department’s 2004 report, there is an expansive reference made to the violation of the rights of former residents of those areas in the Kentron community that have been declared construction zones. In the words of Tadevosian, Armenia’s ombudswoman has made attempts to get explanations from related structures. In the face of the authorities’ harsh resistance, however, these efforts were sometimes unproductive. Armen Tadevosian even recalled the time when the president of Armenia had appealed to the Constitutional Court, whereupon the defender of human rights was accused of intervening in the rule of law and meddling in the affairs of jurisprudence. Despite all these, the evaluation by the ombudswoman’s office is that what has taken place and that which is occurring now is “a blatant violation of our citizens’ ownership and other economic rights” and that “the City Hall is not taking into consideration the rights of the land user or the proprietor.” Tadevosian noted that “in the case when there is no adopted law on real estate that is included in the alienation belt of Yerevan’s construction projects, when the owners do not agree with alienation, then the government of the Republic of Armenia is not empowered to adopt such resolutions.” He also declared that the ombudswoman’s office has exhausted all measures toward the protection of human rights, and that it would come out with an extraordinary report that would call on the people to petition the MPs in their constituencies, and encourage them to join the National Assembly’s signature campaign. Perhaps in this way, it might be possible to make the Constitutional Court take up the matter. Vice-chair of the “Bureau for the Carrying out of Yerevan’s Construction Investment Plans” state organization Samvel Papikian and the specialist from the same office, Gagik Martirosian, pointed out that the alienation of people’s property in the name of state needs is taking place legitimately, and that it is based on the government’s resolution #950, adopted on October 5, 2001, which relates to “the confirmation of the order for the purchase, offering a purchase price, and usage of land and real estate located in Yerevan’s Northern Avenue and other alienation belts of the city of Yerevan,” and decision #909, reached on June 17, 2004, which relates to “allocating unauctioned land for the purpose of implementing construction investment plans in the areas acquired for state necessities, in order to engage in urban development projects in the main avenue of the city of Yerevan.” According to Papikian and Martirosian, “the government itself has defined state needs and the zones for usage, and the agency is bringing those decisions to life.” As mentioned by the lawyers, jurists, and legal advocates participating in the roundtable, the purchase and acquisition of land and real estate in this territory were accompanied by severe violations. First, Article 8 of the Republic of Armenia’s Constitution stipulates that “the right to property is recognized and protected in the Republic of Armenia,” and then, in accordance with Article 28, “the owner may be deprived of private property only by a court in cases prescribed by law. Private property may be alienated for the needs of society and the state only under exceptional circumstances, with due process of law, and with prior equivalent compensation.” The state has not verified in any way as to how allowing private companies the opportunity to make investment proposals and to gain profits from newly-built structures is linked with state necessity. What are “state needs?” How exceptional are the property alienation cases? Why is the person being compelled to “vacate his own home?” Why is he being obliged to “conform” to the contract’s content and sum of the compensation, etc.? None of these is defined. Both the lawyers and residents agree that the compensation amount does not correspond to the value of the property. Accordingly, it cannot satisfy the proprietor, especially when the allocated compensation cannot cover the cost of an apartment in similar or even worse condition in the same area. This procedure also conflicts with Section 1 of the 1 st Protocol of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Basic Freedoms, which requires consideration of the right of property.
The next two policy interventions referred to the legal defense of ownership rights. Member of Armenia’s Barristers’ Union Arthur Grigorian talked about “the upholding of the standards for fair trial ‘in the cases of alienating the property of citizens for state needs.’” The lawyer who has taken part in numerous hearings in that respect maintained that the legal breaches were blatant and many. In his turn, director of the legal firm “Right,” Vahe Grigorian, pointed out many violations of the right for legal protection, which he and his clients had confronted during the court defense of property rights. “The affixation of property alienation under exceptional cases in the Constitution perhaps is not enough to dispossess the person from that right. The citizen’s conformity is very important,” Grigorian noted. The two men also underscored that when it comes to protecting transgressed rights, the courts’ dependency on Armenia’s executive authority has become a very serious issue. Numerous residents have already exhausted the internal avenues of court defense, and a number of cases now have been forwarded to the European Court of Human Rights. They further added that at the court, the representatives of the authorities are not able to point to a state need that validates the people’s deprivation of their belongings en masse. And from the very beginning, there was not even a construction plan or any architectural document prior to this procedure. Vice-chair of the “Bureau for the Carrying out of Yerevan’s Construction Investment Plans” state organization Samvel Papikian and the specialist from the same office Gagik Martirosian mentioned that there was a blueprint. During the debates, it became apparent that one of the painful issues in this process was tied to the understanding of the precept of “with due process of law” that the society and legal advocates retain on the one hand, and the state maintains on the other. Since they are deprived of the opportunity to appeal to the Constitutional Court for the violation of their constitutional rights, Armenia’s citizens are also dispossessed of the chance to dispute the government’s resolutions in court. Consequently, the resolution of this matter meets an impasse, and remains hanging on either the National Assembly, the President, or the political will and wishes of the government itself. For now, however, this is lacking.
NCI coordinator Hovsep Khurshudian stated that extensive infringement upon property rights have made the preparation of the summary report an urgent matter. “In the upcoming months, the NCI will come up with a tri-lingual review, which will be presented for public attention and discussion during one of the following roundtables,” Khurshudian furthermore informed. The remainder of the session was devoted to exchanges of views and policy recommendations among the public figures and policy specialists in attendance. Noteworthy were interventions by MP Vardan Mkrtchian; Armenian Center for National and International Studies (ACNIS) research coordinator Stiopa Safarian; Ruzan Khachatrian of the People’s Party; Edgar Hakobian of the “Heritage” Party; NCI legal advisor Lusine Shahmuradian; “Institute of Culture and National Values” NGO chairwoman Armine Gasparian; a number of specialists from the Armenian ombudswoman’s staff; head of the “Victims of State Needs” civil initiative Vachakan Hakobian and a group of former residents of the Buzand, Lalayants, Aram, and Pushkin streets who are members; and many others. The National Citizens’ Initiative is a public non-profit association founded in December 2001 by Raffi K. Hovannisian, his colleagues, and fellow citizens with the purpose of realizing the rule of law and overall improvements in the state of the state, society, and public institutions.
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
