Provide a legal assessment of Vahram Grigoryan's statements on serious crimes or call him to criminal responsibility for perjury. Arsen Babayan

Yesterday, as you may recall, I published 20 questions that, in my opinion, should be asked of the candidate for the Constitutional Court Justice, Vahram Grigoryan, if we had a strong parliament. The genre's rules suggest that after the questions, it is necessary for the deputy to make a statement regarding those questions. Thus, I present a speech that should again be voiced by a deputy in a strong parliament. This was written by the former deputy chief of the staff of the National Assembly, Arsen Babayan, on his Facebook page.

“Mr. Grigoryan, in an interview given to iLur.am on February 17, 2018, you expressed the opinion that (I quote) ‘In fact, the Republican Party of Armenia, with the assistance of its satellites, restricted the citizens' constitutional right to elect the 4th president of the Republic, endowing itself, since it is obvious from the content of Article 139 of the procedural constitutional law of the National Assembly that even without reaching a consensus on the election of the president of the republic, the Republican Party has sufficient votes to “elect” the 4th president of the republic without the assistance of any other political forces.’ In other words, this is a planned, step-by-step implementation of extreme unconstitutional activity, the aim of which has been the direct appropriation of the citizens' right to elect the 4th president of the republic, which is actually part of the people's power. This unconstitutional activity has a specific name: appropriation of power, which is the only crime provided for by the Constitution. And it is described in the unalterable article of the Constitution, Article 2, part 3. This concerns the unconstitutional and criminal intentions of the Republican Party, its leader, and other decision-makers.

And if Armenia ever has even a relatively independent judicial system, the activities of the Republican Party must be banned, and the participants in this adventure, if it reaches its logical conclusion, should bear criminal responsibility for the appropriation of power. Moreover, this crime should not have a statute of limitations, considering its public danger and the importance allocated to it by the unalterable article of the Constitution (end of quote).”

Mr. Grigoryan, does this mean that the 4th president of the republic should be dismissed or that the National Assembly's decision regarding his election should be recognized as unconstitutional and void by the Constitutional Court? Should the guilty parties, including the president who nominated you, be subject to criminal responsibility? Your extreme declarations in this case are legal, rather than political, and are partly of a criminal legal nature, and you openly and clearly assert that the body that nominated you is unconstitutional and there is a need to conduct direct elections for the president of the republic, punishing the guilty and banning the activities of the Republican Party.

If you do not retract your purely legal assessments, which would serve as a basis for another qualification, how will you fulfill this commitment as a candidate for the Constitutional Court nominated by a body elected with gross violations of the Constitution? And what if it is proven in accordance with the procedures established by the Constitution and the law that you were wrong? Are you ready to resign and face criminal responsibility for perjury?

In general, will this be your principled approach as a Constitutional Court justice with regard to declaring the presidential election invalid and banning the Republican Party, or will you change it? Do you have constraints regarding being consistent, or could your legal assessments simply be naked statements that you could easily refuse without even a pang of conscience?

Why do you think your statement has remained unanswered by the law enforcement system? Where is our NSS, which has the function of safeguarding the constitutional order? Why doesn’t the majority of the ruling party turn to the Constitutional Court regarding the presidential issue? Why hasn’t your close friend, the head of the Special Investigative Service, launched a criminal case yet? Why hasn’t the Government led by your close friend, the Prime Minister, or the National Assembly coordinated by your friend the Speaker of the National Assembly yet approached the Constitutional Court to address the issue of banning the Republican Party for such a blatant unconstitutional act?

Somewhat making use of your lexicon, is indifference to such encroachments on the constitutional order extreme cynicism and even a crime when those responsible abuse their official powers based on personal or group interests by failing to take the necessary steps to remove the president from office, to organize new elections in accordance with the 2005 amendments to the Constitution, to reveal and punish the guilty parties for those illegal and criminal acts? Is it now convenient to keep the president manageable, imposing your whims on him, including your nomination? Is it permissible to turn a blind eye to these extreme illegal acts for cheap political dividends and hyper-centralization of power, and with fanatic persistence place someone in the Constitutional Court through the president who says there is no elected president, and then being at least 88 votes directed to the Constitutional Court?

It is a shame; step back from this action and be a little consistent. Is this how you intend to operate in the Constitutional Court, having already discredited the president with your statements, and with your selection, will you discredit the prime minister and the parliamentary majority instead of consistently pursuing the solution to the serious legal issues you raised?

If you also retract your claims, I will state publicly—before the prime minister, my colleagues, and especially before all law enforcement agencies—either provide a legal assessment of the statements of Constitutional Court justice candidate Vahram Grigoryan regarding serious or especially serious crimes, or call him to criminal responsibility for perjury, and for your possible and predictable inaction, you will also bear full responsibility,” wrote Arsen Babayan.