Iravunk: The Real Goal and Outcome of Transitional Justice is the Redistribution of Property

Any revolutionary process, regardless of its declared goals and even methods of implementation, ultimately implies changes in political, economic, and sometimes administrative systems. Furthermore, such changes must be systematic and profound in nature. This is precisely what gives rise to the concept of revolution itself: everything occurs through non-evolutionary means.

Regardless of declared objectives and rhetoric, the history and practice of all revolutions in the world shows that, ultimately, the issue of property redistribution is also placed at the core by both the initiators and the godfathers of the revolution. We can examine the revolutions of different eras, including the bloody, colored, and velvet regime changes of the last 30 years, and we will see that these processes have inevitably led to property redistribution sooner or later.

Of course, a classic example of systemic change is the Bolshevik Revolution of the early 20th century, during which all property was nationalized. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the opposite process essentially took place: a process was initiated that contradicted the logics of the socialist revolution, as public property was privatized using criminal methods characteristic of the 1990s, thus forming criminal-oligarchic systems.

Subsequently, revolutions in Georgia, Ukraine, and even Kyrgyzstan resulted in property redistribution in one way or another. Former property owners were either forced to relinquish their assets or conditions were created for portions of the property to be transferred to individuals closely linked with the new authorities, often including representatives of the new government.

This historical excursion suggests that even the most velvet revolutionary processes inevitably lead to a point where the process of property reconfiguration begins at some stage.

During and after the 2018 velvet revolution in Armenia, the topic of property redistribution has been addressed numerous times. It has been repeatedly stated that not only will there be no vendettas against prominent representatives of the previous government and the criminal-oligarchic system, but there will also be no redistribution of capital. Of course, it was always emphasized that the plundered assets should be returned nonetheless. This already implies that the declared process, after all, involves capital redistribution.

As we have seen over the past year, the beginning of this process has already been set in Armenia. Prominent representatives of the former criminal-oligarchic system have been faced with the issue of sharing their property, with names being repeatedly mentioned from various podiums and in opposition media. Some of them seem to have resolved their issues, but it remains unclear what price the former thieves and oligarchs have paid to legalize their assets. It is also unclear based on what principles and proportions they have made their payments, and most importantly, where these payments have gone.

Details in today’s issue of the newspaper.