What Principles Are Discussed When a Person's Only Sanctity Is Their Mandate? Iveta Tonoyan on Sergey Bagratyan

A significant discrepancy in positions is articulated by a person who, until the very last session of the Prosperous Armenia Party's (BHK) political council, expressed his unconditional support and agreement with all the decisions made. This was stated by Iveta Tonoyan, a member of the National Assembly from the BHK, on her Facebook page.

In her post, she specifically mentions: "When the obsession with holding onto a mandate surpasses all masculine and moral values. I was genuinely shocked and couldn't hide my surprise when I read the Facebook post of my former colleague, Sergey Bagratyan. For a moment, it seemed that his thoughts handed in black and white were a result of temporary memory loss; then I realized that the efforts to hold onto that coveted mandate at any cost were what inspired him to compose that text. I truly feel ashamed…

A person is talking about significant differences in positions, who, until the very last session of the BHK political council, offered his unconditional support and agreement with all the decisions made. A person speaks about the eternal existence of the state and the necessity of strengthening Armenian statehood, who himself is under investigation by criminal cases for causing millions in damages to the state. Moreover, the BHK president, Gagik Tsarukyan, has repeatedly urged Bagratyan to compensate for these damages, offering both his and our entire team's assistance in this matter.

It is probably about these contradictions that Mr. Bagratyan speaks when he opposed restoring the damages caused to the state, while we insisted on the opposite. Nevertheless, I truly regret that just to maintain a parliamentary mandate, a person can trample over their morals, their man's word, their principles. Yet what principles are we discussing when a person's only sanctity is the mandate…"