MP Statements Considered Official Announcements, Rebuttals Prohibited: 'Factinfo'

All members of the National Assembly are considered public officials, thus actions related to ensuring the legal regime of martial law and state security, including speeches and publications that criticize or contradict these actions, are prohibited. This was stated by the Armenian police in response to a written inquiry from 'Factinfo'.

It should be noted that martial law was declared in Armenia and Artsakh on September 27, and on October 8, the government decided to tighten certain measures, prohibiting criticism in the decision on declaring martial law in the Republic of Armenia.

The government’s decision states: 'The publication of reports that criticize, contradict, undermine the effectiveness, or otherwise discredit the actions carried out by state and local self-governing bodies and public officials concerning the legal regime of martial law and the provision of state security (including speeches, publications) is prohibited.'

Administrative and criminal measures are provided for violations of these rules, with oversight placed under the jurisdiction of the Armenian police. On October 13, 'Factinfo' sent a written inquiry to the Armenian police to clarify whether there are established criteria for what constitutes 'actions related to ensuring the legal regime of martial law and state security', as well as what is considered criticism, reports that undermine effectiveness, or otherwise discrediting publications.

In response to the inquiry, the Armenian police stated that we can refer to Article 76 of the Constitution of Armenia, the legal framework provided in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Law on the Legal Regime of Martial Law, and the provisions established by the Armenian Government’s decision No. 1586-N dated September 27, 2020. Regarding the criteria for the terms 'criticism', 'reports that undermine effectiveness or otherwise discredit', or 'publications', the police stated: 'We find that when interpreting their essence, the starting point should be the forms of legal interpretation (logical, purposeful, lateral, systemic) by the legal practitioner.'