Human Rights Defender Discusses Visit to Syunik and Current Situation

Arman Tatoyan, the Human Rights Defender of Armenia, wrote on his Facebook page: "During a two-day visit to the Syunik region of Armenia, we visited the border villages of Aravus, Khoznavar, Nerkin Khndzoresk, and several other border settlements with the team of the Human Rights Defender’s Office. We held discussions with the mayor of Goris, the leaders of the Tegh community and its administrative districts, the staff of the municipal administrations, as well as residents of the villages. The discussions with personnel from the Armenian armed forces, who are engaged in heroic service, were particularly important.

Below are some conclusions based on the results of the visit:

1. The shortcomings in the work and coordination of state administrative bodies have not only left the issues concerning the rights of residents in border settlements unresolved but could also exacerbate these issues due to new challenges related to border demarcations and delineations. This primarily endangers the lives, physical and mental integrity, and property rights of the residents of the border settlements. State administrative bodies, each in their capacity, are obliged to give special attention and be proactive regarding the issues raised by the residents of border settlements concerning state borders; this is one of the exceptional priorities of these days.
2. I again assert that the issues of border demarcations or delineations cannot be resolved using applications of private organizations such as Google or by GPS systems. This issue requires professional approaches, detailed on-site work, proper legal frameworks, and so on. Observations from the Human Rights Defender confirm that, for example, in several border settlements in the Syunik region, the application of such approaches has seriously endangered the life, physical and mental integrity, and other vital rights of border residents, and is problematic from the perspective of the security of the state borders of Armenia. Moreover, an uncertain situation has arisen for the border residents themselves. If a mechanical reference is taken from Google Maps or GPS systems, how can it be explained that, for example, a direct contradiction arises between the land use maps of these settlements from different years related to the village of Aravus? Consequently, people are deprived of the opportunity to use vital agricultural lands that are considered private property (for example, as orchards, arable land, or pastures), and the community is likewise deprived of the opportunity for community properties. How can it be that in 1991, these lands were allocated to people with property rights, and then, in 2004, new cadastral certificates confirming state registration of property rights on those lands were provided? In the case of Aravus, according to the head of the administrative district, this relates to 9 hectares of private property and nearly 34 hectares of land considered community property. In the whole enlarged community of Tegh, according to what the community leader informed the Human Rights Defender’s office, it is approximately calculated that there are more than 2000 hectares of land that are only private property. The issue is also related to the physical safety of people and their ability to cover their vital needs (Khoznavar, Khndzakh, Nerkin Khndzoresk, Aravus, etc.).
3. Comprehensive work is needed to correlate and study maps from different years and also to ascertain whether the versions of maps referenced by Azerbaijan are indisputable. It is also necessary to understand why the Azerbaijani side, concerning at least those places in the Syunik region where the Human Rights Defender has conducted investigative work, unequivocally relies on the Google mapping applications or GPS systems.
4. Regarding the issues of border demarcations and delineations, direct communication between state administrative bodies (non-community) and residents of the border villages is lacking. For this reason, unjustified burdens arise for the personnel of the Armenian armed forces, who, together with the officers of the National Security Service border troops, carry out selfless service. Community bodies are also disproportionately burdened. All this creates ongoing uncertainty primarily among the border residents. State administrative bodies must provide proper information to the public, and especially to residents of border settlements, regarding issues that concern them. This is a guaranteed right of citizens, and ensuring this is a direct obligation of the state. Moreover, it is not mandatory for all work to be done publicly, especially since we are dealing with sensitive issues. This concerns the protection of our state borders, the physical safety and security of our people, and each individual.
5. All results from this visit will be summarized and letters will be sent to state administrative bodies. Necessary inquiries will be made, and clarifications will be requested.