President Has Not Signed Law Increasing Monetary Compensation for Defamation and Insult and Has Applied to the Constitutional Court

The Public Relations Department of the Office of the President of the Republic of Armenia has issued a statement regarding the law on "Amendments to the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia."

"The law entitled 'On Amendments to the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia', adopted by the National Assembly, was received by the Office of the President on March 26, 2021. The law aims to significantly increase the monetary compensation amounts for defamation and insult. Importantly, the amendment is also applicable to mass media outlets.

The President has discussed the law with leaders of several journalistic organizations, considering their observations and concerns regarding legislative initiatives related to media activities being discussed and adopted without taking into account the opinions and recommendations of the professional community. Concerns expressed by international human rights organizations were also considered.

The President highly values freedom of speech and expression and is concerned that, on one hand, the proposed amendments do not address any systemic issues in the field, while on the other hand, the proposed regulations could cause significant harm to freedom of speech and expression, severely limiting journalists' freedom and the media's ability to objectively criticize and report on events and phenomena, including the activities of officials and political actors.

In a democratic society, the freedom of expression of mass media that acts as a 'public monitor,' along with opinions on issues of public interest, is considered a more protected category. The freedom of expression in the Republic of Armenia is guaranteed by Article 42 of the Constitution. Each individual's right to freely express their opinion is also enshrined in various international documents.

Defamation and insult are undoubtedly unacceptable, intolerable, and condemnable. At the same time, an analysis of legal sources allows us to conclude that any restriction on freedom of expression in a democratic society (including the legally set compensation amounts) must be justified and proportionate; compensation should align with the country's socio-economic context, and its application should not negatively affect freedom of speech and the discussion of public issues—creating an undue financial burden on the respondent that could even have a decisive impact on their activities.

The law appears to be problematic from a constitutional perspective. Considering the above, the President has not signed the law adopted by the National Assembly and has applied to the Constitutional Court to determine the law's compliance with the Constitution,” the statement from the Office of the President reads.