Adoption of this Article Represents a Misguided Approach to Combatting Issues, Says Armenian Human Rights Defender

I have repeatedly warned that adopting such an article (137.1) is a misguided approach to fighting issues, which will lead to new problems. This was stated by Armenian Human Rights Defender Arman Tatoyan on his Facebook page.

“The article on serious insult in the Criminal Code and its application are extremely concerning, although insulting or offending someone is unacceptable in any case. I have repeatedly warned that such an article (137.1) should not be adopted, as it represents a misguided approach which will lead to new problems. The official representative of the government and the lawmakers supporting the article were unable to explain in the National Assembly what the provisions of the article meant.

Now it has turned into an article that provides unacceptable protection to officials and politicians from citizens, compounded by aggravating criminal liability. This article of the Criminal Code is extremely dangerous for the right to personal freedom. In particular, although no part of the article provides for imprisonment as a punishment, and thus a person cannot be detained (as a preventive measure), cases are not rare where, for example, people are arrested.

There is even a case where a journalist can interview a citizen, and then without knowing on what basis the law enforcement agencies go and arrest that citizen who provided the interview. Journalists have expressed concerns to the Human Rights Defender that there are already cases where citizens are hesitant to give interviews because they are not confident that they will not be subjected to criminal prosecution or arrest. Furthermore, neither citizens nor journalists know what criteria law enforcement agencies apply. Law enforcement agencies themselves do not have a clear understanding.

Journalists have also noted that in this situation they feel under an artificial moral burden, feeling restrained in their professional work. This means that this article poses a threat to freedom of speech and hinders journalists' work. I confidently say that the 'hand that holds this article' has also fallen into the trap of law enforcement officials. Those who say otherwise are either speaking purely for political reasons or are involved in the adoption of the article and are biased.

But how could everything be left to practice? After all, it would have been simply impossible to apply this article to all cases of 'insult or indecent insult'; first, there aren’t enough resources, and second, the article cannot combat insults and offenses flowing from abroad and fake accounts.

There would have been a discriminatory or selective application of the Criminal Code, and it is absolutely unclear what criteria are used to determine the 'targets'. Even when applied, violations of citizens' rights are recorded. It’s like adopting an article criminalizing murder, but not applying it in all murder cases, due to the lack of human and technical resources; and those who commit crimes from abroad or through masked identities remain unpunished altogether.

Not to mention that this article (137.1) has been adopted with gross procedural errors in the Criminal Code, ignoring professional observations. I applied to the Constitutional Court in October, simultaneously requesting a suspension of the article's operation. Unfortunately, the High Court did not suspend it. Now we are gathering additional grounds to apply again to suspend it. We are talking about criminal prosecutions and the right to personal freedom, freedom of speech, and the professional work of journalists; suspension is the only alternative,” Tatoyan wrote.