On 21 February, the Caucasus Research Resource Center – “Armenia” Foundation presented the results of the public opinion survey on corruption among RA households in 2019. The survey was initiated by Transparency International Anticorruption Center within the framework of the “Engaged Citizenry for Responsible Governance” project with support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

Although the Armenian CSOs Anti-Corruption Coalition attaches particular importance to conducting objective surveys that reveal public perceptions and opinions on corruption and its manifestations in Armenia, and publicizing their results; however the Coalition has certain reservations about data in some tables and charts included in the survey report and presented at the presentation, which are misleading and subsequently cause ungrounded speculation, some biased non-objective and unjustified conclusions based on them, as well as the spread of misinformation.

Taking into account the aforementioned, on 19 March of this year, the Governing Board of the Coalition issued a statement, which we present below:

The CSO Anti-Corruption Coalition of Armenia, being one of the key actors in the anti-corruption sector in Armenia and an active participant in anti-corruption reforms, places particular emphasis to conducting objective surveys that reveal public perceptions and opinions on corruption and its manifestations in Armenia, and publicizing their results, as well as their targeted use by government agencies, civil society and the private sector to improve public administration in in the development of anti-corruption policies and programs; and below we present the Coalition’s position on some parts of the survey.

First of all, it should be noted that the survey was mainly based on the methodology developed on the basis of professional standards. However, the data in some figures and tables included in the research report and presented at the presentation of the report are misleading; moreover, they have subsequently led to ungrounded speculations, and based on them some non-objective and unjustified conclusions have been made, and misinformation was spread.

One of the obvious examples justifying the above is the public discussion of the “Draft RA Law on Making Amendments and Addenda to the RA Law on Public Organizations” recently held in the National Assembly, as well as statements made by some CSOs at various platforms during press conferences that the public, according to the data of “Public Opinion Survey on Corruption in Armenia” well knows the CSOs and specifically those 5 CSOs[1] that are recognized by the public and which work transparently. Whereas, according to the same data of the same survey it can be stated the opposite: 94.3% of the 1500 respondents surveyed, i.e. 1415 people are not aware of any NGO with anti-corruption mission operating in Armenia. This shows that anti-corruption NGOs are recognized by only 5.7% of respondents, based on which so-called “beneficial” CSOs build their speeches at various public events. Specifically, it is about public awareness of non-governmental organizations involved in anti-corruption activity in Armenia, Figure 45 and the following it paragraphs and tables. Thus:

• First: it should be borne in mind that any data that is a small number in a quantitative survey is not presented in percentage terms but is presentedin the number/frequency of responses. Moreover, it is not presented graphically, followed by a thorough analysis of recognizability of this or that structure depending on the educational level of the respondents. Is there a need for a detailed analysis if it comes to an average of 5 people?
• Second: if we look at the recognizability of organizations with such a mission together and the responses presented in the following Figure 46 to assess their effectiveness, which shows that 40% of the 7% that “know” the  CSOs are unaware” of  and have not assessed the effectiveness, it becomes clear that only 51 people are aware of CSOs’ activities.

Thus, an objective question arises as to whether the quantitative research revealed the trends or the specifics?

            The next issue we would like to address is that the names of some CSOs are included in the questionnaire, despite the clear instruction that their names will not be read and all possible answers shall be accepted (it is clear that this was done to ease the coding). Unwilling to question the accuracy of the research, however, it is clear that in case of quantitative research, it is important at all stages to maintain the accuracy of the step and instruction to ensure a reliable final result. This raises the question of whether the list wasn’t a guide for the interviewers to document the structures, and whether the structures whose names were not included in the list, were not deprived of the opportunity to take their possible place from the very beginning.

At the same time, being confident that the above methodological problem is not intentional, we nevertheless wish to state that the name of the CSO Anti-Corruption Coalition of Armenia is misrepresented in both the questionnaire and the analysis, which may have had an impact on the identification of the structure.

In addition to aforesaid, we consider it appropriate to refer to Question 56 of the Questionnaire and the awareness of the Government’s anti-corruption actions in Section 6 of the Survey Report. In this case, it is not clear what criteria were taken into account when including the names of certain electronic platforms for anonymous corruption reporting in the questionnaire, because for example Bizprotect.am website operated by the Armenian Lawyers’ Association, is also an effective anonymous reporting platform.

Citizens and representatives business sector are reporting about corruption risks and incidents through BizProtec, and they are provided with free legal advice on tax, customs, procurement, labor and other legal matters.

According to data summarized for the period of since the launch of the reporting platform in July 2017 till December 2019, in the scope of the received 94 reports, 86 letters were sent to state and local self-government bodies, contacts with the whistleblowers and government agencies have been maintained; other necessary measures have been taken. Systematic solution to the above mentioned reports was given in 15 cases; the reports were satisfied in 13 cases, official clarification or consultation was provided in 22 cases. It should be added that a number of reports are still under investigation.  Moreover, highly appreciating the effectiveness of the platform, the latter was included in the EU’s “CivicTech4Democracy” Handbook.

Based on the foregoing, the Coalition calls on organizations that work in the field of civil society to avoid biased and possibly partial presentation of controversial results of the survey when making it public, through dissemination of misinformation, misleading the public or other manipulative way to create an advantageous situation for themselves, but rather maintain constructive and partnership relationships with the community of civil society organizations.

Governing Board of the CSO Anti-Corruption Coalition of Armenia

“NGO Center” Civil Society Development NGO,

“Union of Advanced Technology Enterprises” NGO,

“Armenian Association of Young Doctors” NGO,

“Right and Freedom Center” NGO,

“Center for Economic Rights” NGO,

“Tukhmanuk Human Rights and Education Center” NGO,

“Union of Communities of Armenia” NGO,

“Support for Equal Opportunities Foundation”,

“Armenian Lawyers’ Association” NGO, Coordinating Secretariat.

The statement was accepted at a distance meeting of the Governing Board of the CSO Anti-Corruption Coalition of Armenia on 19 March, 2020.

[1] Survey report figure 45, page 62