Representatives of the executive and legislative bodies have been talking about the need to make constitutional changes for a long time. On 5 November, the Ministry of Justice organized discussions on Constitutional reforms.
Iravaban.net has launched a series of interviews, with the objective to present the observations and opinions of experts in the field on the need for constitutional reform.
We talked about the topic with constitutional expert Gohar Meloyan.
– The Ministry of Justice announced the initiation of the constitutional reform. To what extent its need is justified for it now?
– We already have experience in practice. Last year we witnessed that a committee was convened on the relevant legal grounds, but the activity of that commission ended ingloriously. On the grounds that the legal scholars who were part of it refused to continue their work in the created atmosphere.
When anti-constitutional actions have taken place, fundamental human rights are obviously violated, a number of basic principles are endangered, in these conditions, I think it is even superfluous to think about constitutional reforms, because it is a formality, it is secondary; it is for occupying some people and wasting time.
Constitutional reforms have taken place in our country for at least the period of 10 years. I consider the Constitutional change that took place in 2020 illegal. It can be commented that it is a matter of political expediency, proceeding from the ideas of the current government. In my estimation, we lack professionalism.
– What factors should be taken into account before the adoption of the new Constitution and what should be the process of implementation of constitutional reforms?
– It is necessary to have a staff composed exclusively of professional scientists and specialists with certain trajectories (path) in order to implement those changes. In addition, it is necessary to have a specific goal, to have a situation that will dictate and require such changes.
– RA Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan once mentioned that during the crisis that arose in 2020, the parliamentary system of government showed its non-viability. Is there a need to change the way the country is governed?
– Maybe I share his opinion to some extent. In any case, in such an unstable situation, making these issues on the agenda is just another blow to the roots of our state.
– The Professional Committee on Constitutional Reforms (the activity of the Committee was suspended due to 2020 Karabakh war), on 22 August 2020, adopted the draft concept of decentralization of Constitutional Control and unification of the highest courts, in particular the establishment of the Supreme Court. To what extent is the decentralization of Constitutional control and the creation of the Supreme Court justified?
– I am against it, because this process is carried out in the context of the inglorious and year-long work against the Constitutional Court. And this is plan B, if it was not possible to remove the undesirable judges in the Constitutional Court. In any case, I think huge problems will arise in the context of the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court.
– Experts in the field of anti-corruption argue that providing constitutional status and guarantees of independence to anti-corruption bodies, such as the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption and the Anti-Corruption Committee, will increase the independence and efficiency of these institutions. What is your opinion on this issue?
– I do not share the opinion here either. This was possible to implement effectively in the past and in the structure of the existing legal system. If there was corruption, there was information and there was a basis and corpus delicti to initiate a case, it was possible to organize it without these unnecessary processes and administration. From the point of view of efficiency, this was not so expedient, as it was possible to perform those functions before as well.
Hasmik Sargsyan
