Only one person has applied to the Government-announced competition for the selection of candidates for the position of Chairman of the Anti-Corruption Committee – Rafael Yeritsyan. Iravaban.net learned about this in response to an inquiry directed to the Prime Minister’s staff.

According to information received from open sources, he held the position of Head of the NSS Main Directorate (from November 2022 until January 18, 2024), and if passing the qualifying thresholds, Yeritsyan’s candidacy will be presented for appointment.

Iravaban.net in its inquiry had requested from the Prime Minister’s staff to provide the biographical data of the applicant for the position, as well as documents submitted to the Prime Minister’s staff about their experience in the field and their activities in the anti-corruption sphere.

Let us recall that to participate in the competition for the selection of committee chairman, along with other documents, the person must also submit documents certifying higher education, curriculum vitae, documents certifying having held a senior or chief position in an investigative body or proof of having at least five years of experience as a judge, prosecutor, investigator or lawyer, or at least five years of experience in anti-corruption policy development or anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing or operational-intelligence activities, or having at least five years of combined complementary experience in these positions, and several other documents.

However, the Prime Minister’s staff has stated that the provision of biographical data of the only likely candidate, as well as documents submitted to the Prime Minister’s staff certifying their experience in the field and anti-corruption activities, is denied.

The staff has referenced Article 8 of the “Law on Freedom of Information,” which relates to restrictions on freedom of information.

According to the mentioned regulation, the information holder, except for cases defined in part 3 of this article, refuses to provide information if it:

1) contains state, official, banking, commercial secrets

2) violates the privacy of personal and family life, including the confidentiality of correspondence, telephone conversations, postal, telegraph and other communications.

Reference was also made to Articles 11 (Publicly Available Personal Data) and 26 (Transfer of Personal Data to Third Parties) of the “Law on Personal Data Protection.”

The Prime Minister’s staff’s refusal to provide information raises serious concerns from the perspective of transparency and public oversight.

First of all, it must be understood that this is not about a private individual, but about the only likely candidate for the position of Chairman of the Anti-Corruption Committee. When a person applies for such a high position, they consciously accept that their professional qualities and experience will become subject to public discussion.

It is noteworthy that the inquiry requested exclusively data related to professional experience and qualifications, which are necessary for the public to evaluate the likely candidate’s suitability for such a responsible position.

The Prime Minister’s staff’s reference to the “Law on Personal Data Protection” is not appropriate in this case. The law clearly defines that data that becomes accessible to the public as a result of a person’s conscious actions is considered publicly available. Applying for a high position is exactly such a conscious action.

Moreover, the UN Convention against Corruption, to which Armenia has joined, requires ensuring maximum transparency in the public decision-making process. The appointment to the position of Chairman of the Anti-Corruption Committee is undoubtedly such a process.

The refusal of information also hinders journalistic activity. Media outlets cannot fulfill their public oversight function, which is a crucial prerequisite in a democratic society.

This refusal sets a dangerous precedent. If the Prime Minister’s staff does not provide information about the only likely candidate for the head of the Anti-Corruption Committee, then how will the transparency of the fight against corruption be ensured?

It is also noteworthy that the Prime Minister’s staff has also ignored the request for organizing an interview. Such silence testifies not only to a lack of transparency but also to the absence of cooperation between the state body and the press, which creates a dangerous situation in a democratic country.

It should also be remembered that Rafael Yeritsyan has already held a high position and has submitted declarations of property, income, expenses, and interests, which have been published previously. The qualifications and experience required for the position cannot be considered confidential information. They are directly related to public office and should be transparent.

Iravaban.net also presents Rafael Yeritsyan’s declaration of property, income, expenses, and interests submitted as of the date of termination of official duties, which was submitted in 2024.

Yeritsyan owns two land plots under joint ownership rights, both acquired in 2001. Additionally, he owns 25 percent of an apartment acquired in 2023.

Yeritsyan has also declared a Toyota vehicle manufactured in 2019, which he purchased in 2023. As of the date of termination of office, the loan amount taken from the “YSU Alumni Association” NGO amounts to 26,499,321 drams. The declarant has declared 3,825, 1,749, and 42,022 drams in three different banks.

Rafael Yeritsyan has also received income from the State Revenue Committee, which amounted to 646 thousand drams. He also has a 40 percent participation in “EVA-BKV” company. He has also declared 15 million drams in cash.

We have found out that the mentioned company is engaged in paper bag production, and Yeritsyan’s activity in the LLC is currently temporarily suspended.

Let us remind that Iravaban.net, staying true to its mission in covering the anti-corruption fight, continues its series of publications, keeping focus on two key processes: the selection of the Anti-Corruption Committee chairman and the appointment of the RA Prosecutor General’s coordinating deputy for illicit property confiscation. The detection of corruption crimes and the confiscation of illegal property are crucial for the effectiveness of anti-corruption policy in the country.

The competition council for selecting the committee chairman also includes the “Informed Citizens Union” NGO and Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor Office, which are presumably supposed to ensure the openness and transparency of the competition.

It would also be interesting to hear their position regarding such a response and stance from the Prime Minister’s staff. Not everything has been “clean” in the process of NGO involvement in the council either.

Earlier we reported that the 3 members already included in the council are interconnected, creating a conflict of interest situation in the council. These are Supreme Judicial Council member Karen Tumanyan, “Informed Citizens Union” NGO founder Daniel Ioannisyan, and Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor Office Legal Department Coordinator Ani Chatinyan.

This was manifested already during the first session in the election of the council chairman. During the first session, the council had to elect a chairman. There were no self-nominations; at that time, Mrs. Chatinyan announced that she proposes Karen Tumanyan’s candidacy as chairman of the competition council formed for selecting Anti-Corruption Committee chairman candidates.

In our study, we also tried to understand how these NGOs ended up in the competition council. Regarding the latter question, an inquiry was made to the Prime Minister’s staff; we promised to address the details in subsequent publications, however, the Prime Minister’s staff has provided an incomplete response to Iravaban.net’s inquiry.

It is also problematic that only one person has applied for the vacant position of Anti-Corruption Committee chairman. There are well-founded suspicions that no real competition will be held, but rather only a verification of the likely candidate’s compliance with the criteria defined by the RA Law “On Anti-Corruption Committee” will take place.

Although the law does not prohibit a competition with one candidate’s participation, such a procedure does not inspire confidence; appropriate legislative changes in the law are necessary.