Armenia: Questions Continue About Elections

Nearly a month after Armenia's May 12 parliamentary elections, dissatisfaction with the vote among opposition parties and local election monitors shows no sign of abating. Four opposition groups have called for fresh elections, while a prominent non-governmental organization has questioned the campaign finance practices of two major pro-government parties.

On June 1, Armenia's Constitutional Court began to consider petitions from the opposition Orinats Yerkir (Country of Law) Party, the New Times Party, the Republic Party and the Impeachment bloc to throw out the party-list results from the country's May 12 parliamentary vote and hold new elections. [For details see the EurasiaNet special feature Armenia: Vote 2007].

"There were large-scale falsifications and serious cases of abuse," New Times Party leader Aram Karapetian told a press conference on May 31. "If the Constitutional Court is unbiased, the results of the elections will be considered invalid." The official results gave the ruling Republican Party of Armenia a clean sweep of the polls; only two opposition parties -- one of them, Orinats Yerkir -- managed to win seats in parliament. [For details see the EurasiaNet special feature Armenia: Vote 2007].

So far, little public information has been released about the Court's deliberations. On June 2, the Court's nine judges gave the government three days to provide information about Armenians who were outside of the country on election day. The opposition petitioners have submitted that these citizens' names were used in an alleged attempt to rig the election results. (Voting outside of Armenia is not permitted).

Popular expectations, however, are low that the Constitutional Court will agree with the arguments made in the petitioners' 230-page report. Since the country gained independence in 1991, the Court has rarely ruled against the government.

Meanwhile, one local non-government organization is taking issue with another aspect of the parliamentary vote -- campaign finance. The pro-government Republican Party of Armenia and Prosperous Armenia Party spent far in excess of the 60 million drams (about $167,131) allowed for election campaigns, the Center for Regional Development/Transparency International Armenia charged at a May 31 press conference. Under the law, parties which do not adhere to campaign finance regulations can have their registrations suspended.

Based on monitoring done in three cities (Yerevan, Gyumri and Vanadzor) between November 2006 and May 2007, the center found that the Republican Party spent an estimated 79.1 million drams (about $226,810) on its campaign, while the Prosperous Armenia Party, headed by oligarch Gagik Tsarukian, spent an estimated 129.6 million drams (about $371,613). [The monitoring was supported by the Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation -- Armenia, which, like EurasiaNet.org, is part of the Soros Foundations Network].

The three other parties that won seats in parliament complied with limits on campaign spending, according to the findings. The pro-government Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) spent 50.7 million drams (about $145,376), while the opposition Orinats Yerkir and Heritage parties spent 33.1 million (about $94,910), and 24 million drams (about $68,817), respectively.

Amalia Kostanian, chairwoman of the CRD/Transparency International Armenia, called the calculations "very delicate," with "only official tariffs" or "minimal prices" used to total likely expenditures. Some expenses were ignored, Kostanian said. Armenian singers who said they had performed for free at lavish campaign concerts staged by both the Republican and Prosperous Armenia Parties were taken at their word, as were party statements about donations of transportation and various forms of logistical support. [For details, see the Armenia: Vote 2007 Photo Digest archive].

The Central Election Commission (CEC) has denied that the Republican Party of Armenia or Prosperous Armenia Party overspent on their campaigns. "The CEC has a surveillance service that controls the process and we haven't registered any deviation," said spokeswoman Tsovinar Khachatrian. "Different organizations can state what they want."

The Republican Party of Armenia officially states that it spent about 58.9 million drams (roughly $168,888) on its campaign, while Prosperous Armenia has reported a little over 40 million drams (about $114,695) spent.

Considerable controversy has also surrounded the use of so-called "hidden" advertising. Kostanian charged that ads touting the 15th anniversary of the formation of the Armenian army were used to encourage support for Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian, head of the Republican Party, who served as defense minister until late March.

Potato seeds, free medical care and ambulances given away by the Gagik Tsarukian Benevolent Foundation, an organization run by Prosperous Armenia Party head Gagik Tsarukian, also attracted criticism.

But Prosperous Armenia spokesperson Baghdasar Mherian dismissed the contention that the donations had a political aim. "An ambulance cannot be considered part of the election campaign," Mherian said. "Let's say it could be considered an election bribe, but it is not that, either." The donation of an ambulance "just coincided with the election campaign" and was made in response to a request to Tsarukian in 2006, he added.

A representative from the Republican Party's office in Yerevan also stressed that its campaign spending had occurred "within the limits of the law."

The Center for Regional Development/Transparency International Armenia charges that the election code's failure to regulate third-party expenditures has allowed political parties to bypass campaign finance restrictions. Kostanian has called on Armenians "for our own sake" to use the run-up to next year's presidential elections to press for greater vigilance in detecting possible election code violations.

The Central Election Commission, however, is not convinced. "These are independent observations," commented Ara Harutiunian, head of the CEC's campaign monitoring unit. "We have checked everything we could within the limits of our control. Maybe they have other sources that we don't."