Constitutional Court Continues Reviewing Appeals by Seven Political Forces Contesting Election Results

YEREVAN — Central Electoral Commission Chairman Vahagn Hovakimyan asked the Constitutional Court to reject all applications contesting the results of the National Assembly elections.

Hovakimyan described the decision summarizing the election results as lawful. He emphasized that the decision had been adopted in compliance with the Electoral Code and therefore asked the court to reject the appeals.

Before the start of the hearing, when journalists asked whether shortcomings recorded during the elections had affected the results, Hovakimyan replied: “No, they did not.”

The seven political forces have already presented their applications. The respondent, the ruling Civil Contract party — recognized as a third party in the case — and law enforcement bodies have also presented their positions.

Constitutional Court Judge Edgar Shatiryan asked the representative of Strong Armenia about two polling stations where soldiers had voted after the stations had closed. Asked whether they had requested that the voting results in those two polling stations be declared invalid, Aram Vardevanyan said they viewed the matter from another perspective.

“The CEC had every opportunity to prevent this phenomenon, but did not do so,” the Strong Armenia representative said.

When Shatiryan asked whether the election campaign had been a contest between individuals or programs, Vardevanyan replied that it had been a contest between programs.

The next question from the Constitutional Court judge was addressed to Prosperous Armenia Party lawyer Aram Orbelyan. The judge asked whether, under such circumstances, the distribution of mandates was realistic, referring to the polling stations where results had been declared invalid. Orbelyan responded affirmatively, saying that the CEC had been obliged to hold repeat voting but had failed to do so.

“This alone is enough for the election results to be declared invalid,” Orbelyan said.

Judge Edgar Shatiryan also addressed a question to Suren Grigoryan, the representative of Civil Contract, which is involved in the proceedings as a third party. The judge asked whether the rhetoric of political forces involved in the electoral process could have influenced voters’ free expression of will and the final outcome of the elections.

Grigoryan responded that it could not have.

“There is not even such a statement, let alone any impact from it. The prime minister made very harsh and sharp remarks about his political opponents, but no such remarks were addressed to voters,” the Civil Contract representative said.

Justice Minister Srbuhi Galyan noted that hate speech, campaigning and disinformation must be distinguished from one another.

“It is being said that the prime minister said, ‘Why did you not die?’ and that this caused fear among people. Regarding some of the statements made, we can even speak about a decline in ratings, and this applies to all political forces,” the minister said, adding that Prime Minister Pashinyan’s remarks had been directed at political opponents.

The minister emphasized that the Corruption Prevention Commission is examining at least two episodes involving the prime minister.

Galyan also noted that disinformation is capable of intimidating the public.

“For example, citizens were told that if they elected people loyal to another nation, 300,000 Azerbaijanis would come. Many such videos were presented to our citizens as possible reality. This must become a subject of discussion,” Srbuhi Galyan said, emphasizing that citizens had made their choice.

Responding to Judge Shatiryan’s question, CEC Chairman Vahagn Hovakimyan said that it was undesirable for voting at a polling station to continue after 8 p.m., but despite the issues, they had not seen evidence of a substantial violation.

The court is working under an expedited procedure, and the final decision must be published by July 4.