Armenian court found political rhetoric incompatible with healthy electoral climate, lawyer says

An Armenian court concluded that certain political rhetoric was incompatible with a free, peaceful and healthy electoral environment, according to lawyer Aram Vardevanyan, who said the findings relate to statements made by members of the ruling Civil Contract party and Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan.

Speaking at a news conference on Thursday, Vardevanyan, a board member of the opposition Strong Armenia party, said the issue of alleged hate speech had been examined by the Administrative Court and would be presented in greater detail before the Constitutional Court.

“Many people are unaware of the position the Administrative Court adopted regarding the language and expressions that were used,” Vardevanyan said. “Those findings will be presented comprehensively to the Constitutional Court.”

According to Vardevanyan, the court held in a ruling that has entered into legal force that the statements in question could “objectively be perceived in a different context,” rather than merely as harsh political commentary.

He said the Central Electoral Commission had previously determined that the remarks constituted sharp political speech. However, Vardevanyan argued that the Administrative Court reached a different conclusion.

“Under the standards established by the court’s decision, such rhetoric is incompatible with a free, peaceful and healthy electoral environment,” he said.

Vardevanyan further alleged that the principal source of hate speech during the period under review was the Civil Contract party led by Pashinyan.

“This is not my personal assessment,” he said. “It is a conclusion contained in a judicial act that has entered into force.”