A BURDENED OMBUDSMAN LUNCHES WITH AMBASSADOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 YEREVAN 000862 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/26/2018 TAGS: PHUM PGOVEAID AM SUBJECT: A BURDENED OMBUDSMAN LUNCHES WITH AMBASSADOR Classified By: Ambassador Marie L. Yovanovitch. Reason 1.4 (b/d) SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (C) During their introductory lunch October 24, Ombudsman Armen Harutyunian sounded cautious optimism on the issue of resolving the fate of the March 1 political detainees but otherwise struck a more downbeat note on the human rights situation. A somewhat self-serving Harutunian portrayed himself as a man loved neither by the government nor the opposition, but who is "fighting the good fight" with an emphasis on changing the mindset of the young generation. Generally, the view of the diplomatic community is that Harutunian is doing a good job in difficult circumstances. End Summary. ¶2. (U) Human Rights Defender Ombudsman Armen Harutunian invited Ambassador Yovanovitch to hold their introductory meeting over lunch on October 24. The Ombudsman was cautiously optimistic about gaining traction on resolving the issue of some 70 political detainees arrested after the March 1 government crackdown on the opposition, but was unable to provide details on a possible face-saving solution. (Note: The Human Rights Defender is an independent Constitutional officer of Armenia, appointed by the National Assembly after nomination by the president. He serves a six-year term of office. Armen Harutunian was appointed February 17, 2006. End note.) OPPOSITION MISSING THE BOAT ON MARCH 1 INQUIRY -------------- - ¶3. (C) The Ombudsman termed the fact-finding group to study the deaths surrounding the March 1 government crackdown as an indirect recognition of some kind of role for the opposition by the government. As imperfect a vehicle as the fact-finding mission may be, the Ombudsman predicted the opposition would be shooting itself in the foot if it did not make use of the few mechanisms that exist to participate in a political dialogue. Harutunian predicted the opposition would eventually join the fact-finding group, but then seek a pretext to distance itself from the anticipated results. The Ombudsman himself will appoint a representative to participate in the fact-finding panel. ¶4. (C) Harutunian also considered the fact-finding mission a direct result of pressure exerted by international bodies, specifically the Council of Europe, to gauge Armenia,s commitment to resolving the political crisis and regain international credibility. (Note: Thomas Hammarberg, the Human Rights Commissioner of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) was particularly active in pressing President Sargsian and the GOAM to create an inquiry panel into the March 1 events which is not dominated by pro-governmental forces. See septel for additional details, some of which are still being clarified, about the new fact-finding panel, which is to report its findings to the parliamentary ad hoc commission. End note.) POLITICAL DETAINEES: AMBIVALENT MESSAGE -------------- ¶5. (C) Harutunian concurred with the Ambassador that the issue of the 70-odd political detainees was the most prominent issue facing Armenia and marring Armenia,s reputation in the world. He expressed hope that the political detainees could be released, (either through legislative amnesty, presidential pardon, or some other unspecified mechanism),but in the same breath predicted the cases could drag on for years before being challenged at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. The Ombudsman opined that his meetings with the Prosecutor-General and Presidency staff indicated no wiggle-room on the part of the government to find a face-saving solution to resolving the charges levied against the detainees, which Harutuntian considered clearly politically motivated and artificial. The Ombudsman remarked that the Prosecutor-General was using the "methods of 1937" - in a reference to Stalinist show trials to deal with modern-day human rights issues. "NO ONE LOVES ME!" -------------- ¶6. (C) The Ombudsman described his priorities as raising public awareness, especially among the younger generation, of their civil-political rights including freedom of speech and fair trials. One standing task of his office is to vet draft human rights legislation which, by law, the Ministry of Justice must submit to the Ombudsman for review. The Ombudsman also fields some 6,000 public appeals and complaints per year among which property disputes, military hazing, and media freedoms figure prominently. A major task YEREVAN 00000862 002 OF 002 for the Ombudsman Office is the publication of so-called Ad Hoc Reports -- Harutunian provided copies of past reports to the Ambassador -- which he sees as a basis for dialogue and assistance. Harutunian,s office is also involved in developing policy on alternatives for obligatory military service for conscientious objectors. ¶7. (C) At one point, the Ombudsman described his office as the subject of "provocations" by both the government and the opposition without specifying the exact meaning of that statement. He did, however, note increased attention paid by the government to his office as illustrated by its inclusion in the proposed fact-finding panel on the March 1 events. This outreach is one of the reasons Harutunian sounded cautiously optimistic about the Sargsian administration,s intentions to improve the human rights situation in Armenia. Reflecting in contrast on the Kocharian presidency as "lost years," the Ombudsman betrayed mutual animosity on several occasions towards former President Kocharian, who originally nominated the Ombudsman. At one point in the conversation, Harutunian even described Kocharian,s authoritarian character as "Stalin and Lenin" combined and noted that he would be in prison by now if Kocharian had remained president. (Note: Just before he left office in April 2008, Kocharian publicly lambasted Harutunian as "my worst personnel decision," after Harutunian began issuing sharp criticisms of authorities, actions March 1. End note.) COMMENT -------------- ¶8. (C) Harutunian, like his predecessor before him, started out as a pro-government man, who showed great reluctance to speak out publicly against authorities on most any issue, but eventually found his voice and has embraced his constitutional role. In Hartunian,s case, it seems to have been the March 1 events themselves that transformed his attitude. On the afternoon of March 1, Harutunian personally interposed himself (alongside two Heritage party MPs who did the same) between the police and angry protesters, and sought to negotiate a peaceful end to the escalating street crisis that would by March 2 claim ten Armenian lives. ¶9. (C) Ever since, Harutunian has been far more activist -- and appropriately so -- in questioning authorities, abuses of human rights, and his greatly risen in our estimation and that of the diplomatic corps and international organizations generally. Harutunian,s effectiveness is occasionally limited by his own ego and impulses toward personal empire-building. He declined, for example, to play an active role in the parliamentary ad hoc commission of inquiry into March 1, in our view as much out of institutional jealousy as for the reasons of principle he espoused. However, he has promised to participate fully in the new fact-finding group which will be established, which is welcome both for the addition of his newly-won personal credibility as well as for the significant staff resources he has in his office. To this point, the lack of any real staff has been a significant weakness of the parliamentary commission. YOVANOVITCH