Karen Zadoyan participated in the Meeting of the Anti-Corruption Policy Council and voted against the Agenda Issue

On 12 February a meeting of the Anti-Corruption Policy Council was held in the government under the leadership of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. President of the Armenian Lawyers’ Association Mr. Karen Zadoyan, who is a member of the Council, participated in the meeting as well.

At the beginning of the session, several members of the Anti-Corruption Policy Council, including Karen Zadoyan, spoke about the agenda of the Council meetings.

Karen Zadoyan suggested that the Council members should submit the agenda issues for the Council meetings to the Council secretariat within fifteen to twenty days, after which the issues should be discussed and prepared in the sectoral anti-corruption working group created by the RA Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia, and only after that they should be included in the agenda of meetings of the Anti-Corruption Policy Council. Karen Zadoyan proposed for discussion at Council Meetings issues related to whistleblowers and the whistleblowing system, confiscation of seizure of property of illicit origin, and criminal liability of legal entities. As a result of the discussion, the Prime Minister instructed the Minister of Justice to apply the above-mentioned approach to formulating the agendas of the Council Meetings.

After that the Council discussed the issue on the agenda related to the restrictions on the member of the Council of Elders to simultaneously hold another public office.

Deputy Minister of Justice Karen Karapetyan, Minister of Territorial Administration and Infrastructures Gnel Sanosyan, Acting Chairwoman of the Corruption Prevention Commission Mariam Galstyan made reports on the issue.

According to part 1 of Article 31 of the Law on Public Service, “Public servants and persons holding public positions (except members of community councils) may not hold a position not related to their status within other state or local self-government bodies, or any position within commercial organizations, or engage in entrepreneurial activities, or perform any other paid work, except for scientific, educational and creative work.”

Despite the above-mentioned regulation, the Corruption Prevention Commission informed the public servants who are members of the council of elders that they can no longer combine the status of a public servant and a member of the council of elders.

Council members, discussing the issue of the agenda, presented their observations and recommendations. It was emphasized that the purpose of defining incompatibility requirements is the prevention of conflicts of interest, the provision of checks and balances on the separation of powers. The majority of Council members agreed that a review of existing legislation governing public council member’s incompatibility requirements shows that uniform interpretation and application is not possible.

Member of the Anti-Corruption Policy Council Karen Zadoyan, noted that the solution to the current problem should be found through the application of the provisions of the RA Law “On Normative Legal Acts”, that is, the Ministry of Justice should provide an official clarification on the issue, after which the Corruption Prevention Commission should be guided and apply the law based on that official clarification. Regarding the future, the legal regulations of Article 31, Part 1 of the Law on “Public Service” should be changed and the members of the community council should not have the right to hold a position not conditioned by their status in other state or local self-government bodies. The possibility of paying compensation to the council of elders for their duties should also be explored.

As a result of extensive discussions, some of the members of the Anti-Corruption Policy Council claimed that the Ministry of Justice cannot provide an official clarification, as this right is reserved to the Corruption Prevention Commission, so the majority of the Council came to the general position that it is necessary to adopt a law, to clearly define the incompatibility rules without the possibility of different perception, stipulating that at the moment those members of council of elders who have found themselves in a situation of incompatibility conditionally speaking are given amnesty,  and starting from all the coming elections that will take place, establish an absolute ban for public and civil servants and public office holders. Member of the Anti-Corruption Council Karen Zadoyan and another member of the Council voted against this decision, arguing that the problem is subject to official clarification within the framework of the general structure.

After the end of the session, Karen Zadoyan, guided by the legal regulation of Article 42, Part 1 of the RA Law “On Normative Legal Acts”, according to which “Official clarification of a regulatory legal act shall be a process aimed at the clarification of the meaning of the provisions of a regulatory legal act, in case of necessity to make their insufficient clarity, different perception, as well as the issues having arisen in the field of application of the regulatory legal act clear”, as well as according to Part 2, Clause 16, of the Resolution N 1159-N of 9 July, 2020 of the Government of the Republic of Armenia “On defining the list of bodies and relevant fields of the state administration system providing official clarification regarding the Legislative Act and the decision of the Government of the Republic of Armenia”, according to which the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia issues an official clarification on the legislative acts regulating the field of anti-corruption policy, proposed the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Armenia in a written application to give within the framework of his powers defined by RA legislation, in the manner and within the time limits prescribed by law, an official clarification regarding the legal act in the field of anti-corruption policy, part 1 of Article 31 of the Law “On Public Service” (which regulates the incompatibility requirements and other restrictions that constitute the anti-corruption framework).

The member of the Anti-Corruption Policy Council, Karen Zadoyan, also submitted a written request to Mariam Galstyan, Chairwoman of the Corruption Prevention Commission, suggesting that she inform whether the Corruption Prevention Commission is included in the list of authorized bodies for official clarification of the normative legal act according to Article 42 of the RA Law “On Normative Legal Acts” and whether it  can provide an official clarification regarding part 1 of Article 31 of the normative legal act, the Law on Public Service? If the Corruption Prevention Commission is not authorized to give an official clarification, then in accordance with Clause 9, Part 1of Article 21, of the RA Law “On the Corruption Prevention Commission”, provide a comment on Part 1 of Article 31 of the Law “On Public Service”.

After receiving responses to his written applications, Karen Zadoyan is going to submit them to the Anti-Corruption Policy Council to ensure their further progress.