By Tigran Grigoryan and Tatev Baghdasaryan
Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s government has faced a wave of resignations over the past two weeks, with several ministers and officials stepping down and some positions already filled. However, the circumstances surrounding these resignations have ignited controversy and raised serious constitutional concerns.
In an interview with Public Television on Friday, November 22, Pashinyan admitted that all the resignations occurred at his request. The officials who stepped down include two ministers and four chairpersons of state institutions.
The most contentious resignation was that of Karen Andreasyan, Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC). Legal experts argue that this action constitutes a violation of multiple constitutional provisions.
Armenia’s Constitution establishes the separation of powers—legislative, executive, and judicial—to ensure a system of checks and balances. The judiciary is an independent branch, safeguarded against interference from the executive. Experts view Pashinyan’s direct request for Andreasyan’s resignation as a breach of constitutional principles, including Article 4, which outlines the principle of separation of powers and Article 441. This article stipulates that public officials are prohibited from taking actions beyond their authority that cause significant harm to the lawful interests of society and the state.
Pashinyan expressed dissatisfaction with certain court decisions, citing a desire for greater judicial independence as the justification for Andreasyan’s dismissal. However, his actions starkly contradict this stated rationale. By requesting Andreasyan’s resignation, Pashinyan exceeded his authority as Prime Minister, undermining the very independence he purported to advocate. This interference underscores the fragility of Armenia’s judicial system and its susceptibility to external pressures.
Karen Andreasyan’s appointment to this position was also met with significant controversy, given his prior role as a minister in Pashinyan’s cabinet and his affiliation with the ruling party. This not only raised concerns but also represented a breach of the principles of separation of powers and judicial independence.
Apart from Andreasyan’s case, the resignation of Sasun Khachatryan, head of the Anti-Corruption Committee (formerly Special Investigative Committee), has also raised concerns about the legality of Prime Minister Pashinyan’s actions. As with the previous resignation, Pashinyan sent a text message “requesting” Khachatryan’s resignation. The Special Investigative Committee is responsible for investigating crimes committed by state officials, including high-ranking ones. Given the circumstances surrounding Khachatryan’s resignation, serious doubts have emerged about the committee’s ability to effectively fulfill its core mandate, particularly when it involves members of Armenia’s ruling political circle.
These developments once again highlight a troubling aspect of Armenia’s democratic trajectory: weak institutions and a lack of political will for meaningful institutionalization. The ruling party’s absolute control over independent institutions, coupled with the prime minister’s dominant influence, poses significant threats to the country’s prospects for democratic consolidation. This personalized style of governance creates fertile ground for further democratic backsliding and an even greater concentration of power in the hands of the ruling party.
Democracy Watch is a joint initiative by CivilNet and the Regional Center for Democracy and Security, a Yerevan-based think tank.
