100 Questions, 100 Answers: Hrayr Tovmasyan

Hrayr Tovmasyan outlined two current priorities of his work as Mnister of Justice, as a guest of the Civilitas “One Hundred Questions and Answers” series: tackling contradictions and inconsistencies in the law and instilling a new way of thinking that upholds justice as a top demand and need for the society at large. “We need to clear the law of all corruption-related risks, and we need to allow access to new people and to a new value system that will espouse justice as a way of thinking,” explained Tovmasyan. “Justice should be a public demand and we need to clearly formulate that demand.”

The purpose of the series is to offer citizens an opportunity to speak directly to decision-makers, opinion-makers and policy-makers. With no pre-determined topic and no speeches, the guest immediately responds to questions from the audience and from those who have submitted questions online. The audience also enters into dialogue with the guest. In this case, environmental activist Karine Danielyan argued, “The demand often runs into a wall,” citing cases where a new business was clearly preferred while community needs were ignored when environmental safety was at stake. Tovmasyan agreed but reminded the audience not to forget the successful cases when construction was stopped due to public demand for the sake of environmental safety and architectural integrity. “Five years ago, you would see trees cut down every step of the way, whereas now public figures think not just twice, but three times before ordering a cut-down, and this is solely due to public opinion. Public demand always precedes and exceeds what the state can do to satisfy it,” said Tovmasyan encouraging discussion participants to stay true to their cause and continue the good work.

The discussion touched upon judicial independence and impartiality of Armenian courts. “The constitution provides for the separation of the judicial branch from legislative and executive branches,” said Tovmasyan, an expert in constitutional law. “However, it is not solely the task of the constitution to guarantee an independent judicial power and to instill the correct perception of justice in judges. It is impossible to tackle this with just constitutional reforms. The society needs to step in.”

The Minister explained that the Justice Ministry’s responsibilities revolve around the development of the Criminal Code, and administrative or disciplinary actions related to judicial officers. He talked about a recent survey conducted by his students which showed that 84 percent of respondents were ready to resort to bribery to arrive at some illegal solution to a problem, while 63 percent of respondents would resort to illegal methods to provide a solution to a legal matter as well. “We have a clear need for change in society’s thinking. There are no other alternatives to an impartial judicial system,” concluded Tovmasyan.

The Minister was also asked questions of a political nature.  He responded to a question about early parliamentary elections by explaining that “If prior to the 2005 constitutional reforms, the president could, at any time, for political reasons alone, dissolve the National Assembly, then following the 2005 reforms, only under specific circumstances is the President able to dissolve the National Assembly and hold special elections,” said Tovmasyan. “There is no such legal basis for special elections at this moment, nor do I believe that there are political, social or economic bases either.” 

Towards the end of the discussion Tovmasyan revealed his teaching philosophy as a professor and what he tries to pass on through his lectures to the next generation of Armenian lawyers. “Many think that a good lawyer is one who knows a lot of laws. Jurisprudence is, again, a way of thinking – either you have it or you don’t. I try to convey this to my students, which always reminds me of what my own professor used to say years ago that jurisprudence is the ability to read in between the lines of the law.”