Pashinyan Denies Existence of Secretly Written Constitution

During a session in the National Assembly, ruling deputy Sergey Bagratyan raised an unsettling question. He pondered on the potential consequences of the new Constitution, especially in terms of Armenia’s historical connection. He expressed concerns about the possibility of the nation’s history being overlooked or unaddressed in the forthcoming legal document. He questioned, “Is it possible that as a result of the new Constitution, Armenia’s connection with its history will be severed, the history of the people will not be reflected in the new Constitution?”

In response to this, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan clarified that the final text for the Constitution has not yet been prepared. He assured, “If I had the text of the Constitution and brought it, I would say, people, I suggest that it be written like this, let it be written like this… I just said that I think a new Constitution is needed, whatever happens, whatever happens, that It is a matter for further discussion in the Constitution. It’s not like there is a Constitution written in a secret drawer, we keep it from everyone and want to take it, bring it in through another door and make it the Constitution of Armenia”.

Pashinyan further elucidated his stance on the need for a new Constitution. He stated, “I say that a new Constitution is needed, because I have come to the conclusion that it is very important for the people to consider the Constitution as their own, to consider it adopted by their vote. This one. Secondly, our current environment has changed, both internal and external environment, all our external relations have changed, internal ones too. The Constitution we have was adopted in a different environment and under different conditions. And the Constitution must bear that new situation and manage that new situation”.

Addressing the issue of competitiveness, Pashinyan declared that the objective of the Constitution is to enhance the state’s competitive edge. He added, “I formulate the problem at the conceptual level. The rest is a matter of discussion.”

Finally, Pashinyan articulated his vision of the Constitution in relation to history. He responded, “Or what is written in our Constitution today that keeps that connection with history? We must have such a Constitution that does not lose touch with our future.”