The Feudal Standards of the Civil Contract Party
One of the notable parts of Edgar Ghazaryan’s speech in the National Assembly on September 16 concerned the system of local self-government and territorial administration formed under the Civil Contract government. In his description, the standards operating within this system are increasingly moving away from the logic of modern public administration and instead resemble medieval feudal relations.
Ghazaryan spoke about why the Civil Contract Party does not choose candidates nominated by the opposition. His conclusion was blunt: those candidates do not meet the Civil Contract Party’s “standards.” According to the deputy, the nature of these standards can be understood through examples of positions being passed on within the government itself.
He mentioned Hrazdan, emphasizing that the city’s former mayor was Sasun Mikaelyan, while the mayor’s position is now held by his son. “A standard that we, apparently, do not meet,” Ghazaryan said sarcastically.
According to him, the same picture can be seen in the Ararat region, where the governor is being replaced by his son. Ghazaryan described this phenomenon more vividly with the expression “Duke of Yeraskh.” Under this logic, a public office appears to become a family inheritance, while political influence becomes a personal domain.
The deputy also referred to another example of the distribution of positions within the Civil Contract Party: Vahe Ghalumyan’s family and personal connections. His sarcastic remarks were aimed at showing that access to positions within the system of government is often determined by whether someone is considered one of “their own.”
This was the core of Ghazaryan’s criticism: when the position of a community leader or regional governor begins to become associated with family succession, a natural question arises: where does the system of public administration end, and where does the sphere of personal influence begin?
Essentially, Ghazaryan’s sarcastic question came down to one thing: if this is the Civil Contract Party’s “standard,” then perhaps failing to meet that standard is a virtue rather than a shortcoming.