Open news feed Close news feed
A A

IS ARMENIA THE HOMELAND OF ARMENIANS OR...?

Politics

On February 22, deputes of RA National Assembly held a debate on the admission of the packet on dual citizenship.

“Armenia exists due to the people living in the country who have overcome the hardships and tortures of the recent years”, NA Speaker Tigran Torosyan announced during the debate. He assumes that it is unjust to ensure equal rights and conditions for the people living in Armenia and beyond its boundaries.

Regardless of his respect towards the Diaspora Armenians, Mr. Torosyan reminded that they have countered no obstacles over the past 15 years to return to Armenia, get citizenship and settle in their homeland.

NA Deputy Speaker Vahan Hovhanissyan asked a rhetoric question, “Do Armenians living in the Republic of Armenia always decide their own fates and do they always form the power?” In this respect, he highlighted the importance of holding free and just elections in the country; the remark was addressed to the Republican Party.

As for the notion of “resident”, Vahan Hovhanissyan wondered that once a person is the RA citizen and not a resident, he doesn’t pay income tax as he has no income, should he be deprived of the right to vote.

ARF Dashnaktsutyun, at the head of Vahan Hovhannisyan, finds it inadmissible that RA dual citizenship implies that RA citizens must have families in Armenia, business or they must have lived in Armenia for at least six months over the past 5 years.

Mr. Hovhannisyan inquired what will become of the RA President and MPs in case they become citizens of other countries during their office.

“There is one legal solution to this problem”, answered David Haroutyunyan. “In case they admit the citizenship of other country they must be considered criminals under the Penal Code”.

To note, tomorrow the bill will be put to voting. By the way, Republican Party and ARF Dashnaktsutyun tried to conceal the antagonism between their parties and underlined that they both endorsed double citizenship; their opinions differ concerning the ways and methods of its implementation.