For much of the 20^th Century, Armenia was a part of the Soviet Union and although it has no significant geo-political importance to the West, it is a southern salient of Christianity amid Muslim nations (Turkey to its west, Iran to its south and Azerbaijan to its east) and a buffer state for Russia, the great power to its north.  In fact, Armenia has long seen Russia as its protector and there is great affection for the Russians among  the Armenian people and its current government.  And while a significant number of Armenians are looking to the West for democracy and prosperity, many other Armenians would rather ally their country to Russia, as it was in the past.

Given all the problems facing Armenia as a small, land-locked country with few natural resources and virtually no industrial infrastructure, why should FOI be high on its political agenda?   As in the case of other hopefully emerging democracies that want the economic benefits of association with international political and financial organizations, Armenia must adopt certain reforms.  Among the chief anti-corruption reforms being thrust upon that country is the enactment of FOI laws.  Thus the pressure for such laws is external, rather than internal where there are, of necessity, many more priorities.

Because the pressure to enact FOI laws is external rather than internal, the question is whether Armenia is ready for such legislation.  Phrased another way, would any FOI laws be meaningful in Armenia today?

 

For example, based on what I observed at the FOI conference it is clear that many participants simply did not understand the term “freedom of information.”  The term does not translate well literally as to its meaning.  And in places where there is no tradition of democratic government, such as Armenia, it is merely a lofty sounding expression.  The term is now being used throughout Europe as one of a series of freedoms deemed to be basic human rights -- such as the freedoms of speech and of the press.  Unfortunately, while the latter freedoms translate conceptually, FOI does not.  It therefore requires explanation.  FOI is high-sounding, as all freedoms sound in text.  But “freedom of information” is not really a freedom in the obvious sense of the word.  It is a right.  And if people unfamiliar with the concept are to understand it, it must be defined and expressed in terms that people will understand.

I believe that the term “freedom of information” should be replaced by another term that describes the concept of the right of any citizen to have access to government records and/or proceedings or to government information in general.  In this regard, the term “government transparency” has greater utility because it describes metaphorically, as through a window,  the democratic principle in words understandable in most cultures and conveys more vividly the meaning and values underlying FOI laws.

In speaking with members of NGOs concerned with pro-Western style democratic reforms, I also discovered another more pragmatic problem with respect to Armenia implementing FOI legislation as intended.  There appears to be a wide-spread skepticism that any FOI legislation that is enacted by the current government will be anything more than a token designed to appear to meet the requirements of  Western organizations with which the government desires to associate.  In addition, the same skepticism presents itself even if the government were to enact good legislation because of a general sense that the government (including judges or even any official specifically appointed to enforce the law) is corrupt and will not permit such a law to be enforced according to its terms.

Because the pressure on the government to enact FOI legislation is primarily external, one way to deal with this problem is to have the external organizations promoting democracy and anti-corruption within the Armenian government, seriously audit compliance in Armenia with any FOI laws enacted.  Concerned NGOs and civil society groups should make direct contact with such external organizations at an appropriate time, present their concerns and any evidence of governmental sabotage of the FOI legislation.  In case of disingenuousness by the Armenian government with respect to the legislation, the NGOs and civil society groups should urge the external governmental entities and organizations to treat the Armenian government as if it were in default of its promises for greater transparency and anti-corruption reform.

The FOI conference was a good first step toward enacting meaningful FOI laws in Armenia.  Nevertheless, much additional work needs to be undertaken to surmount the difficulties attendant to passage of such laws.

As important as government transparency and a government free of corruption under the rule of law are to any nation that aspires to become democratic, they are only a few of the critical problems facing Armenia.  The effects of history, geography, the economy and international politics, among other things, must be overcome if Armenia is to survive not only as a democracy, but as an independent state.  Although Armenia may be lacking in natural resources and infrastructure, it does not appear to be lacking in the spirit, resourcefulness, energy and intelligence of its people who are dedicated to preserving their homeland and their unique heritage.  In this respect, they are worthy of our continued efforts and support.