Armenia's Ruling Party Resists Amending Controversial Constitutional Clause
30.09.2024
By Tigran Grigoryan and Karena Avedissian
On September 19, the Constitutional Reform Council debated and ultimately rejected a proposal by the Union of Informed Citizens (UIC) to remove the constitutional provision that guarantees a stable majority in parliament before the 2026 elections. This provision, a central issue in discussions on electoral reforms, ensures a parliamentary majority even if a party’s initial voter support is low.
Under Armenia's 2015 Constitution, if no party wins over 50% of the seats in the National Assembly and the qualifying parties cannot form a coalition, a second round of elections is triggered. In this runoff, the two leading parties from the first round compete, with the winner receiving extra mandates to secure a majority in parliament, regardless of their initial vote share.
This system enables a party that initially garnered only 25-30% of the vote to potentially gain a majority and govern independently. Critics argue that this arrangement disproportionately boosts the influence of a party with relatively limited public backing, raising concerns about fair representation.
Stable majority parliamentary systems face several criticisms, as outlined in the Union of Informed Citizens' (UIC) proposal:
- It contradicts the essence of parliamentarism, as the party receiving bonus seats is represented in parliament greater than its share of voter support.
- It creates a parliament that does not proportionally reflect the views of different segments of society, instead operating on a "winner takes all" principle.
- Political forces are not incentivized to negotiate and engage in dialogue.
- When parliament no longer proportionally represents society, public discontent often spills into the streets as parliament ceases to be a proportionally representative body of society.
The stable majority clause is widely regarded as one of the most problematic elements of Armenia’s constitution, believed to have been designed for former President Serzh Sargsyan. This provision was intended to enable the ruling party, which lacked broad public legitimacy, to retain power despite limited voter support.
Current Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and his party were vocal critics of the constitution, pledging to amend it both during and after the revolution. However, six years have passed since the revolution, and this promise has yet to be fulfilled. Facing a substantial decline in popularity, Nikol Pashinyan and his team are hesitant to eliminate this principle ahead of the 2026 parliamentary elections, prioritizing the party's interests over necessary––and promised–– constitutional reforms.
A key concern is that mechanisms intended to incorporate civil society input on major policies—particularly regarding political representation—do not function as intended. The government often rejects proposals that are perceived as threats to their power. As a result, while these mechanisms create the appearance of a deliberative, democratic process, they ultimately fail to lead to meaningful change.
Democracy Watch is a joint initiative by CivilNet and the Regional Center for Democracy and Security, a Yerevan-based think tank.
This material has been funded by UK International Development from the UK government; however, the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s official policies.