The Opposition Hopes the Court Will Act Fairly. Hovik Thinks That's Unfounded Optimism.
The opposition is betting that the Constitutional Court, despite being stacked with Pashinyan appointees, will rule against the election because the falsifications are too egregious to justify legally. Hovik thinks that's wishful thinking.
The opposition coalition challenging the 2026 election results has publicly stated it is giving the Constitutional Court an opportunity to demonstrate its independence. Their logic is straightforward: the election falsifications are so widespread and illegal that even Pashinyan appointees, as lawyers with reputations to protect, will struggle to find legal justification for upholding the results. Some analysts argue that judges, once separated from party politics and ensconced on the bench, develop an interest in legal consistency and professional legitimacy that transcends partisan loyalty. Hovik is deeply skeptical of this reasoning. He acknowledges the opposition’s argument but labels it unfounded optimism. The structural reality remains: every judge on the Constitutional Court was appointed by Pashinyan, and no independent voice exists to challenge a ruling favoring the ruling party. The court’s historical function under previous administrations, when it contained judges from earlier eras, was to provide some measure of institutional constraint. Now, that constraint is gone entirely. However, Hovik raises one scenario that complicates the picture: Pashinyan himself may want the court to annul the election. If the ruling party intends to hold new elections with opposition parties banned, an annulment by the Constitutional Court provides legal cover for new balloting. In this scenario, the court serves Pashinyan’s interests by invalidating the current results, then standing aside while the government designs new election laws excluding major opposition forces. The atmosphere in Armenia remains one of uneasy calm. The opposition has not been told to hit the streets. Conversations about strategy continue behind closed doors. But Hovik senses the tension is building toward conflict depending on how the June 26 hearing unfolds. Both Samvel Karapetyan and Kocharyan, major opposition figures, are unlikely to accept a minority parliament position under Pashinyan for another five years.
Transcript
Asbed: So why has the opposition come out and said that there are some positive indications Asbed: that there could be a fair judgment on the part of this court? Asbed: They're saying we're giving the court the opportunity to come out and show Asbed: that they are an independent body. Hovik: I think that is unfounded optimism, to be honest. Hovik: And I think that one of the arguments I've heard is that these judges, Hovik: whatever they are, Hovik: they are supposed to be lawyers, Hovik: they have a reputation to protect, Hovik: so they are no longer Civil Contract officials, Hovik: and the law demands them to find some legal justification. Hovik: And given that you have entire precincts where your opponent was winning, Hovik: invalidated. Hovik: I mean, that's just one of the things that the opposition is challenging. Hovik: It's very difficult to find any sort of law that will back this decision up. Hovik: So I think that many in the opposition are clear that this is such a falsified, Hovik: such an illegal move that the Constitutional Court has no choice to do that. Hovik: But I think that Hovik: If it does happen, Hovik: if the Constitutional Court annuls the election, Hovik: maybe then that is to Pashinyan's liking as well.