The Zhoghovurd newspaper of the Republic of Armenia (RA) writes as follows, in particular: The restrictions being applied to the work of reporters in the National Assembly [(NA)] are not a new phenomenon. Since 2021, they have repeatedly been criticized by journalistic organizations, freedom of speech organizations, and civil society as mechanisms that are disproportionate, anti-democratic, and hinder the professional activities of the media. Therefore, what has again come into the spotlight in recent days is actually not a new restriction, but a long-criticized procedure, the need for which has been raised for years.

The Zhoghovurd daily, among other media outlets, had publicized yesterday that the security rules—which also apply to the work of accredited reporters—in force in the territory and building of the parliament's residence were approved by the signature of Ruben Rubinyan, who is temporarily performing the duties of the speaker of the National Assembly.

The document stipulates that reporters can carry out professional activities only in specially designated areas, while to work in other parts of the parliament, they must obtain permission from the NA chief of staff and secretary general. However, Ruben Rubinyan had dismissed in an interview with the Zhoghovurd daily that new restrictions have been introduced.

“There are no new restrictions, no new decision has been made, the procedure adopted in 2021 has simply been confirmed,” he noted.

And this is where the crux of the problem lies. The problem is not the new decision, but the procedure, which has been the subject of constant criticism since 2021.

Let us recall that it was during [NA speaker] Alen Simonyan’s tenure that the free movement of reporters in the National Assembly was significantly restricted. During that time, a number of reporters were deprived of their accreditation, and the public also remembered the cases when the parliament security service employees were physically removing reporters from the NA building, including by dragging women.

All this has been repeatedly condemned by journalistic organizations. (...).

(...).

And in another statement, human rights organizations have noted that the accreditation procedure in force in the [Armenian] parliament is problematic in itself and contradicts the current legislation in a number of provisions.

(...).

Thus, although Ruben Rubinyan is right on the matter that no new restrictions have been imposed, the reality remains the same: the procedure that has been criticized by the professional community, journalistic organizations, and organizations engaged in the protection of freedom of speech for years has been re-established.