YEREVAN.- Armenia’s Ombudsman Karen Andreasyan issued a report assessing the 2011 activities of Yerevan municipality and other local self-government bodies.
Shortcomings and problems identified
• As a result of the Municipality’s insufficient supervision, arbitrary constructions were often carried out in the yards of multi-residential buildings and also playgrounds, and these works were not prevented.
• While implementing the project of dismantling of kiosks, the Municipality mainly did not ensure the necessary legal procedures, as a result of which the corresponding people’s rights were violated causing social tension.
• The authorized body, acting on behalf of the Republic of Armenia, was not defined, which should have to carry out a proper supervision of implementation of obligations of builders prescribed by law or contract in the territory considered as territory of supreme public interest.
• Yerevan Municipality did not sufficiently carry out control over activities of governing bodies of condominiums and residential buildings in the respect with implementation of renovation and preventive measures towards property (general equity-owned buildings) maintenance requirements and their assurance.
• In certain cases (address: Komitas 26) a citizen was provided with planning documents giving permission to carry out construction works, which were subsequently eliminated by the same body due to reasoning that it had been given with some legislative violations.
• Yerevan Municipality not in all cases subjected to administrative responsibility the persons who had made urban development and administrative legislative violations. That is, a discriminatory and arbitrary approach was demonstrated.
• The public transport situation in Yerevan is very concerning. Sufficient measures have not been taken to improve the exploitation of public transport, to make the management more effective and enhance the quality of passenger transportation.
• Yerevan Municipality did not carry out programs to adapt urban development facilities of urban significance and also public transport for free movement of people with disabilities people, and as a result the latter’s rights continued being violated.
• Landscaping and reconstruction actitivies have been carried out in communities.
• New public transport stops have been restored, furnished and constructed.
• The Municipality, in cooperation with a charitable foundation, managed to solve accommodation, food, hygiene, care and other essential issues of homeless people.
• The charitable program “Wish Implementation” was elaborated and put into action through the Municipality website aiming to support children in extreme need.