Strengthening women's political participation in the Republic of Armenia

27 Pages·2015·0.65 MB·English

STRENGTHENING WOMEN’S POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN THE REPUBLIC
OF ARMENIA: EXISTING EFFORTS, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

Irina Ghaplanyan
Anna Melikyan

Irina Ghaplanyan
Anna Melikyan
Center for Gender and Leadership Studies

This study/report is made possible by the generous support of the American People through the United
States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of this study/report are the sole
responsibility of the authors (or name of organization) and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID
or the United States Government

YEREVAN 2015
Acknowledgement
The authors express their deep gratitude to the YSU Center for Gender and Leadership Studies for the opportunity to
participate in Small Grants programme and support provided. Our special thanks go to individual experts for their
time and meaningful participation in interviews.

1. INTRODUCTION
This paper examines current patterns of women’s political participation and mechanisms for increasing
women’s substantive representations in Armenia. Key pre-requisites and obstacles to success of these
mechanisms are analyzed.
The existing or potential outcome of “emergency” policies such as gender quotas, attempts of
international organizations and local NGOs as well as measures implemented by government of Armenia
are considered together with an assessment of future priorities for the political engagement and
empowerment of women. The policy research included analysis of legislation and legal documentation,
available statistical and research data on the related topics and expert interviews.

2. METHODOLOGY
This report provides a descriptive profile of the local and international attempts to strengthen women’s
political participation in Armenia. Since there has been identified a plethora of various programs and
measures dedicated to women rights in Armenia, the analysis developed in this report does not go into
detailed scrutiny of each program and undertaking but rather focuses on the most urgent and general
issues of the activity directed to increasing women participation in political life: the adequacy of the
available legal basis, the sufficiency of local efforts and international support of Armenian women as well
as existing challenges. However, this should not be considered an exhaustive list of the issues linked to
the struggle against weak political participation of women in Armenia.
Data used in the research were collected through desk research (review of relevant international and
national documents, literature review), analysis of statistical data as well as qualitative semi-structured
expert interviews conducted with 35 professionals (14 men and 21 women) involved in the political
activities both in Yerevan and marzes of Armenia, including Tavush, Lori, Shirak and Syunik. Members
of political parties as well as their youth wings, civil activists, assistants to Parliament members,
representatives of local NGOs with relevant agenda, incumbent and former members of avagani councils
in marzes of Armenia, incumbent heads of villages and community leaders, relevant staff members of the
Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs in charge of implementation of gender related commitments,
member of the President's Administration, former public officials, representatives of international
organizations, as well as sociologists working in the field were interviewed. In course of the identification
and selection of potential interviewees preference was given to those who have endeavors to launch or
excel in political career on different level to identify obstacles on their way.
The information on current situation on women’s political representation as well as on most urgent
obstacles to women’s political participation presented in Section Three and Section Four respectively was
collected through a review of legal instruments and reports of various sources, both governmental and
independent, and other relevant literature, and partly from the interviews with the representatives of key
agencies dealing with women issues in Armenia.
The information on governmental measures, international efforts and local NGOs’ input given in Section
Five, Six and Seven respectively, was also collected through a review of available reports and the
consultations with relevant professionals in Yerevan and other regions of the country. Interview questions
addressed the most urgent challenges political women face today and the strengths and weaknesses of
available measures boosting women political activity in the region. Data collection tables were prepared
in advance of the interviews. In combination with open questions this provided both focused assessment
of the identified measures as well as wider picture of current state of affairs in Armenia. Broadly,
participants in these interviews were asked:
Key obstacles - What have been the key obstacles in your opinion that prevents or hinders progress in
women’s political careers?
Key undertakings – What have been the key measures that addressed these obstacles?
Evaluation - How well have these obstacles were addressed by the various measures? How have they
affected women in Armenia?
Gaps - What are the remaining gaps in policy and/or legislation?
Success stories – Are there examples when women overcome the existing barriers?
Recommendations - What would facilitate the implementation of measures increasing political
participation of women?
As a result, the interviews provided researchers with a sound understanding of the similarities and
differences of the opinions on the key issues among governmental officials, representatives of
international organizations and members of local NGOs.
This literature review assisted in the identification of knowledge gaps in current research and enabled us
to focus on the barriers to and enablers of better political participation of women. The interviews together
with the literature and legal review allowed us to identify the most urgent challenges on the subject,
develop our main arguments and offer key recommendations that is in our view would assist the better
implementation of the women’s political rights agenda in Armenia. Absent from the current writings is an
assessment of the measures increasing women’s political participation in the Armenian context.

3. CURRENT SITUATION ON WOMEN POLITICAL PARTICIPATION
Women making up more than a half of the population of most states overall remain underrepresented in
public and political life. Armenia is not an exception but a vivid example of the gender inequality.
According to the Gender Gap report 2014, Armenia occupied 103rd place out of 142 rated states.1
However, analysis of the separate indicators demonstrates that women in Armenia have access to and
excel in certain areas of life, such as education (women are better represented in secondary and tertiary
level education with female-to-male ration of 1.19 and 1.57 accordingly). As for economic participation
and opportunities, again the following factor is noteworthy. While women make up majority of
professional and technical work force (female-to-male ratio is 1.88), the share of women among
legislators, senior officials and managers is significantly lower than that of the male's (ratio is 0.31).
The situation is particularly worrisome in the field of political participation of women. The inequality of
women in this field throws Armenia on 123rd position among 142 rated countries. Thus, women's ratio in
legislative bodies is 0.12 and in the executive posts - 0.13.
Unfortunately, Armenia is doing increasingly worse from year to year in the field of political
empowerment of women beginning from 2007, when Armenia was ranked 125th out of 128 rated. The
situation seems even more alarming when we compare the data from early 1990s of still Soviet Armenia,
where the single party political system had many more women in its national parliament, than post-Soviet
Armenia has ever had after the collapse of the USSR and Armenia’s history as an independent state. The
number of women in parliament decreased from 36% (in 1985, the last convocation of the Verkhovniy
Soviet, the parliament of Soviet Armenia)2 to around 11 % during the process of radical changes in
political life after the end of Communist one-party rule in 1990.
According to the most recent official data, 52.2% of Armenia’s population is comprised of women.3 Since
early 1990-es, when Armenia underwent quite a challenging period of transfer to the market economy
coupled with serious economic crisis, significant unemployment rate and shortages in food and energy
supplies, the country witnessed an increased participation of women in labour market. This was largely
attributed to women’s flexibility in tackling crisis situations. At the same time women occupied certain
niches, including small business, service sector and remained significantly well represented in the
traditionally female fields of education and health. However, as gender roles remained strong, increased
participation in previously underrepresented sectors as well as certain emancipation of women did not
lead to their increased participation in government and decision-making processes. Political, economic,
social and other national-level decisions affecting the lives of the entire population of the country, are
unfortunately made and executed by men, and not only significant but even marginal participation of
women in Armenia’s public sector is yet to be seen. This is despite the existence of numerous local and
international undertakings aimed at encouragement and support of female participation in decision-
making processes at all levels.

1 See Global Gender Gap Index 2014 Report, Armenia, available at http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-
report-2014/rankings/.
2 “Women’s Political Participation in the 2012 Parliamentary Elections in the Republic of Armenia”, Armenian
Association of Women with University Education, Yerevan, 2012, p.80.
3 Official statistics provided by the National Statistics Service, available at www.armstat.am.
In 2007 the OSCE-supported study analyzing the participation of women in the 2007 parliamentary
elections concluded that imperfect electoral process, gender stereotypes and a lack of political experience
as well as limited financial resources put female political candidates at a disadvantage.4 Not much
changed in the consecutive five years. Following the 2012 Parliamentary Elections, a similar study
undertaken and sponsored by the same organizations came to the following conclusion: “Gender issues
were totally absent from platforms of the majority of political parties; no attention has been paid to
women’s issues within inter-party activities or, in general, to issues of promotion of women’s political
participation.”5
Serious concerns about gender inequality in Armenia have been raised for many years on numerous
occasions on international, regional as well as local levels. For instance, in Armenia's 2nd cycle of the
Universal Periodic Review on compliance with its human rights obligations under UN treaties in January
2015 in the Human Rights Council, the issue of gender equality and combating discrimination was the
main topic: over 30 recommendations out of 154 recommendations made related to these issues.6
The latest remark of Nil Muižnieks, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, is even more
alarming: “[…] substantial efforts remain to be undertaken in Armenia to ensure the equal status of
women in society and to combat discrimination and bias on the grounds of sex.”7
Today, women in the Armenia’s National Assembly make up only 10.7% of the total seats (14 out of 131
seats in the Parliament, one of them being a Deputy Speaker),8 despite the fact that an amendment to the
national Electoral Code stipulated that no more than 80% of candidates on a party list may be of the same
gender.9 However, the Code did not stipulate on the obligation to keep the quota requirement in the actual
number of elected MPs. As a result, such approach makes the mandatory quota only a formality, as in
practice female candidates were encouraged to withdraw their candidacies in favor of their male
colleagues.
Undoubtedly, some progress has been made since 2000, when women comprised only 3% of all MPs.10
Gradually the share of female MPs increased to 10.7%, however it remains insufficient. Two of female
MPs are leading two parliament fractions: Prosperous Armenia and Heritage.
The Electoral Code set similar quota (not more than 80% of the same gender on a party list) requirement
for the elections of the Yerevan municipal council.11 As a result of 2013 elections to the Yerevan

4“Women’s Political Participation in the 2007 Parliamentary Elections in the Republic of Armenia”, Armenian
Association of Women with University Education, Yerevan, 2007.
5 “Women’s Political Participation in the 2012 Parliamentary Elections in the Republic of Armenia”, Armenian
Association of Women with University Education, Yerevan, 2012, p.12-13.
6 See Report of the Working group on Universal Periodic Review, A/HRC/15/9, available at http://daccess-dds-
ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G10/149/42/PDF/G1014942.pdf?OpenElement. Note that the number excludes
recommendations to accede or ratify international treaties.
7 Nils Muižnieks, Report following Council of Europe’s High Commissioner for Human Rights visit to Armenia on
5-9 October 2014, Strasbourg, 2014, p. 5. Report available at https://wcd.coe.int.
8 More about the MPs’ background see at http://www.parliament.am/deputies.php?lang=arm.
9 Art.108 of the Electoral Code of the Republic of Armenia.
10 Statistics available at http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/indwm/default.htm.
11 Art. 155 (2) of the Electoral Code of the Republic of Armenia.
Municipal Council, out of 65 members 10 are women (15.4%). In the meantime the nationwide numbers
are much lower: out of 6,164 avagani (local council representatives), only 534 are women (8.6%).12
Despite all the measures adopted by the various political administrations to boost women’s political
representations, none of the three presidential administrations to date have taken the necessary measures
in changing their own ranks. For example, current cabinet, comprised of 18 ministers has only two female
executives and only seven women deputy ministers. It is important to note that these two ministerial
positions – Ministry of Culture and Ministry of Diaspora – are traditionally seen and perceived as ‘soft’
ministries, hence the appointment of female executives fits in. At the state and local level, there are only
two female deputy-governors and no female governors (marzpets) in the entire country.13
At the same time research shows that women are active in various areas of public life.14 Armenian
women, who have chosen public sector as their professional domain, are eager, energetic and very active
in civil society, fighting for human rights, for better welfare, for good education, for equality and making
genuine efforts to bring democratic changes to Armenia. It was observed also during the interviews and
consultations conducted in the process of the present research. Women who provided their expert opinion
on the issues raised in this report were diverse and had different background. Every woman had her own
agenda and approach. Some started their career in Soviet times or early 1990s, some repatriated from
abroad and brought their experience and knowledge to their work in Armenia, some are young educated
local professional leaders, who offered new ideas and visions on various, including gender issues. Their
activity areas are also different, some focus on civil activism, public campaigns against domestic
violence, women trafficking, political participation and building gender equality, others dedicated
themselves to research work focusing on gender issues. It is important to note that although there is an
unanimous agreement on some principal issues and goals of gender policies in Armenia, still there is no
one consolidated view on how to improve the current state of gender issues in the country.
However, after the collection of the interview data and corresponding analysis, a number of obstacles
were identified as the factors that require most urgent attention. The next section presents these main
aspects which hinder women’s political participation and which must be first addressed by the
stakeholders.

12 See more at Armenia: What it takes to be a woman in local governance, article available at
http://www.undp.org/content/brussels/en/home/ourwork/democraticgovernance/successstories/armenia--what-it-
takes-to-be-a-woman-in-local-governance.html
13 Statistics available at 2014 Gender Statistics Report of the National Statistical Service of Armenia, available at
http://www.armstat.am/en/?nid=82&id=1601 (last accessed on 3 March 2015).
14 Yet, even in this woman-friendly field male has become the majority. According to the survey, conducted by
World Learning, in the 1990’s, 70 percent of NGO leaders were women. http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/
publication/29304/csb-arm.pdf. However, as of 2014, the percentage of male NGO leaders had increased to 59,
Y.J. Paturyan, V. Gevorgyan “Armenian Civil Society after Twenty Years of Transition: Still Post-Communist?”
Turpanjian Center for Policy Analysis American University of Armenia, Yerevan, 2014, p. 78.
4. OBSTACLES TO WOMEN’S POLITICAL PARTICIPATION
a. The results of the survey
The diagram below presents opinions of the respondents on the most serious concerns on women’s
political participation using a 1-5 Scale. 35 experts interviewed in the frames of the research were asked
to assess a number of identified obstacles using a 1-5 scale, where 1 is the weaker concern and 5 is the
strongest concern15.

Diagram 1. What are the most and least critical obstacles to women’s political participation in
Armenia?

Analysis found that patriarchic/traditional family values were ranked as the main reason why Armenian
women are not adequately represented in the political life of the country.
The next highest concerns are very much linked to the first one and got almost equal numbers. Those are
a) insufficient social demand for better women’s activity in politics from wider public;
b) scarce financial security and independence of women;
c) lack of interest to participate in public decision-making from the majority of Armenian women
themselves.
What is interesting, is that obstacles that are characterized by weak performance of the government, such
as absence of adequate legislation, insufficient governmental attention and even corruption are ranked as

15 Average numbers for every obstacle, however, didn’t fall below 2,5, this is why the diagram starting value on axis
Y is 2,5
the least serious problems. On the one hand those numbers may suggest that respondents’ impression of
the work of the government in general is positive. However, taken together with the answers to the open
questions of the questionnaire, these numbers are explained by the general skepticism that current
Armenian government is able to make a significant impact on the situation by the isolated measures
which are rather aimed at forming positive image of the government itself than at genuine promoting of
democratic values in the Armenian androcentric society. The respondents did not expect current political
elite to be able to deal with the existing stereotypes and to be willing to launch global campaign for the
inclusion of women in the key political processes in Armenia. The role of government in the current
efforts in their view is confined by the “institutional advertising” and sham execution of instructions of
international organizations, which provide primary financial support of the gender programs implemented
by the government.
The latter argument is also supported by the analysis of the data represented in the Diagram 2 below.

Diagram 2. What are the most and least important enablers of women’s political participation?

As we can see, in the view of the respondents the targeted narrow measures such as forming special
bodies to deal with women’s political rights, introduction of mandatory quota and further legislative
initiatives aimed at boosting women political participation do not have the same impact as global media
campaigning on women’s political inclusion, changes in schools curriculum emphasizing the importance
of women’s inclusion in political life of the country, the genuine cooperation of the political elite with
civil society (through NGOs) and allocation of funds to support women’s initiatives.
The collected data confirmed the hypothesis that the collective effort should be directed in the first place
toward the reduction of the deep social stereotypes and cultural prejudices around women’s role in the
society. Having this problem resolved the adequate legislation, number of women MPs and special
governmental agencies would have the effect they are supposed to have in a democratic society with high
standards of gender equality and women’s inclusion in political processes.
In addition to the suggested factors the respondents were given to assess, they also had an option to add
their own thoughts and specify additional obstacles that would complement the suggested list and that in
their view are important for the better understanding of the current situation in Armenia.
Three respondents mentioned that something has to be done to relieve women from their every-day
household duties. Armenian women who are eager to pursue a successful career in any field struggle with
the double burden of work and family care. It was underlined that it is not sufficient to realize that
women’s social role is not confined by housework and children, the burden should be alleviated by
adequate governmental measures and shared responsibilities with men. Specifically, a system of state
sponsored child care centers is seen as a very effective measure, which would be in a great demand if
available. The possibility for men to have parental leaves would also be a good initiative with both
psychological and practical effects.
Having rated the key obstacles to the effective political activity of women in Armenia we would like to
turn to the more detailed overview of the main challenges that women politicians face today and possible
solutions thereto.

b. Key obstacles to women’s political participation
The gender researchers and activists suggest a combination of key reasons explaining women’s under-
representation in politics. The obstacles below are given in descending order of importance, according to
the results of the survey.
 Gender prejudices and cultural factors
The research revealed that the most seemingly intractable obstacle to women’s political participation is
the deeply embedded patriarchal social and cultural value system. The view that a woman’s place is at
home and political career and life is reserved only for men is still held by many in Armenia, including
women. Every research on the subject as well as interviewed respondents pointed out that women in
Armenia have a subordinate role both in the society and in family, and that this trend in fact has become
more prominent. Men are very skeptical on whether a woman may run for office or a woman’s ability to
effectively make decisions and govern predominantly male staff. Moreover, the traditionally revered
woman’s role as ‘goddess of the home’ demands from a given woman to dedicate almost all of her time to
household chores and family responsibilities. Women who choose other path are often perceived as not
successful in their personal life or simply losers. It is common for politically or economically active
Armenian women to be single (divorced), or without small children.
There is another aspect of the same problem identified by the interviewed women leaders. Many
important decisions in political life of the country are made not at the government headquarters, but in
smoking rooms, saunas, restaurants, closed parties, events where only men are allowed. In the Armenian
political culture smoking, drinking alcohol and decision making are often overlapping activities. This
practice “helps” to strengthen male solidarity, communication and leadership skills and is usually seen as
the best way to advance in a political career. At the same time, smoking and drinking alcohol are
considered to be un-lady-like behavior, inappropriate for a decent woman. As a result women are caught
in a trap: they are not able to participate in smoking and drinking and at the same time to be accepted as
an equal trusty partner and a problem-solver. However, if they do not participate they lose an important
opportunity to establish necessary working contacts and gain real influence and power through the “back
door channels”, available for men.
Women in politics are usually seen as a haphazard phenomenon, therefore their eventual failure is an

expected and self-evident outcome. The failure of women to perform well is automatically associated
with their gender and not with the lack of professional skills or abilities, or lack of resources as it would
be in case of men.16 “We used to have a female community leader in our village, but she was not able to
cope with the situation under hardship and get the necessary funds, so I decided to take the post as
management requires special skills and networking.” (incumbent head of a village community)
Women in politics feel more pressure to prove that they are capable of doing it. “When I was elected for
the first time, I started working on myself because it is very important when you represent women, you
have to be well prepared and knowledgeable in order to break stereotypes.” (Avagani Council member)
The following was identified as potential solution: continuous active work aimed at changing the existing
stereotypes, ranging from awareness raising and advocacy campaigns, to lobbying, public debates, media
activities, which are all to be directed towards forming a positive narrative and image of a politically
active and informed women, leading to acceptance and recognition of active woman’s role in political
life. Besides, the political culture should come out of the smoking rooms and men’s clubs, further steps
should be taken to improve transparency, accessibility and procedural formality in governmental
decision-making. In order to reach this goal it is in the women’s best interest to demand the media,
nonprofit groups and the public full access to decision-making.

 The lack of social demand and interest from women themselves
This factor was rated by the respondents as one of the most alarming one and closely related to the
previous factor. Armenian women have not united to form a truly large scale movement. The respondents
argued that this is due to the lack of real political opportunities, the absence of charismatic leaders and
adequate resources. The respondents stated that current female politicians both in the Government and the
Parliament do not enjoy respect of the public, hence they cannot play a role of the leader to be followed.
On the contrary, the most vocal of them by their behaviour and reputation discourage women who have

16