The draft law on amendments to the Law of the Republic of Armenia “On Audiovisual Media” is included in the agenda of the National Assembly session starting tomorrow, October 21. This brief document stipulates that the number of public broadcasters may not be less than two, instead of three as provided under the current law. In addition, the requirement for having an educational and cultural programming focus is also being removed. From this, as well as from the rationale of the draft, it becomes clear that this concerns the discontinuation of the spiritual and cultural “Shoghakat” television channel and its removal from the list of public broadcasters.

We, the undersigned journalistic organizations, do not consider it necessary here to examine in detail the official position regarding the necessity of this amendment, as it is highly general in nature, somewhat misleading, unconvincing, and raises numerous questions. In reality, the initiative is not based on the cited financial, managerial, qualitative, or operational issues, but rather on an evident political context—the gradually intensifying confrontation between the authorities and the Armenian Apostolic Church, with which, as is known, the “Shoghakat” television company is closely associated.

It is noteworthy that under the current law, broadcasters may not be founded or sponsored by religious organizations. This approach has been revised and amended at different stages of the Republic of Armenia’s independence: the restriction was once removed and later reintroduced depending on political expediency. Both the inclusion of “Shoghakat” in the public broadcasting system at the time and the current reconsideration of the issue are purely conjunctural, this time driven by the aforementioned conflict.

Meanwhile, the public interest requires that cultural, spiritual, educational, scientific, and similar topics—which, as a rule, are not driven by commercial objectives but are important for the development of society—be among the priorities of the Public Broadcaster. The proposed legislative amendment creates the opposite impression.

The issue cited in the official justifications—“more efficient use of resources and optimization of operations”—could have been addressed without this amendment, while still preserving the educational and cultural programming in its entirety.

Realistically, it is not difficult to predict that the parliamentary majority will adopt the proposed draft law, especially since it has already received the approval of the Standing Committee on Science, Education, Culture, Diaspora, Youth, and Sports of the National Assembly.

Nevertheless, even the adoption of the formulation “at least two programs” does not preclude the Public Broadcaster from maintaining a third channel fully dedicated to cultural, spiritual, educational, scientific, and similar topics. This is what the public interest requires, and we call on the authorities to consider it a priority and to pursue this approach.

In addition, we urge a principled abandonment of ad hoc, situation-driven approaches to media legislation, which have become a concerning practice and are harming the effective functioning and development of the sector.

Committee to Protect Freedom of Expression

Yerevan Press Club

Media Initiative Center

Media Diversity Institute – Armenia

Public Journalism Club

“Journalists for the Future” NGO

“For Rights” NGO