A return to a semi-presidential system would be destructive for Armenia. This view was expressed by international law expert and constitutional lawyer Vardan Poghosyan, who criticized the ideas currently circulating about changing the country’s system of governance. According to him, such a shift would not resolve existing problems but would generate new and deeper systemic risks.
The semi-presidential system as a source of permanent conflict
Poghosyan argues that the semi-presidential model inherently creates a dual executive — a president and a prime minister. This structure almost inevitably leads to prolonged institutional conflicts.
Disputes constantly arise over who is responsible for foreign policy, who should represent the country in international forums, and how power should be divided between the two centres. These unresolved questions, he notes, repeatedly escalate into political confrontation.
As an example, he refers to Poland, where for many years the president and the prime minister have been unable to agree even on who should represent the country at high-level international meetings. According to him, even constitutional tribunal rulings have failed to provide a final resolution to these disputes.
Risks of a presidential system without aligned majorities
Poghosyan also considers a “pure” presidential system risky when the president and the parliamentary majority do not align politically.
In such circumstances, the system becomes ungovernable. Each power centre begins pulling the institutional framework in its own direction, undermining stability and preventing effective governance.
Parliamentary system: flawed, but correctable
In the constitutional lawyer’s view, a parliamentary system theoretically allows for the introduction of additional checks and balances that can partially limit the dominant position of the prime minister.
The problem, however, is that in Armenia even the existing constitutional mechanisms are not fully implemented. He recalls that the Constitution obliges ministers to independently conduct policy within their respective spheres under the government programme, while direct instructions from the prime minister are permitted only in exceptional cases.
He suggests asking any minister whether they are even familiar with this provision and whether they have ever attempted to apply it in practice. For Poghosyan, this clearly illustrates the absence of a developed political culture.
Constitutional order and political culture
According to Poghosyan, the effectiveness of constitutional governance ultimately depends on the political culture of the ruling elite. Although the Constitution significantly expands the rights of the opposition and parliamentary minorities, these rights are effectively devalued under conditions of arbitrary decision-making.
If the authorities simply decide that a certain institution will not be formed or will not function, the Constitution is reduced to a mere formality.
The constitutional order has been effectively dismantled
Poghosyan emphasized that, in his assessment, Armenia’s constitutional order has been effectively dismantled since at least June 22, 2020, with the process only deepening in subsequent years.
Today, he argues, the country is experiencing genuine lawlessness. The Constitution is violated on a daily basis and is not defended by the very institutions entrusted with that responsibility.
In this context, he criticized the role of the president of the Republic, noting that the Constitution assigns the president a supervisory role in safeguarding constitutional order. In practice, however, this mission is not being fulfilled.
According to Poghosyan, the Constitution is trampled every day, while the president remains silent because he is effectively part of the same political majority.
He concludes that no constitution, by itself, can guarantee democracy if the parliamentary majority and the political culture of the elite remain deeply problematic. Poghosyan notes that the overwhelmingly dominant parliamentary majorities formed in 2018 and 2021 led to a further erosion of governance.
At the same time, he believes that there is still an opportunity to change the situation this year. Everything depends on how opposition political forces participate in the elections and how effectively they communicate to society the gravity of the situation Armenia is facing. According to him, the resolution must occur within the current year.