
ArmInfo. The Central Electoral Commission (CEC) of Armenia issued a lengthy statement regarding its refusal to schedule re-runs at three polling stations where the parliamentary election results were previously annulled. As a result, Gagik Tsarukyan's Prosperous Armenia party failed to enter parliament by a mere 160 votes. As a result, the picture of the new parliament has taken on a completely different appearance. The CEC of Armenia stated that they should not automatically schedule re-runs after the annulment of the voting results at any polling station.
"When making this decision, the Central Election Commission must consider protecting the true will of voters and ensuring the legitimacy of the election results. Therefore, the CEC must choose a measure that is necessary in the given circumstances, proportionate, and does not cause more distortion than the violation, the consequences of which must be remedied. In the case of a partial repeat vote, the following problem arises. Voters who participated in the main vote cast their ballots when the overall result was not yet known. They did not know who was leading, how many votes there were, which party would pass the threshold, and what impact their vote would have on the final result," the Central Election Commission said in a statement.
The Central Election Commission of Armenia believes that voters participating in the repeat vote will vote in a different situation: for them, the overall picture may be known (in this case, 99.8 percent of voters). The Central Election Commission is confident that, under these circumstances, the will of voters can be formed not on the basis of their initial political preferences or free expression of will, but by calculating the possibility of adjusting the already known result.
"This risk is generally characterized as tactical voting. The Venice Commission also recognized that partial re-votes are not always an appropriate measure. In its 2025 urgent report, it notes that if irregularities affect only a few polling stations, then retaliatory measures could, in principle, be limited to those stations. However, this approach has an important exception: partial re-votes cannot be an appropriate measure if a new vote in those stations, due to the possibility of tactical voting, does not guarantee a fair election result.
From the perspective of equal suffrage, the problem is also obvious. Re-elections can undermine the equality of voters, since one group of voters finds themselves in significantly different starting conditions than others," the Central Election Commission added.
Referring to the Constitutional Court, the CEC of Armenia noted that if the will of voters participating in the main vote has already been legally expressed, then a subsequent re-vote should not have a secondary and deliberate impact on that will.
"Therefore, when calling a repeat vote, the Central Election Commission must also consider whether the same free and equal environment will be ensured during the repeat vote as on the main election day. Does the known result create a risk of tactical voting? Will the rights of voters who have already cast their ballots legally be violated? Have sources of illegal or corrupt influence been neutralized? If the answers to these questions indicate that the repeat vote will not ensure a free, equal, and fair result, then it should not be called. Not calling a repeat vote in such a case does not mean ignoring the violation. It means refusing to pursue measures that could further distort the will of the voters. The Central Election Commission should be guided not by the logic of mechanical re-election, but by the principles of free and equal elections, proportionality, and the protection of the true will of the voters, as guaranteed by the Constitution, as an independent body overseeing the legality of elections in accordance with the Constitution," the institute emphasized.