Change of ENA management not politically motivated - minister 

ArmInfo.  It has been a year since the discussions around the Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA) CJSC have become permanent, even parliamentary hearings were held, however, despite this, questions continue to be raised about "why now and why after the political statements" of Samvel Karapetyan these processes were launched. Thus, on July 24, the Minister of Justice of Armenia Srbuhi Galyan answered a journalist's question about the appointment of Romanos Petrosyan as the temporary manager of ENA.

In this regard, she assured that the discussions on this issue began  much earlier and are not related to the assumptions that are actively  discussed in the media. In particular, the process of nationalization  of ENA, which belongs to the Russian businessman Samvel Karapetyan  after the latter's statements in support of the Armenian Apostolic  Church.

"The appointment of Romanos Petrosyan was necessary in the interests  of the public, in order to avoid sabotage, collapse and emergency  situations. However, the change of leadership is perceived not in the  context of all previous events, but only the latest (statements by  businessman Samvel Karapetyan - ed.).  Nevertheless, it cannot be  ignored that the residents of Armenia faced constant power outages,"  Galyan emphasized.

At the same time, she acknowledged that the problems with power  outages will persist, since it is impossible to solve them "in 2-3  days."

Speaking about Armenia's statement that the decision of the Stockholm  arbitration will not be implemented, Galyan went into the legal  thicket, trying to give at least some intelligible explanation for  this step by the Armenian authorities. According to her,  international arbitrations are alternative dispute resolution  mechanisms, the role of which is significant in the Armenian legal  system. Galyan added that Armenia has certain obligations in this  context, since it has joined a number of international conventions  and is obliged to follow their decisions.

Touching upon the specific arbitration decision on Electric Networks  of Armenia CJSC, the Minister noted that in this case a bilateral  investment agreement is in effect and a specific procedure is  envisaged in the event of disputes on the recognition of tribunal  decisions.

"If you study the arbitration decision, you will see a reference to  the relevant New York Convention (on the recognition and enforcement  of foreign arbitral awards - ed.), which defines the mechanisms in  case of its non-fulfillment. This procedure is also present in our  legislation," the Minister added.

As Galyan explained, in order to recognize the arbitration decision,  the party has the right to apply to the Armenian court, after which  only it will become binding. She also noted that according to the  legislation of Armenia and the international convention, it is  possible not to implement this decision if it contradicts public  order.

"Armenia is guided by national legislation and international  conventions, and no violation is allowed. All risks are always  discussed in the government, and the risks that were considered  within the framework of the ENA were assessed as very high. The  decision was aimed at overcoming these risks. As for the decision of  the international tribunal, we will patiently await the consideration  of the dispute. The government will present its facts, and when the  international arbitration gives its reaction to the content of the  dispute, then we will assess all possible risks," the head of the  Ministry of Justice summarized.

The head of the Tashir Group of Companies Samvel Karapetyan and his  family won the arbitration dispute against the government of Armenia  in the case of nationalization of the ENA. The case was considered by  the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC)  on the basis of the Agreement between Armenia and Cyprus on the  Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments dated January 18,  1995. A representative of the Government of the Republic of Armenia  also participated in the consideration of the case.

The Tribunal held that Armenia must refrain from implementing the  amendments recently adopted by parliament to the Energy and Public  Services Regulatory Authority laws, as well as from taking any  further steps aimed at seizing ENA assets. The Tribunal concluded  that urgent protective measures were required because the actions of  the Republic of Armenia "raise serious doubts about the compliance  with the Agreement on Mutual Protection of Investments between  Armenia and Cyprus".