YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 26, NOYAN TAPAN. The second reading of the draft law on property alienation for public and state needs started at the special session of the RA National Assembly convened on September 26 on the initiative of the Armenian government. Its adoption is conditioned by the RA Constitutional Court's decision of April 18, 2006, according to which the National Assembly and the government have to bring the legal acts on alienation of territories into line with the RA Constitution no later than October 1, and to legislatively regulate the legal regime of property alienation for state and public needs in superior public interests. While the issue was being discussed, the owners of property already alienated and in the process of alienation staged a protest outside the building of the parliament. Members of the Orinats Yerkir factions and some other deputies suggested broadcasting the discussion on Public Television, but the proposal received only 48 votes in favor instead of the required 66. Several deputies reminded that in accordance with a preliminary agreement, extended parliamentary hearings on the given draft with the participation of protesting owners were scheduled for September 29. The Chairman of the NA Standing Committee of State and Legal Issues Rafik Petrosian confirmed the intention to hold such hearings but noted that "Tuesday came earlier than Friday". The main speaker, RA Minister of Justice Davit Harutyunian said that the draft has been revised based on the proposals made after its adoption in first reading. He indicated the increase in the amount of compensation payments to property owners against property alienated as one of the essential amendments. The draft passed in first reading considered an amount exceeding 5% of the market value of property alienated as equivalent compensation, whereas 5% has been replaced with 10% in the draft discussed in second reading. According to the minister, in amending the draft, an attempt has been made to create some incentives so that the property owner and the property purchaser will be interested in settling their relations based on an agreement rather than by going to court. For this purpose the government has made an attempt to work out some mechanisms of counterbalances and restraints for both sides. It is noteworthy that the government's right to make decisions about property alienation for public and state needs, as well as its right to decide what represents a superior public interest (only existence of such an interest may be a ground for property alienation) has been retained in the draft.

---