Vladimir Vardanyan’s election and the ongoing politicization of Armenia’s judiciary
07/04/2026
#DemocracyWatch — On March 25, 2026, the National Assembly elected Vladimir Vardanyan as a judge of the Constitutional Court. Only members of the ruling “Civil Contract” faction participated in the vote.
Vardanyan’s election sparked serious criticism in Armenia, as just days before being elected to the Constitutional Court, he was a member of the ruling party and a Member of Parliament. For years, he had been one of the most active members of the ruling party and also chaired the National Assembly’s Standing Committee on State and Legal Affairs. It is symbolic that Vardanyan was elected to fill the vacancy created after the termination of Hrayr Tovmasyan’s mandate.
Earlier, during Serzh Sargsyan’s presidency, when Tovmasyan—who had served as Minister of Justice and later became an MP from the Republican Party—was elected as a Constitutional Court judge, that move was also seen as undermining judicial independence and subordinating the Court to political power. This criticism continued even after the 2018 Velvet Revolution, as Tovmasyan remained a member of the Court. Thus, in October 2019, when the National Assembly discussed a proposal to terminate Tovmasyan’s mandate as Chairman of the Constitutional Court, MPs from the ruling “My Step” faction questioned his impartiality, including due to his prior affiliation with the Republican Party.
Years later, the “Civil Contract” party has effectively followed the same problematic path it once criticized.
In response to Vardanyan’s election, a number of civil society organizations in Armenia issued a joint statement condemning the move. The statement noted that leaving the ruling party and resigning from a parliamentary mandate just days before being elected is not sufficient to dispel doubts about Vardanyan’s independence and impartiality, given his long-standing and active political affiliation.
Filling constitutional courts with loyalists or figures directly affiliated with the ruling party has been one of the most common trends accompanying democratic backsliding in various countries over recent decades.
For example, in 2015, Poland’s outgoing government appointed five judges to the Constitutional Tribunal, but the new government that came to power in November 2015 refused to recognize them, appointed five loyal judges instead, and President Andrzej Duda swore in the judges selected by the ruling Law and Justice party.
In the next phase, in 2017–2018, the ruling party purged members of the Supreme Court by lowering the retirement age, terminating the mandates of around 40% of judges, including the sitting Chief Justice. Steps were also taken to establish control over the National Council of the Judiciary.
These initiatives by the ruling Law and Justice party were criticized by European institutions. The European Union and European judicial bodies assessed them as violations of the rule of law, which also led to financial restrictions.
Another notable example is Hungary, where after coming to power in 2010, Viktor Orbán’s party first increased the number of Constitutional Court judges from 11 to 15, filled the court with loyalists, and then reduced its powers.
Partly due to these and other steps undermining judicial independence, in December 2022 the EU froze around €22 billion in funds allocated to Hungary.
Considering these and other precedents, it can be stated that Vladimir Vardanyan’s election as a Constitutional Court judge aligns with broader and long-term international trends, where in transitional systems with weak institutions, power becomes increasingly concentrated in the executive. This process is not new in Armenia, and Vardanyan’s appointment is merely another episode in it. These steps seriously undermine judicial independence in Armenia, weaken the separation of powers, and erode the already fragile system of checks and balances.
As a result of this ongoing process, it has also become possible to instrumentalize the judicial system for narrow political purposes, something that has been observed over the past year.
It is also noteworthy that, as in other recent anti-democratic developments, no external actor supporting or interested in Armenia’s democratic development publicly condemned this step. Moreover, some actors even congratulated Vardanyan on his appointment.
While this approach may be politically expedient in the short term, it will, in the long run, have serious consequences both for the prospects of democratic consolidation in Armenia and for the credibility of those international actors.
Tigran Grigoryan, Hayk Khanumyan
Democracy Watch is a joint initiative of CivilNet and the Regional Center for Democracy and Security.