Freedom House human rights organization's report on Armenia is objective, but it is a political instrument for the world power centers, Aram Karapetyan, Leader of New Times opposition party, told ArmInfo.
He said that blaming such organizations as Freedom House or Amnesty International for impartiality - except some insignificant faults - is wrong. Western democracies rely on them when making decisions. The politician believes that Freedom House's data on Armenia fully reflect the situation in the country. Armenia is truly a country with semi-authoritarian regime.
"Over the last 5-6 years the authorities have been applying to the so-called soft force, soft dictatorship. The authorities do not make demonstrative repressions, do not fire at people or attack them with batons. Nevertheless, there is overall soft pressure on opponents. The public and political life is under control of the ruling regime. Television is in the hands of the authorities. Unnecessary elements are gradually being ousted from the political and public life," Karapetyan said.
Freedom House's rating will be used against Yerevan, if necessary, for instance, when providing foreign loans or other financial aid, he said.
Armenia proved in the category of the countries with semi-consolidated authoritarian regime in the Nations in Transit 2013 - Freedom House's comprehensive, comparative study of democratic development in 29 countries from Central Europe to Eurasia. This edition covers the period from January 1 through December 31, 2012 and measures progress according to the following indicators: electoral process, civil society, independent media, national democratic governance, local democratic governance, judicial framework and independence, and corruption.
The democracy score of Armenia is 5.36 in the ratings based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The Democracy Score is an average of ratings for the categories tracked in a given year.
Along with Ukraine (4.86), Georgia (4.75) and Kyrghyzstan (5.96) proved in the transitional category where the leaderships of Ukraine and Georgia are qualified as 'transitional governor or hybrid regime' and the leaderships of Armenia and Kyrghyzstan as 'semi-consolidated authoritarian regime.'