The motives of voters' voting became a topic of discussion in the Constitutional Court of Armenia.

The judge of the Constitutional Court of Armenia, Arthur Vagarshyan, on the fourth day of hearings on the results of the parliamentary elections, questioned the arguments of the opposition regarding the motives of the citizens' voting. Representatives of the Karapetyan and Kocharyan blocs stated that voters are vulnerable and suggestible.

As reported by "Caucasian Knot", seven parties appealed to the Constitutional Court against the final decision of the Central Election Commission on the parliamentary elections. The court combined all complaints into one proceeding. It will announce its decision no later than July 4. "Prosperous Armenia," which, according to the CEC, did not overcome the four percent barrier, demanded on the second day of the process to change the vote counting mechanism. On June 28, the third day of hearings, the Central Election Commission proposed the court to reject all claims demanding a review of the election results or a new vote.

Before the start of the session, the representative of "Strong Armenia," lawyer Aram Vardevanyan, stated that the Constitutional Court is the only supra-authority capable of resolving the dispute over the election results, but the possibility of pressure on it "cannot be ruled out," as there are "serious problems" with independence in the Armenian judicial system, reports Arminfo.

During the session, a dispute arose again about the impartiality of Judge Seda Safaryan: she asked representatives of three pro-Russian opposition forces to clarify whether statements from the President of Russia and other officials, who "took these political forces under protection," could have influenced the voters' will. The representative of "Prosperous Armenia," lawyer Aram Orbelian, demanded to stop the "identification of the three forces": he stated that the only force that received targeted external support and used it in its campaign was the "Civil Contract." The representative of the "Armenia" bloc, Artzvik Minasyan, added that the judge's approach could only be interpreted as support for the current authorities, reports Armenia Today.

The court asked the plaintiffs about the motives of the voter

Judge Arthur Vagarshyan questioned the very logic of the opposition's claims: according to him, voters in them appear as "zombies" who "were scared by some statements" or "rushed to vote for pension increases."

"Do you take people for automatons? Is it impossible for a word of hatred to have the opposite effect? You underestimate the citizen," he stated, asking the parties to express their assessment of the voters' motives. When the representative of the "Armenia" bloc, Tatevik Sogoyan, cited Jennifer Lopez's concert as a tool for attracting sympathy, Vagarshyan noted that such a move would only lower his assessment of the organizer in his eyes, reports News.am.

Aram Vardevanyan referred to the fact that Armenian voters have experienced war, losses, and the captivity of compatriots in recent years, and the "most informed person in the country" spoke of the threat of war if he was not elected.

"The rhetoric mentioned caused rejection in me, as well as in a fairly large number of people. But there is a large segment of the population for whom such statements caused fear," added Aram Orbelian. The representative of the "Armenia" bloc, Ovanes Khudoyan, in turn, stated that "the Armenian voter is extremely vulnerable and needs protection."

The Minister of Justice, Srbuhi Galyan, representing the "Civil Contract," stated that possible violations of the limits of permissible rhetoric did not affect the election results, as for politicians during the pre-election period, freedom of speech is broader than for ordinary citizens, reports Armenia Today.

Video surveillance and voting by military personnel

The representative of "Strong Armenia," Goar Meloyan, reported that, according to the bloc, video surveillance was absent at 236 polling stations. Vardevanyan pointed out that a gap of only 153 votes, which determined the passage of the third opposition force into parliament, makes the absence of video recordings particularly significant: video surveillance is provided by the Electoral Code as one of the control mechanisms.

The question of military personnel voting after 20:00 remained unanswered. The chairman of the CEC, Vaagn Ovakimyan, stated that the commission cannot determine whether the military came to the polling stations after closing: the available video recordings do not allow determining whether they managed to enter on time. The judges inquired why the CEC did not appoint a re-vote at two polling stations, the results of which were declared invalid. Ovakimyan again referred to the risk of "strategic voting," noting that the scale of re-voting would be "substantial."

It also became clear at the meeting that through the authorized representative of one of the polling stations where military personnel voted, Ovakimyan learned about what was happening in real-time. Vardevanyan pointed out that this authorized representative represented the "Civil Contract" - a party of which Ovakimyan was once a co-founder, informs Arminfo.

After the question-and-answer phase, the court moved on to consider more than 20 petitions submitted by the participants in the process.

"Prosperous Armenia" challenged the constitutionality of the legislative provision that allowed the CEC to count valid votes from the total number of voters, including invalid ballots. The party also petitioned for an examination of the envelopes and ballots for transparency. Ovakimyan explained that the used envelopes were sent for disposal, but unused ones from the same batch were preserved, and the ballots are in the archive.

The party also proposed to request data from the Ministry of Defense on the organization of voting for military personnel and to re-interrogate Ovakimyan as a witness. Lawyer Orbelian also submitted a package of secret documents for consideration at a closed session, reports News.am.

Representatives of the "Wings of Unity" party petitioned to clarify the real cost of the premises rented by the "Civil Contract" during the campaign: in their opinion, the ruling force exceeded the legal limit of campaign expenses. The "Armenia" bloc requested to obtain data on the cost of the parade on May 28, social programs of regional administrations, and tax benefits. The "Civil Contract," in turn, petitioned for the provision of protocols or their scans from all territorial election commissions, reports News.am.

On the "Caucasian Knot," a reference has been published "Elections 2026 to the National Assembly (parliament) of Armenia."