Pashinyan floats parliamentary investigation into Armenian Apostolic Church

By Siranush Adamyan

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said parliament could establish an investigative commission into the Armenian Apostolic Church, a step that would deepen state involvement in the institution despite constitutional guarantees protecting the autonomy of religious organizations.

Pashinyan said in an interview with BOON TV published on Saturday evening that a state agency under the prime minister’s office had prepared a report on what he called a crisis in the Church and possible ways to resolve it.

He said he had read the finalized draft, discussed the issue preliminarily with the board of his ruling Civil Contract party and expected the report to be published.

“I do not rule out that, following the publication of the report, an investigative commission will also be created in the National Assembly, which will make proposals for legislative changes arising from the report,” Pashinyan said.

The report remains unpublished, making it impossible to independently assess its findings or the evidence on which they are based. No detailed mandate for the possible commission has been announced.

“The situation we have today in the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church is simply terrible, because our Church is occupied,” Pashinyan said.

Asked who had occupied it, he replied: “It is occupied by Ktrich Nersisyan [Karekin II’s secular name].”

The possible investigation would form part of a broader government effort to change the Church’s leadership and governance. The removal of Karekin II is included among the objectives of the government’s five-year program through 2031.

The program envisages removing the Catholicos, electing a locum tenens, adopting a new Church charter and subsequently holding an election for a new Catholicos. Placing the removal of a specific religious leader in an official government program has turned the governing party’s dispute with Karekin II into declared state policy.

The government has presented the campaign as a matter of “spiritual security,” but analysts say the policy raises constitutional and democratic concerns by blurring the boundary between the state and religious institutions.

Also read: Why Armenia’s ‘spiritual security’ policy raises constitutional concerns

Armenia’s Constitution guarantees the freedom of religious organizations, states that they are separate from the state and recognizes their autonomy. It also recognizes the Armenian Apostolic Church’s special role in the spiritual life, culture and national identity of Armenians.

A separate constitutional provision allows relations between the state and the Church to be regulated by law. Pashinyan cited that provision as authority for possible legislative action.

But allowing the state to regulate its relations with the Church does not necessarily give the executive or parliament the power to determine the Church’s leadership, doctrine or internal governing structure. Any parliamentary investigation and resulting legislation would have to be assessed against the Constitution’s guarantees of religious freedom, autonomy and separation from the state.

Pashinyan proposed legislation that could regulate the creation of parish councils, internal elections and the participation of believers in discussing and nominating candidates for Church leadership.

“The Church is not the Catholicos; the Church is the community of believers,” he said. He later added: “The Church is neither the Catholicos nor the bishops. The Church is the people who believe.”

Giving parishioners a greater role could be presented as an effort to improve accountability. But legislation drafted by a political majority that has already committed itself to removing the Catholicos could also allow the government to influence internal Church elections and leadership decisions.

Pashinyan also alleged that religious organizations had violated Armenian electoral legislation by participating in political campaigning.

“That must lead to consequences,” he said, without presenting evidence during the interview or referring to a final court judgment establishing such a violation.

Asked whether Karekin II was acting under Russian influence or carrying out Kremlin instructions, Pashinyan did not answer directly. He said the forthcoming government report contained details that should be considered in their entirety after its publication.

Pashinyan then referred to archival material released by Armenia’s National Security Service that, he said, identified Archbishop Yezras Nersisyan, Karekin II’s brother and head of the Church’s Russian and New Nakhichevan Diocese, as a former Soviet KGB agent.

Pashinyan did not explain how the allegation concerning Yezras Nersisyan’s Soviet-era activities related to Karekin II or provide evidence of current links between the Catholicos and the Kremlin.  

Former Education and Science Minister Armen Ashotyan has made a separate allegation about a possible government information campaign against the Church.

In a Facebook post, Ashotyan said a confidential source had told him that the Armenian government hired a Western lobbying firm to discredit the Armenian Apostolic Church and Karekin II in European media.

Ashotyan alleged that the campaign would promote the description of the Church as a “Kremlin agent” and portray it as an obstacle to Armenia’s peace process and geopolitical reorientation. He said the purported effort also targeted think tanks and expert communities and was intended to create international acceptance for the government’s actions against the Church.

Ashotyan said he was not authorized to identify his source but assessed the information as “almost 100%” accurate. He provided no documentary or independently verifiable evidence for the allegation.

The government’s confrontation with the Church has already drawn international criticism.

The World Council of Churches warned against “undue interference” in the Church’s internal affairs after Karekin II and six members of the Supreme Spiritual Council appeared in criminal court.

Also read: World Council of Churches voices concern over Armenia's treatment of Apostolic Church

They are accused of failing to comply with a civil court order requiring the temporary reinstatement of a defrocked bishop while his lawsuit was pending. The Church rejects the charges, arguing that the appointment and removal of bishops are governed by canon law and do not fall within the authority of secular courts.

The case marked the first criminal prosecution of a serving Catholicos in Armenia’s history. The opening hearing ended without substantive proceedings after the judge recused himself.

Six United Nations human rights experts have questioned Armenia’s use of criminal and terrorism-related charges against senior clergy. Religious freedom organization Forum 18 has also described the proceedings as state interference in the Church’s internal affairs, while religious and civil society organizations have criticized the prosecution.

Church officials are not exempt from criminal law, and credible allegations of ordinary criminal conduct can be investigated. But an investigation into the Church as an institution — particularly one initiated by a government committed to removing its leader — raises a different set of legal questions involving religious autonomy and the constitutional limits of state power.

Also read: World Council of Churches voices concern over Armenia's treatment of Apostolic Church