Central Election Commission of Armenia explained its refusal to order re-votes at three polling stations where results were annulled
15.06.2026,
10:59
Central Election Commission Chairman Vahagn Hovakimyan stated that the commission should not automatically order re-votes at polling stations where results were declared invalid.
YEREVAN, June 15. /ARKA/. Central Election Commission Chairman Vahagn Hovakimyan stated that the commission should not automatically order re-votes at polling stations where results were declared invalid.
According to him, when making such a decision, the CEC must consider the protection of the genuine will of voters, the legitimacy of the election results, and the proportionality of the measure taken.
"The commission must choose a measure that, in the specific circumstances, is necessary, proportionate, and does not distort the results more than the violation whose consequences must be corrected," Hovakimyan said in a statement released on Monday.
He noted that partial re-votes pose a risk of tactical voting, since voters at such stations cast their ballots after the overall election results have been released.
"Voters who participated in the main vote cast their ballots under conditions where the overall result was not yet known. They didn't know who was leading, what the vote difference was, which political force would clear the threshold, and what impact their vote would have on the final outcome," the head of the Central Election Commission noted.
Meanwhile, according to him, those participating in the repeat vote may already know the overall picture of the election—in this case, the results of 99.8% of voters.
"Under such conditions, the voter's will may be formed not on the basis of their initial political preferences and free expression of will, but based on the calculation of adjusting the already known result. This risk is usually characterized as tactical voting," Hovakimyan stated.
He also cited the Venice Commission's approach, according to which a partial repeat vote is not always an appropriate measure if, due to the risk of tactical voting, it does not guarantee a fair election outcome.
Hovakimyan emphasized that a repeat vote could violate the principle of equal suffrage, as one group of voters finds themselves in significantly different circumstances than others.
According to him, when assessing the consequences of electoral violations, the rights of voters who have already made their choice legally must also be taken into account.
"If the answers to these questions indicate that a repeat vote will not ensure a free, equal, and fair result, it should not be called," the head of the Central Election Commission (CEC) noted.
He explained that refusing to call a repeat vote in such a case does not mean ignoring the violation, but rather rejecting a measure that could further distort the will of voters.
"The CEC should be guided not by the logic of mechanically calling a repeat vote, but by the constitutional principles of free and equal elections, proportionality, and the protection of the genuine will of citizens," Hovakimyan stated.
About the court's decision
Earlier, the Administrative Court rejected the Prosperous Armenia party's claims to invalidate the results of two polling stations. However, the court found a violation and the need for a rerun.
About the elections
On Sunday, June 14, the Central Election Commission of Armenia presented the final results of the National Assembly elections held on June 7.
According to the CEC, the ruling Civil Contract party received 49.745% of the vote (64 seats), the opposition Strong Armenia bloc received 23.271% (29 seats), and the opposition Armenia bloc received 9.923% (12 seats).
Another opposition party, Prosperous Armenia, received 3.989% of the vote, falling just shy of the 4% threshold.
A total of 18 political forces participated in the elections.
According to him, when making such a decision, the CEC must consider the protection of the genuine will of voters, the legitimacy of the election results, and the proportionality of the measure taken.
"The commission must choose a measure that, in the specific circumstances, is necessary, proportionate, and does not distort the results more than the violation whose consequences must be corrected," Hovakimyan said in a statement released on Monday.
He noted that partial re-votes pose a risk of tactical voting, since voters at such stations cast their ballots after the overall election results have been released.
"Voters who participated in the main vote cast their ballots under conditions where the overall result was not yet known. They didn't know who was leading, what the vote difference was, which political force would clear the threshold, and what impact their vote would have on the final outcome," the head of the Central Election Commission noted.
Meanwhile, according to him, those participating in the repeat vote may already know the overall picture of the election—in this case, the results of 99.8% of voters.
"Under such conditions, the voter's will may be formed not on the basis of their initial political preferences and free expression of will, but based on the calculation of adjusting the already known result. This risk is usually characterized as tactical voting," Hovakimyan stated.
He also cited the Venice Commission's approach, according to which a partial repeat vote is not always an appropriate measure if, due to the risk of tactical voting, it does not guarantee a fair election outcome.
Hovakimyan emphasized that a repeat vote could violate the principle of equal suffrage, as one group of voters finds themselves in significantly different circumstances than others.
According to him, when assessing the consequences of electoral violations, the rights of voters who have already made their choice legally must also be taken into account.
"If the answers to these questions indicate that a repeat vote will not ensure a free, equal, and fair result, it should not be called," the head of the Central Election Commission (CEC) noted.
He explained that refusing to call a repeat vote in such a case does not mean ignoring the violation, but rather rejecting a measure that could further distort the will of voters.
"The CEC should be guided not by the logic of mechanically calling a repeat vote, but by the constitutional principles of free and equal elections, proportionality, and the protection of the genuine will of citizens," Hovakimyan stated.
About the court's decision
Earlier, the Administrative Court rejected the Prosperous Armenia party's claims to invalidate the results of two polling stations. However, the court found a violation and the need for a rerun.
About the elections
On Sunday, June 14, the Central Election Commission of Armenia presented the final results of the National Assembly elections held on June 7.
According to the CEC, the ruling Civil Contract party received 49.745% of the vote (64 seats), the opposition Strong Armenia bloc received 23.271% (29 seats), and the opposition Armenia bloc received 9.923% (12 seats).
Another opposition party, Prosperous Armenia, received 3.989% of the vote, falling just shy of the 4% threshold.
A total of 18 political forces participated in the elections.
