On March 18, the NA adopted (78 deputies voted for, 9-against and 12-abstained), amendments, developed by the coalition factions, to the Civil Code and the Criminal Procedure Code.

The package has been submitted to the Venice Commission for three times, and a number of comments and suggestions were received.  The last recommendation was given in December 2009, where the Commission indicated that the package needed improvement.  

Legal State faction, the co-author of the draft law declares that the Venice Commission's suggestion were taken into account and significant changes were made in the package. 

However, yesterday prior to voting, Styopa Safaryan, head of the Heritage faction, asked for 20-minute break, expecting that co-authors will present the conclusion of the Venice Commission on the package.  After 20 minutes, Hovhannes Margaryan, deputy from the Legal State political party approached Safaryan and handed an envelope with a red ribbon, where the Venice Commission indicates about twenty disagreements regarding the amendments' package. The Heritage suggested that the elaborated package is sent to the Venice Commission for review and then voted for.  However, Hovik Abrahamyan refused the suggestion.

In fact, only a few independent deputies and the Heritage faction voted against the amendments.

The package raised protest among journalists.  Thus, the president of the Yerevan Press Club declared that the amendments "may aim at establishing control over the undesirable mass media. Laws of this kind can promote freedom of speech only if they are of a very high quality."

According to Navasardyan, the law does not specify notions such as "false witnessing", "libel", also the size of punishment is not specified, which may give the not-independent judges in Armenia an opportunity to use the law subjectively and selectively."

Larisa Alaverdyan, the first ombudsman, raised her concern during the discussion of the package, regarding the ways of evaluation of words whether they are offensive or not.  She brought an example for review: "When wild people want to reach fruits, they break the tree, and the same is totalitarian state." These are words of Montesquieu.  Have our judges to judge the words according to the law standards whether these words of Montesquieu are offensive or not?

According to Ms. Alaverdyan, all analyses of the package rate it as a new club for the mass media's head, and it reflects the current situation with legal and judicial practice of Armenia. She suggested that the government starts the process with itself.