Audit report on Amulsar gold mine 'unrelated to Environment Ministry'

The government-commissioned audit report on Amulsar had absolutely nothing to do with the Ministry of Environment, a spokesperson for the agency said today, ruling out their engagement in the recent environmental impact assessment activities in the gold mine located in Armenia's south-east (Vayots Dzor region).

‟The Investigative Committee itself established the [procedures for] expert examination within the scopes of the proceeding requiring a probe. That does not pertain to the functions of the Environment Ministry. A criminal case was instituted, as part of which the Investigative Committee assigned an expert examination,″ Armen Vardanyan told Tert.am.

Asked whether the Ministry was not supposed at all to give its professional opinion, the spokesperson said that they had submitted a 2016 environmental impact assessment report to the Committee ‟along with numerous other necessary documents″ to provide a comprehensive overview of the expert conclusion.

As for Minister Erik Grigoryan's position on the issue, Vardanyan admitted his somewhat negative stance on boosting mine exploitation projects on the territory of Armenia. ‟The minister, in general, has repeatedly stated that it isn't right to attach priority to the mining industries in Armenia.″

In a live broadcast aired through Facebook on Sunday, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan cited the Committee's recent conclusion ‟ruling out any environmental hazards″ to the water resources in nearby areas (esp. the resort town of Jermuk). He also said that the impact risks to the river canals (water systems connecting Arpa and Vorotan) were found to be ‟absolutely manageable″. The premier added that Lydian International, the Anglo-American company in charge for the mine exploitation, has outlined 10 environmental impact mitigation measures, ‟with further plans to add another five″ to increase the safety standards. ‟The Investigative Committee is also arriving at that conclusion,″ Pashinyan said.

His repeated references to the findings were perceived unequivocally by the public at large, with many environmentalists expressing their surprise that an environmental conclusion could have been issued by the Investigative Committee.  

In a statement on Wednesday, the Committee reported several shortcomings in the conclusion, outlining them one by one in a separate document enclosed to its official press release.