In a stinging blow to Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s deepening authoritarianism, the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce has ordered the Armenian government to halt its attempt to forcibly nationalize the Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA), the country’s primary electricity distributor. The ruling stands as a rare but vital win for rule of law and property rights in a country where Facebook posts increasingly masquerade as legal decrees.
At the center of the controversy is jailed billionaire Samvel Karapetyan, a vocal critic of Pashinyan’s war against the Armenian Apostolic Church and, by extension, the last vestiges of Armenia’s national institutions not yet subdued by his regime. Hours after Karapetyan’s politically charged arrest on June 18, Pashinyan posted on Facebook a pledge to “quickly” nationalize ENA — a move that appeared less about public interest and more about political retribution.
True to form, the Civil Contract-controlled parliament rammed through a bill on July 2 allowing the government to temporarily seize ENA’s operations and force a sale within 90 days. Regulatory rubber-stampers quickly fell in line, with Romanos Petrosyan, a Civil Contract loyalist, appointed as interim manager.
However, the international arbitration court’s ruling casts serious doubt on the legality of Pashinyan’s maneuver. The tribunal found that Armenia’s actions may violate the 1995 bilateral investment treaty with Cyprus — where Tashir Group, ENA’s parent company, is legally registered.
“This verdict shows that justice exists in the world and it is not carried out through Facebook, as is the case in Armenia now,” said Narek Karapetyan, Samvel Karapetyan’s nephew and chairman of ENA. He added that the ruling invalidates any changes to the company’s management structure — a direct challenge to Petrosyan’s appointment and the sacking of ENA’s acting CEO, Davit Ghazinyan, which Ghazinyan himself called illegal.
Pashinyan’s office, in its now-familiar style of selective interpretation, claimed the ruling does not restrict its appointment of Petrosyan. The statement sidestepped the ruling’s substance and instead offered vague bromides about international law — the same law the government had just been accused of breaching.
Let us be clear: this is not about efficient energy management, nor nationalization in the public interest. This is a regime that fears dissent, especially from wealthy and influential figures who refuse to kneel. Pashinyan’s targeting of Karapetyan mirrors his broader strategy — neutralize, defame, and eliminate anyone who challenges his self-image as Armenia’s sole savior.
And yet, despite the regime’s reach, the ENA episode has delivered a critical reminder: Armenia is still bound by international treaties and cannot operate as a lawless fiefdom. The SCC ruling not only shields ENA from an unjust takeover — it affirms that there are limits to Pashinyan’s arrogance.
Opposition parties, independent experts, and civil society must treat this not as an isolated case, but as a precedent. It proves that the international legal order — though imperfect — can be leveraged against domestic tyranny. The Armenian people deserve a government that respects institutions, not one that wages vendettas through parliamentary ambush and social media spectacle.
The battle for ENA is not just about electricity. It is about sovereignty — not just from foreign powers, but from the capricious will of a regime that believes the law begins and ends with one man’s Facebook feed.
