During a working visit to Ostrava, Czech Republic, Nelli Davtyan, head of the Migration and Citizenship Service under Armenia’s National Security Service, discussed the production and certification processes for new biometric documents intended for foreigners and stateless individuals. Davtyan met with Stanislav Pospišek, head of production at IN Groupe, and other specialists involved in developing the new documents, signaling a significant step in Armenia’s broader identity management reform. The discussions occurred amid a broader push to streamline procedures for people residing in Armenia who do not hold citizenship or have refugee status, aiming to reduce the need for cross-border travel to secure identity papers.
The central question posed by Davtyan was how the changes will affect ordinary citizens, foreign residents, and those without citizenship who seek stable identification. She noted that the legal framework for such documents has always existed, but the regime had not been implemented into circulation. The new system will address two key document types: a conventional travel document, intended solely for border crossings, and a flexible identification card that can be used within the republic without extra charges. For those without citizenship and recognized refugees, the identification card represents a more accessible, affordable means of proving identity within Armenia’s borders.
One notable development discussed in Ostrava concerns a separate biometric document for individuals performing duties for foreign diplomatic missions in Armenia. This category will receive its own biometric passport, manufactured from polycarbonate and designed to meet international security standards from raw material to integrated features. The emphasis on polycarbonate and robust security aligns with global norms for durable, tamper-resistant credentials used in international diplomacy and cross-border movements. Davtyan stressed that the new diplomatic credential is not a substitute for the universal identification card but an independently secured document for a specific diplomatic context.
The visit also focused on the major stages involved in issuing a biometric Armenian passport for citizens and non-citizens alike, including the cover page, data page, and visa pages, as well as the roll-out of an “all-in-one” self-service system. The plan envisions a streamlined workflow (from application to issuance), with the state maintaining exclusive decision-making authority over status and which document is issued. In practice, private sector partners will only begin biometric data collection or document production after the state grants a green light. Davtyan emphasized that until the state approves the case, there are clearly defined backstage mechanisms—outwardly, the process may appear to move quickly, but behind the scenes, work is governed by strict procedures and approvals.
The overarching aim, according to Davtyan, is to add layers of legal identity protection. The new system aims to render forgery or theft of identity almost impossible by embedding advanced security features and standardized issuance practices. The pilot and full-scale rollout will depend on regulatory alignment and rigorous quality control, but the trajectory is toward a fingerprint of process reliability that reduces the opportunity for manipulation. Davtyan also reiterated Armenia’s commitment to preserving the state’s exclusive prerogative to define legal status and determine the corresponding document, underscoring that any private partner’s role is conditional and time-bound to the state’s green light.
Davtyan described the current system as fragile, noting that the new framework seeks to harden it against exploitation. The modernization effort hinges on a careful balance: ensuring that people who need documentation can obtain it with minimal delay, while maintaining strict safeguards against fraud and misrepresentation. She spoke of additional protective layers intended to shield individuals’ legal identities and to provide documents that are interoperable with international standards. The private sector’s involvement will be regulated to prevent any unilateral action that might compromise security or undermine the state’s sovereignty over identity decisions.
Another important dimension discussed was the user experience and accessibility. A key objective is to eliminate unnecessary costs and bureaucratic friction for the public within Armenia, enabling individuals to rely on a credible identification card as their primary proof of identity for everyday transactions and access to services. The biometric passport for non-citizens and refugees alike would be issued under a standard framework with built-in protections, ensuring consistency across institutions and reducing the risk of inconsistent treatment or delays. The approach aims to be robust yet user-friendly, providing a practical path to lawful recognition and movement for people who previously faced obstacles due to their legal status.
In outlining the phased approach, Davtyan highlighted that the process toward green-light status is as crucial as the final product. The state must first ensure that all legal and technical prerequisites are met, including alignment with international norms for security, privacy, and data handling. The Ostrava meeting underscored Armenia’s intent to adopt a modern identity ecosystem that can adapt to evolving border-control and immigration needs while preserving personal rights and due process. The decision to pursue biometric identity across multiple document types reflects recognition of a complex population landscape—citizens, permanent residents, non-citizens, and recognized refugees—and the necessity of reliable, equitable systems that can operate effectively in diverse scenarios, including travel, procurement of services, or legal recognition within the republic.
Beyond the immediate administrative changes, the Ostrava discussions raised questions about implementation, funding, training, and public communication. The success of these reforms will depend on coordinating interagency workflows, ensuring compatibility with existing information systems, and providing clear guidance to citizens and foreign residents about how to obtain, use, and renew biometric credentials. Davtyan’s statements suggest a long-term plan that prioritizes security, accessibility, and international alignment, with the ultimate aim of creating a more stable and trustworthy identity framework for Armenia.
Armenia’s move toward biometric documents for non-citizens and refugees represents a significant modernization of the country’s identity infrastructure. The partnership with IN Groupe and the attention to security, privacy, and user accessibility indicate a deliberate strategy to reduce vulnerability to forgery and identity theft while expanding legitimate access to services for those outside the citizenry. The success of this reform will hinge on careful implementation, robust oversight, and sustained public trust. If managed well, the program could become a model for inclusive, secure identity management in a complex migration landscape, strengthening Armenia’s ability to protect individuals’ rights while preserving the state’s sovereign prerogatives.