0 8000 12 11

The preliminary investigation body excluded the version of murder, thereby preventing an objective investigation.

The trial of the case of Vahan Khalafyan, 24, who was taken to the police department and died a few hours later ended in the court of first instance in favor of the police version of “suicide”.

On November 29, 2010 the Court of General Jurisdiction of Kotayk region confirmed the police claim of suicide and sentenced Ashot Harutiunyan, the former head of the criminal investigation unit of the Police Department of Charentsavan, whose charges were the heaviest under this case, to 8- year imprisonment.

The official version is that violence exerted by Ashot Harutiunyan against Vahan Khalafyan caused him to commit a suicide.

However, this decision of the court did not change the belief of the aggrieved party and the public that a murder had been committed in the police station, especially that this trial lasting for over 5 months was marked by shocking statements and unexpected revelations.
Moreover, after the trial Harutiunyan’s parents addressed a letter to the Prosecutor General’s Office noting that their son was a “scapegoat and was convicted for a sin committed by someone else”.

“On April 13, 2010 the person who beat Vahan Khalafyan to death was not the head of the Criminal Investigation Unit Ashot Harutiunyan but Samvel Tonoyan, the deputy head of the same criminal investigation unit,” states the letter to the Prosecutor General’s Office. There has been no response to this letter, however.

Following this case the head of the Police Department of Charentsavan was dismissed, several officers were transferred, whereas Samvel Tonoyan, the deputy head of the criminal investigation unit, whose name is related to the death of Vahan Khalafyan, and who headed the operation of revelation of robbery on that day, remained in his position.Rumors about Samvel Tonoyan, witness to this case, were present during the trial but nobody voiced any defenite accusations agaisnt him at the court room.

Tonoyan denied his participation in the case of death in the unit which he heads. “Let them write, let them turn to anyone they wish, if I am guilty, let them punish me, my conscience is clean.” The case of death was reported on April 13, 2010 when 6 suspects of robbery were taken to the police station. As it became known later, all the six were tortured but for one of them, Vahan Khalafyan, it had a fatal end.

Following the incident the police released information that “in the office of the head of the prophylactic unit of the Police Department of Charentsavan, Vahan Khalafyan took a kitchen knife from the board and stabbed himself, causing physical damage to the abdomen.”
This version was also officially upheld by the Chief of the Police of Armenia Alik Sargsyan who announced that Vahan Khalafyan was very calmly interrogated, and no violence was used against him at the police station.

“I officially announce that there are no bodily injuries on him, no policeman lifted a hand against him, insulted him or hit him,” stated Alik Sargsyan to journalists two days after the case. However, much later, after the publication of the forensic report, the chief of police apologized to Khalafyan’s relatives for his announcement.

The report of the forensic examination of the body of the 24-year-old young man describes the numerous injuries which Vahan had got immediately before his death, which is evidence to torture he underwent at the police station.

Vahan Khalafyan’s relatives disagree with the conclusion of the forensic report which does not exclude that the young man could have committed a suicide.

The mother of the young man says there were crisscross cuts on his son’s chest made with a sharp tool, there were two holes in the abdomen, and the entire body was covered with bruises. The mother is convinced that his son was tortured and killed in the police station.
“They cut a cross on his chest with a knife, stabbed the stomach twice,” the mother told in tears. “I wish my son were a thief and were sent to jail, but they killed him and put the body in my house. 2-3 of them stood there and left my child bleed to death.”

Besides denying the suicide, Vahan’s relatives draw attention to the circumstance that according to the fingerprint examination report the fingerprints on the knife with which Khalafyan was stabbed to death “are not liable to identification”. Vahan Khalafyan’s relatives are highly suspicious about it.

“This is a case that happened to our family today and tomorrow may happen to others. Therefore, efforts must be mobilized to reveal the truth…” says Hmayak Khalafyan, the representative of the successor of the injured party.

The investigation unit of Kotayk region of the RA Police General Department of Criminal Investigation started legal proceedings of the case on April 13, 2010 under article 110 of the RA Criminal Code.

Under this case of death charges were brought against 4 police officers, the main accused to this case was Major Ashot Harutyunyan, the head of the Criminal Investigation Unit of the Police of Charentsavan, who is charged for exceeding authorities and causing essential damage under article 309, part 3 of the Criminal Code.

The other three police officers of the criminal investigation unit Garik Davtyan, Gagik Ghazaryan and Mores Hairapetyan are accused of exceeding authorities. According to the official claim, these three policemen were in the same room with Vahan Khalafyan in the time of committing suicide but failed to prevent his actions leading to suicide.

These were the persons expected to present details of the circumstances of the death, tell what had happened in the room in reality but they were even unable to present the version of the pre-trial criminal proceedings. Their speech at the court room was rambling and controversial.
Judge Mesrop Makyan sentenced the accused Mores Hairapetyan to two years’ probation, the other two officers were acquitted, to which those in the courtroom reacted negatively.
Ashot Harutyunyan who denies the charges set forth to him claimed in court that the death was not caused by a suicide. Moreover, he described the incident as a “negligent murder”.

“There was no suicide. A suicide would not pull up his top before stabbing himself, would not stab himself twice, one 3, the other 12 cm deep. Nobody wants to pay attention to this,” Ashot Harutyunyan stated several times during the examination in court.

Arguing that Vahan Khalafyan could not look for a knife and commit a suicide in the presence of policemen, Harutyunyan drew the attention of the counsel for the prosecution to the circumstance that if Khalafyan had committed a suicide, his fingerprints would be on  the knife.
Ashot Harutyunyan testified in court that he had seen the knife with which Vahan Khalafyan had allegedly committed a suicide in the hand of Mores Hairapetyan immediately after the incident.

The officer of the criminal investigation unit Mores Hairapetyan did not respond to these accusations, remaining silent till the end of the trial.

“I will not plead guilty of all this shit,” said Ashot Harutiunyan during the trial, hinting at what had happened in the police station. However, he did not reach the logical ending of his testimony and did not speak any more, even though during the hearings his parents urged him to tell “everything”.

Harutyunyan states that the accused Mores Hairapetyan, the former officer of his unit, had given false testimony (on the grounds of his testimony he was charged for beating Khalafyan, leading Vahan committed a suicide).

“He thereby covered up the circumstance that his actions caused the death of Vahan Khalafyan. I say the policeman negligently caused the death of the citizen, in the result of his negligent actions.”

Harutyunyan is convinced that Hairapetyan’s testimony against him was part of the deal with the Special Investigative Service to cover up the truth, and they had offered him deal as well, proposing to testify against his supervisors.

The former head of the criminal investigation unit told in court that he had heard noise from the room where Khalafyan was and went there. “When I entered the office, the chairs were in a mess, the chair was lying on the floor. It is evidence that there was a row and fight there.
According to his testimony, Samvel Tonoyan also entered the room but the other three policemen did not utter a word about it in their testimonies, and this fact was ignored by the court.

“You are hereby trying to save the reputation of the police… Let’s reveal the truth. You are also terrified by the fact that a person is killed by a policeman in the police station,” Ashot Harutyunyan stated in court.

Although testimonies were heard in court refuting the story set forth by the police, the representatives of the office of the prosecutor general who defended the police claim did not take any steps for their verification, claiming that there was a suicide.
“They use the successor of the injured person and the accused Ashot Harutyunyan as an instrument to reach their purpose,” stated the counsel for the prosecution, hinting at the human rights organizations monitoring the trial.

Several influential international human rights organizations (Human Rights Watch, FIDH) have urged the office of the prosecutor general to conduct an impartial and transparent investigation and punish those responsible for the death of the young man in strict respect of law.
During the trial the counsel for the prosecution Koryun Piloyan asked direct questions to Ashot Harutyunyan: “If you have something to tell, please do”. But the latter did not add anything.

Arax Mkrtumyan, Ashօt Harutyunyan’s wife told us that his husband was threatened and warned that he would be transferred to the jail of the National Security Service if he continued to make statements in the courtroom.

“Regarding Ashot Harutyunyan, the preliminary investigation was biased, which hindered the objective revelation of the circumstances of death of Vahan Khalafyan. The body of preliminary investigation missed such important circumstances as the description of the case,” says Seda Safaryan, the defender of Ashot Harutyunyan. “Our hopes that new circumstances would become known in court did not come true,” she said.

The defender says the preliminary investigation body excluded the version of murder in the very beginning, thereby preventing an objective investigation.

The representative of the successor of the injured party Artak Zeynalyan, a human rights activist, put together the results of examinations and evidence gathered in court, and presented what had happened in the police station, accusing Mores Hairapetyan of committing murder, and filed a petition to change the qualification of the action and bring charges against Mores Hairapetyan.

Zeynalyan says his claim is grounded and there is evidence that the former head of the criminal investigation unit of the police mentioned in his testimony. He said he had seen the knife in Mores Hairapetyan’s hands.

Prior to the arrest of Ashot Hairapetyan, similar charges had been brought against Mores Hairapetyan, and when the latter testified against Ashot Hairapetyan, the measure of prevention was substituted, the resolution on bringing charges was changed, he was set free upon signing an order not to leave the town.

Hairapetyan is the only accused who pleaded guilty and helped the preliminary investigation body to draw up the indictment.

Artak Zeynalyan, the representative of the Khalafyans, filed a petition on assigning an investigative experiment to find out the circumstances of Vahan Khalafyan’s death, whether he could take the knife from the board, scratch his own body twice, afterwards stab his own body in two places, one 3 cm and the other 12 cm deep, then take out the knife and throw it away.

Artak Zeynalyan claimed that non-interested persons could participate in this experiment, and it could be useful for revealing the crime.

The counsel for the prosecution objected to investigative experiment, saying that it may pose danger. Although Ashot Harutyunyan volunteered to simulate the actions of Vahan Khalafyan as described in the materials of the case, namely take the knife, keep it near his body, the judge rejected the petition.

Judge Makyan also rejected the justifications of Artak Zeynalyan and Defender Seda Safaryan to invite Samvel Tonoyan, the deputy head of the criminal investigation unit of the Police of Charentsavan to court for additional interrogation.

“The bar does not differ from the counsel for the prosecution in any way, it is not impartial, it tries its hardest to defend the indictment and rejects any evidence that may contradict to it, to prevent revelation of the truth,” announced the former head of the criminal investigation unit of the Police of Charentsavan.

Artak Zeynalyan filed another petition to change the qualification of charges brought against Ashot Harutyunyan because no evidence was provided to the court that he had beaten Vahan Khalafyan. According to the policemen’s testimonies in court, the former head of the criminal investigation unit had only once slapped Vahan Khalafyan.

Khalafyan’s relatives wonder why Samvel Tonoyan, the deputy head of the criminal investigation unit of the Police of Charentsavan, is not an accused to the case.

“The criminal investigation unit is subject to Tonoyan, the deputy head of the unit for criminal investigation, but for whatever reason today he is just a witness to the case, and he is not held responsible,” the injured party complains, who believes that the version of suicide was not proved during the trial.

The official information that Khalafyan committed a suicide after undergoing beating was also doubted by the HRD of Armenia Armen Harutyunyan, who stated that the investigators investigating the circumstances of death of Vahan Khalafyan bypassed the issue of responsibility of more high-ranking officials.

“The preliminary investigation body hurried to qualify the crime as a suicide. If the injured party claims that it was a murder, the preliminary investigation body must examine it,” the HRD says.

According to the HRD annual report, complaints of citizens against the Police system increased significantly compared with 2009. Complaints refer to cases of illegally taking people to police station and depriving them of liberty, inhuman treatment and torture by police officers while at the police station.

Notably, the HRD report states that “in our reality it is almost impossible to restore the violated rights of citizens through letters of complaint on torture because the Police usually consider the facts presented by citizens as false and groundless.”

On April 13, Norair Chilyan and Arayik Arakelyan, who had been taken to the police station in the result of our investigation and afterwards set free, left Armenia. These persons were important witnesses to the case of Vahan Khalafyan, 24, who died in the result of violence in the police station.

Before leaving Armenia, the young men told Arthur Sakunts, the human rights activist, that during interrogation in the police station they heard the policemen beating Vahan Khalafyan in the next room.

Our investigation revealed that they left Armenia upon the instruction of policemen. The young men told Arthur Sakunts that if they refuse to plead guilty, they will undergo sexual violence, the pictures will be spread, and they cannot go on living.

“In other words, under inhuman torture the young men were forced to sign certain documents, and it is not known who was involved in the robbery in reality, and who was not,” says Arthur Sakunts, the head of the Vanadzor office of the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly.

“On April 13 a murder was committed in the Police Department of Charentsavan, and it was committed by the policemen, and today the police headed by the Chief of the RA Police Alik Sargsyan is trying to cover up the incident,” the human rights activist Arthur Sakunts says.

So far nobody has been held responsible for the death of Levon Gulyan in the police station in 2007. The case is still moving from one instance to another. The incident took place in the General Investigative Department of the Police, and Levon Gulyan reportedly tried to escape through the window of the third floor but fell down and died.

During the preliminary investigation and trial of the case the RA Prosecutor General and the Chief of Police, as well as the head of the General Investigative Department made statements in favor of “suicide”. Human rights activists evaluate the statements of officials as direct pressure for the desirable decision on the judicial case.

“With its verdict the court legitimized torture in police stations,” stated Mikael Danielyan, a human rights activist, the head of the Helsinki Association after the court decision was in place.

www.lragir.am