0 8000 12 11

In a meeting with journalists Inesa Petrosyan, advocate of Shant Harutyunyan, arrested and later placed at psychiatric hospital after November 5 protest action held on Mashtots avenue, informed that her defendant’s mental state was normal, and had no complaints. According to the advocate, Shant Harutyunyan was only agitated over his being placed at the psychiatric hospital when there was an expert’s conclusion, according to which, he had never suffered from mental disorder.

Shant Harutyunyan was charged under Part 2, Article 316 of the RA Criminal Code, as if he had exerted violence against the police official. According to the advocate, Shant Harutyunyan did not accept the aforementioned accusation, and did not provide any evidence regarding it. He is accused of hitting police official Edgar Aleksanyan on different parts of the body with a truncheon. Whereas, when the latter stated about initialing a march in the Liberty square, there were already provokers.

“He had initially informed they requested not to provoke anyone, since they were going for a peaceful march. In case there are provocations there will be relevant a response.  He stated he knew what the authorities were capable of. I knew March 1, the ten victims, that is why I relied on those facts”, noted the advocate. Inesa Petrosyan reminded that Shant was only ready to give a response in case he was attacked. He had also stated that they were intending to exercise their constitutional right and they should not have confused him and his friends with other oppositionists, since they had a clear-cut goal. Inesa Petrosyan drew the attention on the shot episodes, where it was clearly seen how provocations were being organized against Shant and his friends right before the march. Whereas, Shant had turned to the Police before the procession with a request not to initiate any provocations.

The advocate draws the attention on the fact that there is no legal definiteness why her defendant had been taken to a Psychiatric hospital. Inesa Petrosyan informed she had appealed that decision of the Court.

“If we have a conclusion that the person did not and does not suffer from any mental disorder, they apply a sanction against him and later decide to place him at psychiatric hospital, it is devoid of any legal definiteness. It can became a precedent that any person can be forcefully placed at a psychiatric hospital for political views”, stated Inesa Petrosyan.

The advocate also noted that Shant Harutyunyan did not trust the authorities and thus refused appealing their actions. Shant Harutyunyan is banned to have meetings, he is allowed to only meet with his advocate.

Shant Harutyunyan also fears that there may also be provokers among those arrested with him, since he did not know all of them.

Source: http://www.irates.am/hy/1385715933#.UphZ8-OuxV4.facebook