0 8000 12 11

As we have informed before, HCA Vanadzor is engaged in protection of the violated rights of S. Gh. Note that ArmenTel CJSC filed a claim to a court of law against him on seizing due amounts; however, he insisted that he had never signed any contract with the company and expressed doubts that someone else might have used his passport for such a purpose. Also, S. Gh. is registered at psycho-neurologic dispensary.

Based on the information obtained, on April 27, 2015, the HCA Vanadzor filed a crime report with Vanadzor Bazum Division, RA Police Lori Marz (Region) Department. However, in this regard, no decree was issued under Article 181, Criminal Procedure Code (decrees following consideration of crime reports). It was only after the Organization filed an appeal with Lori Marz (Region) Prosecutor’s Office on August 27, 2015 that S. Poghosyan, Senior Investigator at Vanadzor Bazum Division, RA Police Lori Marz (Region) Department, decreed to reject initiation of criminal proceedings. By its appeal to G. Elizbaryan, RA Lori Marz (Region) Prosecutor General, dated September 18, 2015, HCA Vanadzor requested to annul senior investigator S. Poghosyan’s decree to reject initiating criminal proceedings as well as to initiate such proceedings, give a legal assessment to the violations by Vanadzor Bazum Division, RA Police Lori Marz (Region) Department and submit the case to competent authorities for relevant investigation.

As it turned out later, Lori Marz (Region) Prosecutor’s Office considered the appeal baseless and upheld Vanadzor Bazum Division senior investigator S. Poghosyan’s decree on rejecting initiation of criminal proceedings. As for the legal assessment of the violations by the police officers, the letter of the RA  Police Lori Marz (Region) Department of November 5, 2015 suggests that by admitting that the preliminary investigation was inadequate and the completeness and comprehensiveness of the prepared materials were not insured in violation of the requirements of Article 17 (fair trial), RA Criminal Procedure Code, it considered that such disciplinary infringement had exerted no impact on further outcomes of the investigation, and as the police officer sincerely repented of the infringement, he was not subjected to any disciplinary action and the official investigation was terminated. Hence, it may be assumed that according to the RA Police Lori Marz Department, showing inaction in terms of restoration of a person’s violated rights, which results in a situation when the alleged crime remains unsolved and the person faces uncertainty, is a “minor” flaw which can be fixed by sincere repentance. And if we take into account that Lori Marz Department does not consider such a violation to have exerted any impact on the outcomes of the investigation, the only thing we can assume is that such an irresponsible and inconsistent attitude is accounted for by the fact that S. Gh. belongs to a vulnerable social group (as mentioned above, he suffers mental health problems). Actually, the competent authorities continue to show absolute inaction in the protection of his human rights considering it a minor and insignificant flaw.