0 8000 12 11

On March 2, 2016, the General Jurisdiction Court of Lori Marz (Region), presided by V. Hovnanyan, resumed trial of Avan Mental Health Center CJSC v. HCA Vanadzor and Zhuleta Amarikyan.

The court hearing was attended by attorney E. Bademyan, plaintiff’s representative, A. Hakobyan, Head of the Center, attorney A. Zalyan, representative of defendant HCA Vanadzor, and witnesses of the case D. Khachatryan, M. Nersisyan and A. Harutyunyan.

Defendant Zh. Amarikyan and representative of Azatutyun (Liberty) Radio Station, third party that had not submitted any independent claim on the case, did not attend the court hearing.

Considering that the latter had been duly notified, the parties to the trial did not object to continuing the hearing in their absence.

At the beginning of the court hearing, the Court discussed the defendant’s motion on the limitation period; note that the plaintiff had filed the claim above with the Court in violation of relevant terms.

Plaintiff E. Bademyan requested the Court to dismiss the motion above on the pretext that the terms were violated due to technical issues related to post delivery. In response to this, the Court required to provide evidence on the date when the claim had been submitted to the post office. The plaintiff party had no such evidence.

A. Zalyan, representative of the defendant party, considered it necessary to remind that ignorance of the law is no excuse, and the plaintiff party was under obligation to submit the claim in the terms prescribed by law, even more, considering that it used legal services.

The Court passed to questioning of witnesses.

The first witness called in the court room was D. Khachatryan, staff member of Avan Mental Health Center. His/her testimony made it clear that ex officio he/she had not met Zh. Amarikyan during her inpatient treatment and he/she had met her only a few times. The witness mentioned that he/she had first met Zh. Amarikyan when she voluntarily sought medical examination. The examination revealed a mental health problem, which might not make her dangerous to the people around her. Zh. Amarikyan refused the treatment proposed. Later the communication of witness D. Khachatryan and Zh. Amarikyan were limited to medical rounds.

In response to the questions of the Parties, the witness said that persons under treatment might refuse treatment and only by a court decree might be subjected to compulsory treatment. As for refusing food, the witness said that everybody was entitled to do so.

As for Zh. Amarikyan’s speech at the Report presentation, witness D. Khachatryan said that despite her health problems, her speech was quite smooth and seemed to be natural.

Interestingly, shortly after the witness gave another answer on the same phenomenon particularly by mentioning that persons with mental health problems of delusional nature were able to convey their messages in a smooth and reasonable way.

Then the defendant party asked questions in an attempt to find out more details by asking the witness about attorney’s visit, records in the Center’s register, etc.

Next, the Court called in M. Nersisyan, another staff member of Avan Mental Health Center, who was Zh. Amarikyan’s attending doctor during her stay at the Center.

The witness provided certain details on Zh. Amarikyan’s health at the moment of her admission to the Center and particularly mentioned that she was intimidated and felt doubtful about a number of persons, including her brother’s family with whom she shared an apartment, and about the law enforcement agencies.

As for the interpersonal relations of the Center patients, the witness did not exclude that various disputes might arise between them and make them exchange insults.

Witness M. Nersisyan also confirmed that Zh. Amarikyan’s mental health problem of delusional nature could by no means affect her mind. At the same time, the witness stated that Zh. Amarikyan changed her position on the Center’s staff after seeing her attorney and expressed an opinion that his questions might be of a provocative nature. The witness also said that at the meeting with the attorney, that he/she attended personally, Zh. Amarikyan repeatedly claimed that she was a Mormon and had no right to lie.

When asked how he/she might explain such a speech by Zh. Amarikyan given his/her statements that her disease might not have affected her mind and she was able to be logical in her judgements, the witness replied that their patients had a feature to protest.

Note that the plaintiff party objected to the questions addressed by the defendant party to witnesses under the claim arguing that they had nothing to do with the case. A. Zalyan, representative of the defendant party, drew the attention of the Court to the subject of the claim and mentioned that the questions were in compliance with the claim. The Court agreed to this.

The last witness of the case questioned was A. Harutyunyan, a monitoring group member, who in person interviewed Zh. Amarikyan. A. Harutyunyan introduced the monitoring principles and methods and the entire process.

The witness said that the issues raised by Zh. Amarikyan in her interview were fully covered in the report summarizing the monitoring results; however, the witness was unable to clearly recall certain details since the monitoring had been held several years ago.

In response to the questions of the parties to the trial, the witness noticed that the information provided by Zh. Amarikyan was verified through other methods and at the same time highlighted that the same issues were raised by other patients under treatment at the Center as well. Particularly, such issues concerned the quality of the food and the attitude of the medical personnel.

In his/her testimony, among other issues, A. Harutyunyan referred to the fact that Zh. Amarikyan slept on a sofa in the corridor of the medical facilties and the plaintiff did not deny it either.

Having heard the witnesses, the Court decreed to adjourn the hearing and schedule it for April 13, 2016, at 2:10 pm.

Note that within the monitoring of the RA psycho-neurologic medical facilities, HCA Vanadzor visited Avan Mental Health Center. Within interviews with the patients, the staff members of the Organization met Zhulieta Amarikyan who told them about the ill-treatment she suffered on the part of the staff of the psychiatric institution.

HCA Vanadzor summed up the monitoring results in its Report on Human Rights Situation in RA Psycho-Neurologic Facilities in 2013: Hospital can Never Become Home for…Anyone. Avan Mental Health Center CJSC considered the information in the Report to constitute offence and defamation and filed a claim with the court against HCA Vanadzor and Zh. Amarikyan.

See also: hcav.am