Court judgment on Taron Siradeghyan’s case to be appealed
17:07, March 3, 2016 | News, Own news
On March 3, 2016, the RA Administrative Court, presided by H. Ayvazyan, announced the court judgment on the administrative case on the claim by the RA Police against Taron Siradeghyan on imposing on him administrative sanctions under Article 182 of the RA Code of Administrative Offences, and on the counter-claim by Taron Siradeghyan against the RA Police on declaring the police actions unlawful. Particularly, the Court ruled to uphold the claim of the RA Police by imposing on T. Siradeghyan administrative sanctions under Article 182 of the RA Code of Administrative Offences and imposing a fine of 50,000 AMD. At the same time, the Court decided to dismiss T. Siradeghyan’s counter-claim to the declare the RA Police actions unlawful.
In this judgment, the Court found that the behavior T. Siradeghyan displayed at the protest action on June 23, 2014, by blocking the traffic section of the road, constituted a violation of the public order. The Court considered the police officer’s order aimed at opening the traffic section of the road to be lawful and stated that such order also followed from the necessity to ensure the public order and safety and the Court considered failure to obey such an order to constitute an administrative offense.
Hence, the Court argued that an administrative offense occurred due to disobeying a lawful order of a police officer fulfilling his duty to protect the public order, the fact that the offense was committed by T. Siradeghyan was established and such offence was punishable, and therefore the Court ruled to impose on T. Siradeghyan administrative sanctions.
As for the counter-claim submitted under the case, the Court noted that police officers arrested T. Siradeghyan on the grounds of the offense above and apprehended him to an RA Police division. Generally, the Court considered the RA Police actions lawful and therefore considered the temporary restriction of the counter-claim plaintiff’s freedom of movement and personal liberty and security of person to be lawful and dictated by the necessity to protect the public order and restore the lawfulness.
The defendant and counter-plaintiff party will appeal the Court judgment in terms specified to the RA Administrative Court of Appeal.