0 8000 12 11

On April 1, 2016, Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor, with the financial support of the Open Society Foundations Armenia and Sigrid Rausing Trust, held a round-table discussion on Situation of Execution of European Court of Human Rights Judgments by Republic of Armenia at Ball Room, Congress Hotel.

The event brought together representatives of competent state agencies, international organizations, diplomatic missions to the Republic of Armenia and non-governmental organizations.

The event started with the opening remarks by Artur Sakunts, Chairman of HCA Vanadzor.

Then David Amiryan, Deputy Director for Programs at OSF-Armenia, took the floor. He talked about the activities of the Organization and highlighted that OSF-Armenia had a vast experience in cooperation with HCA Vanadzor. According to D. Amiryan, the implemented projects were an attempt to influence the exercise of fair trial proceedings in our country. In regard to the essence of the Study, D. Amiryan stated that it was quite extensive and of a high value for human rights defenders, theorists and other persons interested in this field. The speaker expressed a hope that the discussion of the topic would not be confined to the event and would be continued also through individual discussions among representatives of narrow specializations.

In his speech, A. Sakunts, Chairman of HCA Vanadzor, stated that the representatives of competent state agencies responsible for ensuring execution of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgments in the RA were also invited to the event but they did not confirm their presence.

At the event, the speakers presented the progress in development of domestic mechanisms for execution of the ECtHR judgments, the situation of the execution of the ECtHR judgments issued against Armenia in 2007-2015 by ECHR Articles and the role of the RA Constitutional Court in execution such judgments.

A. Sakunts highlighted the essential role of the RA legislative and executive authorities in the execution of the ECtHR judgments in RA.

Touching upon the role of the judiciary within the topic, A. Sakunts noted that the Council of Courts Chairmen, in its capacity of a self-governing judiciary agency, had a crucial function to supervise the execution of ECtHR judgments and to refer to the situation of the execution of such judgments in its advisory decisions.

In her speech, A. Chilingaryan, HCA Vanadzor Legal Analysis and Initiative Program Coordinator, referred to the proposals in the Study and highlighted the need to establish practices for execution of ECtHR judgments by the executive authorities.

Referring to the execution of the ECtHR judgments by the State, the speaker noted that the State was under obligation to take 2 kinds of measures: individual and general. The Study mostly touched upon implementation of general measures. From this perspective, A. Chilingaryan noted that due to inadequate execution of the ECtHR judgments in RA, people applied to the ECtHR again and again on similar violations, which was one of the main reasons for the Court’s heavy workload.

A. Chilingaryan noted that the period of 2014-2015 marked enhanced intensification in the Government’s activities towards execution of the ECtHR judgments in the RA.

The speaker referred to individual cases and ECHR Articles and stated that general measures should be taken under almost every Article in question.

Afterwards, Susanna Davtyan, HCA Vanadzor Legal Analysis and Initiative Program Assistant, presented References on invoking ECtHR judgments in the rulings of individual Chambers of the RA Cassation Court.

Aram Vardevanyan, Adviser to the President of the RA Constitutional Court, highlighted such events in terms of identifying the current challenges in the area in question.

By drawing parallels between execution of the judgments of Constitutional Court and ECtHR in the RA, the speaker stated that the progress in execution of the ECtHR judgments in the RA was better and expressed his willingness to attend discussions on the situation of execution of RA Constitutional Court judgments as well.

Then, Artak Zeynalyan, Chairman of Rule of Law human rights NGO, took the floor and highlighted the importance of the Study considering it a valuable research for representatives of relevant entities.

Referring to the views expressed before to the effect that the progress of execution of ECtHR judgments in the RA was better as compared to that of Constitutional Court judgments, A. Zeynalyan noted that the problem lay in the absence of a supervisory agency indicating that this function might be assumed by the RA NA.

The human rights defender urged the competent authorities to ensure awareness of the ECtHR judgments among relevant officers; A. Sakunts also highlighted this issue.

A. Zeynalyan prioritized the issue of proper translation and publication of the ECtHR judgments against RA and mentioned that very often such judgments were translated by “expediency.”

“As statutory acts they must be translated and published officially, whereas out of over 60 judgments only 19 were published officially”, emphasized A. Zeynalyan.

Lusine Sargsyan, Representative of Staff of the RA Human Rights Defender’s Office, mentioned that the Human Rights Defender’s Office would also focus on the issue of execution of ECtHR judgments in the RA and expressed willingness to cooperate with local and international NGOs to make the process more effective.

Other participants of the discussion as well provided their observations on the topic.