0 8000 12 11

“For the sake of Serzh Sargsyan and the services rendered to the authorities: there is no other justification, whereby the nomination of G. Kostanyan’s candidacy for the position of the RA Prosecutor General can be explained”, Artur Sakunts, Chairman of Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor, shared such an opinion in a talk with GALA, who gave G. Kostanyan “devil’s advocate” label as a typical description. The below-mentioned is Artur Sakunts’ interview to GALA.

-Mr. Sakunts, we had a talk with you on the same topic, when S. Sargsyan hadn’t yet nominated G. Kostanyan’s candidacy for the position of the RA Prosecutor, but everyone was talking about it. And you were convinced that Serzh Sargsyan’s choice would end up on G. Kostanyan and it happened exactly as you told. Why?

– G. Kostanyan worked as military prosecutor only for 2 years and was not distinguished for any other approaches. Moreover, I can state that the Prosecutor General’ deputies were far more experienced in the field of prosecutor’s activities which is incomparable with G. Kostanyan’s experience. But we should approach this issue from the perspective of system significance.  Over, whoever was appointed, it would not have crucial significance for the system contents and its change. As a result of long-term monitoring over the activities of the Prosecutor General we are convinced that it aims to implement political requirements to serve the interests of that political regime and not at all promote justice. In a broad sense it is just like that and even if one of Aghvan Hovsepyan’s deputies was appointed, again nothing would change. At least, in terms of experience, knowledge and situation management, in certain cases we could have completely different approaches, which are also excluded in case of G. Kostanyan. Here we will have not the knowledge but solely the circumstance of serving for the political regime.

-Mr. Sakunts, which are the services, rendered to the RA authorities by G. Kostanyan, why was G. Kostanyan awarded?

-Firstly, as far as I remember from 2006 he was the RA Government’s representative in the Human Right Court in Strasburg, in the court where the RA citizens submitted claims versus the Republic of Armenia for violating their rights. Thus, people are dissatisfied with the domestic remedies and the European Court found that the RA has violated the rights of its citizens over the majority of their claims. He was the RA Government’s representative in the Human Rights Court.  Nonetheless, Gevorg Kostanyan continued representing the RA’s interests from the opposite standpoint, whereby, claiming that the RA authorities haven’t violated its citizens’ rights. Hence, the ideal assessment of G. Kostanyan’s activities is here, where he served as “the devil’s advocate” with the RA Government acting as the “devil”. If a person can constantly be in that role, then it implies certain mentality, conduct and capacity. Now the position of the RA’s Prosecutor General is entrusted to him. It means, he already has a biased attitude and this is the position that implements oversight in relation to accusations, it is the position that functions on behalf of state interests; it is the position that protects the accusation in court remedies. Thus, he can directly act in the role of the accusing party like A. Hovsepyan.  However, the principle that must underlie the activities of this post is the principle of the supremacy of human rights.

Now here a logical contradiction comes to the fore: in one case we have the concept of human rights, whereby he should act, whereas, in that respect we already have doubts that during his activities he acted from the opposite perspective. Firstly he acted in the post of protecting violations; secondly, during two years we never saw the actual looks and image of the state prosecutor in military crimes.

– What cases would you single out?

-Especially Hayk Movsisyan’s case was bizarre when the soldier was demobilized on the grounds of health issues. He should have been recognized unfit for military service, but it was revealed during the military service and upon leaving the military unit area due to the same health issues, after demobilization criminal prosecution continues against a citizen and 1 week later after the promulgation of the verdict Hayk Movsisyan was found hanged in “Shushi” Penitentiary and G. Kostanyan was the one to defend that accusation. G. Kostanyan was distinguished for his unique service regarding the protection of Liska’s son and his bodyguard when he stopped the criminal prosecution. He stopped the prosecution against 2 persons by actually patronizing former Mayor of Syunik region, who himself had rendered great services to Serzh Sargsyan and the authorities. Moreover, he initially acted as the prosecutor over that case and took the initiative into his hands. By rendering this service to the authorities, G. Kostanyan actually caused despair among citizens. Thus, he didn’t rely on supremacy of law and democratic principles, but definitely found himself in the role of serving the political authority. In terms of that, seeing a person with such mentality and working style in the position of the Prosecutor General means   disappointing not only the people of Syunik region but also the whole RA population.

-Mr. Sakunts, what happened in the Parliament on the day of voting for the RA Prosecutor, what is your assessment on it? 

-You know, in this case we have to record that G. Kostanyan was elected not only through the help of the political majority but also through the opposition supporters. The so-called Heritage, Dashnaktsutyun, ANC, PA, maybe, PA had 40% vote of confidence, didn’t it?

He was elected by absolute majority, not counting the three faces that were individuals. The tendency of despair was reinforced by the NA vote that even opposition MPs avoided to vote “against” as if providing him with the so-called trust resource for work having the aforementioned facts. It means manifesting ostrich’s behavior and engaging in sophism, burying their heads in the sand pretending not to see or know anything and though this vote they showed their loyalty to G. Kostanyan. In this respect, the NA showed that it is a service providing structure, where the concepts of the opposition and the government vanished. G. Kostanyan was an indicator, a measuring instrument, which showed the bankruptcy of the political opposition.

Source: http://www.galatv.am/news/view/kostanyan-saqunc_09.html