0 8000 12 11

On May 26, 2017 the General Jurisdiction Court of Syunik marz (region), RA, presided by judge N. Ohanyan, started examining the case of Gevorg Khachatryan who committed a suicide on November 28, 2015 at a military unit of the RA National Security Service border guard troops.

Note that under the criminal proceedings initiated by the 9th Garrison Investigative Division of the General Military Investigation Department, RA Investigative Committee on November 29, 2015, charges were brought against captain Mher Voskanyan, head of the post (under Articles 364.1(2), 375(1) and 360(2) of the RA Criminal Code), non-commissioned officer Hovik Kalashyan, major of the post (under Articles 364.1(1) and 375(1) of the RA Criminal Code) and conscript serviceman Harutyun Muradyan (under Articles 359(2)(2), 364.1(1) on 2 episodes and 359(3) of the RA Criminal Code).

The court hearing was attended by defendants H. Muradyan and M. Voskanyan, their defense counsel K. Barseghyan, defendant H. Kalashyan and his defense counsel R. Ghazaryan, prosecutor S. Khachatryan, victim’s successor H. Avetisyan, his representative T. Siradeghyan, lawyer at Yerevan office of HCA Vanadzor, and victims H. Hayrapetyan and A. Antonyan. The court hearing was also attended by the summoned witnesses.

The presiding judge said that defendant H. Muradyan’s defense counsel S. Safaryan and accused M. Voskanyan filed motions on suspending the criminal proceedings for lack of elements of crime.

Prosecutor S. Khachatryan suggested postponing examination of the motions and the representative of the victim’s successor noted that such motions were groundless and were to be rejected. The Court decided to consider the motions after examining the evidence.

H. Muradyan’s defense counsel K. Barseghyan filed with the court another motion requesting to involve a psychologist as an expert in the questioning of the witnesses.

Prosecutor S. Khachatryan objected to the motion noting that the Court had not seen the witnesses yet and there were no grounds to assume that they were unable to provide true testimony.

T. Siradeghyan, representative of the victim’s successor, also objected to the motion noting that the defense counsel did not refer to any provision that would give grounds for the Court to question the witnesses in the presence of an expert and moreover, no such provision is set forth in the RA Criminal Procedure Code regulations on assigning expert examination and rights and responsibilities of an expert.

The Court agreed with the prosecutor and ruled to reject the motion.

As defendant H. Kalashyan did not receive the indictment, the court hearing was postponed till June 8, 2017, 2:10 pm.