0 8000 12 11

On October 15, 2015, the General Jurisdiction Court of Arabkir and Kanaker-Zeytun administrative districts of Yerevan, RA, presided by L. Avetisian, commenced examining the appeal filed by victim Gayane Arustamyan’s representative Artur Sakunts against the decree of A. Tadevosyan, RA SIS Investigator for High Profile Cases dated August 8, 2015 on not initiating criminal prosecution and discontinuing criminal proceedings. Note that at about 9 pm on May 7, 2015, G. Arustamyan was arrested near the Opera building in Yerevan city for insulting an RA Police officer and taken to the RA Police Yerevan city Kentron Division, where she suffered inhuman and degrading treatment and physical force by the police officers and as a result sustained physical injuries. A crime report was filed, and consequently, the RA SIS initiated criminal proceedings under Article 309(2) of the RA Criminal Code. Under the criminal case, G. Arustamyan was declared victim. Nevertheless, upon the preliminary investigation, responsible investigator A. Tadevosyan decreed not to initiate criminal prosecution and discontinued the criminal proceedings due to absence of corpus delicti. The examination of the appeal was attended by appellant’s representative A. Sakunts, RA SIS Investigator for High Profile A. Tadevosyan responsible for the investigation and RA Deputy Prosecutor General Hr. Badalyan’s representative M. Sargsyan. Upon verifying the identities of the parties to the trial and the absence for any grounds for recusation or self-recusation, the Court passed to the examination of the appeal. The appellant’s representative A. Sakunts brought a number of grounds in support of the shortcomings of the preliminary investigation and failure to assess impartially the evidence obtained under the case. In this regard, A. Sakunts presented arguments to the effect that the investigator considered credible only the testimonies of the police officers, who, of course, denied having used any violence against G. Arustamyan. Also, the investigating agency rejected the victim’s motion on further expert examination which would make it possible to track the causal link between the conditions diagnosed with G. Arustamyan on the day following her arrest and the actions of the police officers. A. Sakunts also noted that only 1 police officer had been cross-examined, whereas G. Arustamyan suffered ill-treatment by all the police officers involved in her arrest. A. Sakunts also presented grounds that the investigating agency should have assigned a psychological and psychiatric expert examination to find out whether G. Arustamyan suffered any fears, anxiety and a sense of inferiority or whether her physical and psychological will was broken. Since no such expert examination had been assigned under the preliminary investigation, the aggrieved party itself initiated such an examination and received its findings after the decree on discontinuing the criminal proceedings. A. Sakunts stated that upon the psychological examination carried out by the effective examination and documentation principles under the Istanbul Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, the specialists concluded that the findings of G. Arustamyan’s psychological examinations were highly compliant with the alleged torture reports, and the emotional dynamics coincided with the progress of the alleged incidents of torture, and G. Arustamyan developed grave psychological problems and should receive relevant treatment. Hence, A. Sakunts requested the Court to bind the investigating agency to stop the violation of G. Arustamyan’s rights and freedoms and send the case for a re-examination, and also requested access to the preliminary investigation files of the criminal case submitted to the Court to provide further grounds thereon later. The Court granted the motion. Thus, the Court found it necessary to adjourn the hearing for the aggrieved party to get familiar with the criminal proceedings files and for the investigating agency and the representative of the RA Prosecutor General’s Office to get familiar with the findings of the psychological examination. The next court hearing is scheduled for December 1, 2015, at 10: 30 pm.