Prosecutor’s Office ‘clarifies’: “In response to human rights activist Marina Poghosyan’s inquiry, Police did not provide false information but rather just missed in the letter the abbreviation ‘GDCI’ (General Department of Criminal Investigation)”
12:01, October 30, 2017 | News, Own news
“The ‘internal watch’ investigation and search action taken against human rights activist Marina Poghosyan was lawful”; this position was expressed by H. Aslanyan, Deputy RA Prosecutor General, in his decision of October 16, 2017 on rejecting the complaint of A. Sakunts, Chairman of HCA Vanadzor, against taking such action.
Note that the court ruled to take investigation and search actions against M. Poghosyan on September 14, 2015 when she was involved in the criminal proceedings as a witness and questioned in the status of a witness.
Whereas, according to the RA Law on Investigation and Search Actions, the said investigation and search action may be taken only against a person suspected of committing grave or extremely grave crimes, and it is impossible to get the necessary information in any other way.
Moreover, in response to M. Poghosyan’s inquiry on taking ‘internal watch’ investigation and search action against her, A. Asatryan, acting head of the RA Police General Department for Criminal Investigation, provided obviously false information by stating that as of the inquiry date, August 17, 2016, no such action was taken against her. M. Poghosyan learnt about it later in August 2017 during the trial examination of the criminal proceedings illegally initiated against her.
HCA Vanadzor filed a complaint with the RA Prosecutor General’s Office on taking ‘internal watch’ investigation and search action against M. Poghosyan illegally and against the RA SIS decision of September 19, 2017 on rejecting initiation of criminal proceedings based on the report on false reply to the inquiry. In its reply, G. Margaryan, acting investigator for high-profile cases at the RA SIS, saw no elements of crime either in the police actions, or in the actions of HCA Vanadzor Chairman A. Sakunts in terms of false statement under Article 333, RA Criminal Code.
In its complaint to the Prosecutor General, HCA Vanadzor qualified it as a means of exerting pressure on the human rights activist to hold him back from voicing the crime.
By his decision of rejecting the complaint of A. Sakunts, H. Aslanyan, Deputy RA Prosecutor General, asserted SIS Investigator G. Margaryan’s statement that the terms “suspected” and “suspect” were not the same. According to him, the latter is only a private manifestation of the former. And a person may be suspected of committing a crime, but have no procedural status of a “suspect”.
It is noteworthy that the RA Deputy Prosecutor General explained by a mistake the fact that the RA Police provided M. Poghosyan with false information on taking ‘internal watch’ investigation and search action. He mentions that the RA Police General Department for Criminal Investigation provided information only about the actions taken by the Department; they simply missed the abbreviation ‘GDCI’ in the letter which, according to him, gave rise to confusion; “there was no intent in doing so and it cannot be considered a formal fraud.”
The Deputy RA Prosecutor General also considered groundless the argument on initiating criminal prosecution on false statement against the human rights activist who filed the report, considering that “giving a legal assessment to the action of the person who filed a report is well-grounded and legal”.
HCA Vanadzor will appeal before court the Deputy RA Prosecutor General H. Aslanyan’s decision of October 16, 2017 on rejecting the complaint.