The RA MoJ JACES takes the writ of execution into proceedings on the grounds of NKR court’s verdict
05:59, January 16, 2014 | News, Own news | Children's rights, Prohibition of Discrimination
Vanadzor resident David Hakobyan, whose rights had been gravely violated, applied to Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor on January 9, 2013.
As D. Hakobyan describes his problem, “This is not merely my problem; it is also the state’s issue, since the state is obliged to protect children’s rights”.
It’s been already more than 2 years that D. Hakobyan has been struggling to get his child’s custody. For that purpose on July 29, 2011 he applied to the RA Lori Region Court of Common Jurisdiction with a request to deprive his former wife of parental rights and levy aliment as a living means for the mutual child. In the future on February 6, 2012 D. Hakobyan submitted a supplement to the claim to the court with a demand to leave him the child’s custody and confirm the place of residence, later on July 28, 2012 D. Hakobyan declined his aliment demand.
On August 15, 2011, over 2 months after D. Hakobyan had applied to Lori Region Court of Common Jurisdiction, his ex-wife Arpi Hovsepyan submitted a complaint to the Court of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic with a demand to decide the child’s place of residence.
On September 7, 2011 the NKR Court reached a decision to terminate the case with the submitted complaint until the RA Lori Region Court of Common Jurisdiction adopted a ruling.
On July 12, 2012 the RA Lori Region Court of Common Jurisdiction delivered a verdict, whereby, it satisfied the demands to decide the child’s place of residence with the father and give the child’s custody to the father, meanwhile, declining the demand of depriving the mother of her parental rights.
A. Hovsepyan submitted an appeal and on October 25 the RA Court of Appeals satisfied the submitted claim and sent the case for new trial. During the new court trial of the case the Court of First Instance appointed a forensic- psychological examination and the court trial was terminated on that ground.
Everything seemed going legally, but on February 1, 2013 the NKR Court of Common Jurisdiction, without the presence of a final judicial act in the RA, in an unlawful procedure resumed the trial of the terminated proceedings and on May 18, 2013 illegally reached a decision to leave the child’s custody to the mother and define the child’s place of residence with the mother.
D. Hakobyan attempted to appeal the verdict of the Court of First Instance at NKR Court of Appeals and Cassation Court, however, it remained unaltered.
An writ of execution was sent to the NKR MoJ JACES by the same court instance to leave the child’s custody to the mother and define the latter’s place of residence with the mother.
The NKR MoJ JACES sent the writ of execution to the RA MoJ JACES, where on October 28, 2013 a decision was made to take the writ of execution into proceedings and to entrust the child’s custody to the mother. On December 25, 2013 enforced action implementation day was set, but due to child’s sickness the day was put off until January 10, 2014.
Thus, through obviously illegal way, by violating a number of legislative norms, the NKR Court gave the child’s custody to the mother. Over the same subject A. Hovsepyan submitted a calim to the NKR Court, which was illegally taken into proceedings although the NKR Civil Procedure Code clearly defines that the judge declines the acceptance of the claim, if a case over a dispute with the same grounds between the same persons over the same subject exists in the proceedings of another court or Court of Arbitration.
If we literally explain the provisions of this article, hence, we can infer that in case a dispute with the same grounds between the same people over the same subject exists in the court’s proceedings, then the court should decline the acceptance of the submitted claim in the stage of taking the claim into proceedings. Not taking into account the aforementioned circumstances and failing to conduct investigation, in the conditions of absent responding party, the NKR court reached a decision and based on unknown grounds sent it for conduction to the RA MoJ JACES.
By describing his issue, D. Hakobyan stated, “I do not prioritize the decision reached by the court, but rather its consequences. Here with deal with my child’s issue, and the state is obliged to protect the child’s rights. I am strongly convinced that the child is the state’s keystone and if the state violates the child’s rights, hereby, it undermines its cornerstones.”
Regarding this issue Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor sent a note to RA General compulsory enforcement officer Mihran Poghosyan and RA Minister of Justice Hrayr Tovmasyan to terminate the enforcement proceedings filed at Lori Department of the RA MoJ JACES before the Lori Region Court of Common Jurisdiction delivered the final act.
Follow the updates over this case in the future.