0 8000 12 11

On January 18 the Court of General Jurisdiction of Kentron and Nork-Marash Administrative Districts resolved to reject the claim filed by the 3 presidents of NGOs on human right protection against RA Prosecutor General.

It should be noted that the presidents of “Civil Society Institute”, “RA Helsinki Committee”, “Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor Office” NGOs demanded to bring up a criminal case against Deputy Prosecutor General and head of “Nubarashen” Detention Facility regarding the illegal detention of citizen Sargis Poghosyan from August 5 to September 7 of 2010 executed by the deputy Prosecutor General without the court’s resolution and then released by the same person.

In the beginning of the trial judge Gagik Avetisyan presented the letter received from Sargis Poghosyan by which the latter was showing his determination to hold legal liability in RA in case he receives a suit in the USA. He also mentioned that he hadn’t authorized anybody to protect his rights and had repeatedly rejected the cooperation with right protective NGOs.

Head of “Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor Office” Artur Sakunts announced that the letter was written under pressure adding that they don’t protect the rights of Sargis Poghosyan, but they are trying to avert the evident illegitimate actions of a state official with court intervention.

“Civil Society Institute” NGO President Arman Danielyan also expressed his concerns that if such illegal actions weren’t prevented they would serve a precedent for the procurators to adopt such a working style.

Advocate Robert Revazyan, representing the plaintiff’s interests, posed several questions to the responding party trying to find out what law provisions were considered by the Prosecutor for the detention of RA citizen Sargis Poghosyan’s, who was under criminal prosecution by the USA Virginia state law-enforcement bodies.

2 representatives from the respondent party referred to various international legal acts (European Convention on Human Rights, European Convention on Extradition and other bilateral international contracts, # 482 article of RA Criminal Code), however, no specific legal act was pointed out since there was none in reality.

Judge Gagik Avetisyan, who, by the way, used to work in RA General Prosecutor’s office, often interfered with the plaintiff’s representatives claiming that “the question has been answered” as a result of which the responding party managed to evade giving complete answers to the plaintiff party.

The court passed a resolution to reject the claim presented by the NGO presidents. The plaintiff’s party appealed the court resolution in a 10-day term.  “Civil Society Institute” NGO President Arman Danielyan told the journalists that they were going to appeal the resolution. “Today Prosecutors’ personnel are trying to justify that the oral appointments of the Prosecutor are more important than the Constitution”,- mentioned he by adding that if they don’t achieve results either in the Court of Cassation or Court of Appeal, they will also apply to the Constitutional court.

“The judge’s uneasiness was evitable, he didn’t participate in the examination of the presented claim statement, and he posed no questions for clarification. This testifies that the judge had prior determination in the beginning”, – Artur Sakunts pointed to journalists.

To the question “Was the judge impartial according to you?” presented by www.hra.am advocate Robert Revazyan representing the plaintiff’s party replied,-“The impartiality is more often evitable based on the proclaimed legal act. If our claim was rejected and our claim statement was obviously well grounded, then we find the court resolution groundless”.

RA Deputy Prosecutor General and the head of “Nubarashen” Detention Facility illegal actions were identified by the Group of Public Observers Conducting Monitoring in Penitentiary Institutions. The latter got acquainted with Sargis Poghosyan’s case and found out that there is no court-based resolution of applying detention as a punitive measure to him.

“Prosecutor’s functions aren’t stipulated by Constitution. He cannot refer to the head of detention facility for imprisonment or release of a person”, – pointed out Revazyan.

“We were informed that the court possesses the USA Virginia State resolution on the imprisonment, but the judge didn’t provide the photocopies, only stated that we could apply and get acquainted”,-pointed out the advocate by clarifying that besides the USA court resolution, the procurator’s office should also have the resolution on imprisonment as a punitive measure issued by RA Court.

“The responding party referred to the European Convention as a ground, but the convention at first should be ratified by the USA and then applied. They were claiming that it is being applied even without ratification. We asked them to point to any legal act with a reference to the European Convention, but no such reference was mentioned by the court”, – mentioned R. Revazyan.

www.hra.am