The video submitted by the Respondent is to be examined at the upcoming hearing of the case of the Mashtots Avenue demonstrator
18:25, November 9, 2017 | News, Own news | Freedom of Assembly and Association, Freedom of Information and Speech, Freedom of Movement, Right to liberty and security
On November 8, 2017, the hearing of Geghetsik Tonoyan, the Mashtots Avenue demonstrator, started at the RA Administrative Court.
It should be reminded that the Police demands to hold the demonstrator accountable based on the provisions of Points 11 and 15 of Article 180.1 of the RA Administrative Offenses Law. And G. Tonoyan’s representative, HCA Vanadzor Yerevan Office lawyer Tatevik Siradeghyan, demands to recognize the actions of the Police as unlawful.
In the opening statement, M. Melikyan, the representative of the RA Police, insisted on the claim submitted on the case of G. Tonoyan’s offenses and on the objections against the counter-claim.
In response to G. Tonoyan’s representative’s questions, S. Melikyan informed that the participants of the assembly had disrupted the normal course of the assembly inasmuch as they had blocked the roadway and obstructed the traffic. In addition, S. Melikyan mentioned that the police officers had not been aware of the type of the assembly; there had been no announcement made through the loudspeaker.
The Respondent objected to the claim, indicating that G. Tonoyan’s actions were devoid of the offenses prescribed by Points 11 and 15 of Article 180.1 of the RA Administrative Offenses Law as the demonstrator had not taken any actions impeding the normal course of the assembly. Apart from this, there had been no claim made as prescribed by the Law. Thus, T. Siradeghyan requested to reject the claim of the RA Police.
G. Tonoyan’s representative also delivered the opening statement regarding the counter-claim. It was mentioned by her that the actions of the RA Police had not emanated from the provisions of the RA Constitution and had therefore violated the Counter-appellant’s rights to personal liberty and inviolability, the freedom from torture and inhumane or degrading treatment as well as the freedom of movement, expression and assembly. In particular, the Police dispersed the assembly, administratively arrested G. Tonoyan, violating the order of detention as well as groundlessly applying physical force to her. T. Siradeghyan requested to recognize the Police actions as unlawful.
In the phase of examining the evidence, the representative of the Respondent expressed the viewpoint that the record of the administrative offense was filed, violating the law as it lacks the essence of the offense defined by Points 11 and 15 of Article 180.1 of the RA Administrative Offenses Law. In particular, the record only includes not acting upon the lawful demand. The representative of the RA Police opposed, indicating that the claim had been filed on the basis of performing actions that had disrupted the normal course of the assembly.
Throughout the hearing, the video submitted by the Appellant was examined. The video presented to the Respondent, could not be shown due to technical reasons. Hence, T. Siradeghyan requested to adjourn the hearing in order for the Appellant to submit a different sample of the video.
The court session was rescheduled for 4.30 pm on November 22, 2017.