Today marks 6 month since Andrias Ghukasyan was arrested (30.07.2016). As we know, Andrias Ghukasyan, Armen Martirosyan and Davit Sanasaryan are being accused of organizing mass disorders in Sari Tagh on 29 July 2016. On that day, a demonstration was took place on the Freedom Square, followed by a peaceful march by the participants to Sari Tagh as that was the nearest spot from where the patrol service could be seen. The police instigators attempted to lead the mob closer to the patrol service, where police forces would be waiting for them; nevertheless, owing to the efforts of the mentioned people and other participants of the demonstration, the demonstration remained on place. Seeing that the participants are ignoring the provocations, the police forces approached the venue of the demonstration and gave Armen Martirosyan 5 minutes to lead the mob away, threatening to implement special methods otherwise. When the 5 minutes expired, Armen Martisoryan was arrested, and the police along with the instigators unleashed an attack towards peaceful demonstrators and journalists. Thus, many of them, including Andrias Ghukasyan, were injured.
Nevertheless, Andrias Ghukasyan was the one who got arrested on 30.06.2016 based on alleged accusations of inciting mass disorders. Court of Appeal released Armen Martirosyan and Davit Sanasaryan on bail, refusing to implement the same remedy towards Andrias Ghukasyan, as the latter, in reply to the judge’s question whether he is going to carry on his opposition activity, said “positive”.
Having received the permit by the prosecution, Davit Sanasaryan is currently in the USA, studying at the Fletcher School of Diplomacy and Law, Tufts University and Armen Martirosyan is involved in the election rally. As to Andrias Ghukasyan, he has been kept in jail for 6 months now; the detention has been expanded for another 2 months. He is banned from making phone calls, including his 87-year-old bedridden father, 79-year-old mother, his adolescent daughter, his wife. Why? One of the reasons is depriving him from the opportunity to participate in the upcoming parliamentary elections. There are other reasons as well, but we will get to that.
Let’s now discuss how exactly Andrias Ghukasyan is kept under detention. First, let me say, that the court was authorized to arrest Andrias Ghukasyan, let alone, extend the detention and moreover, decline the bail motion only in case if the case included materials that could make it reasonable to assume that by remaining free Andrias Ghukasyan, the 2013 candidate for RA presidency, the person taking care for his elderly parents and an adolescent child, the head of an architectural studio and a radio station, the one who received the sponsorship of 20 MPs of the National Assembly and is intending to participate in the upcoming NA elections will jeopardize al the abovementioned and flee the country or try to convince the policemen to change their testimonies or commit a crime in order to escape imprisonment.
Read also
Naturally, there are no facts in the materials of the case that can remotely prove any of the above mentioned points. The first instance court that has examined the detention and bail 5 times, as well as the Court of Appeal that has examined the corresponding appeals on the mentioned case, were not able to point out at least one proof of the possibility of the above mentioned scenarios. Nonetheless, Andrias Ghukasyan is still under detention. We have already reported that the court has declined the appeal as of 24.08.2016 to release Andrias Ghukasan on bail, because the latter declared he would continue his opposition activity once released. The appeal to replace detention with bail was declined, although the prosecutor refused to provide the court with evidences proving that Andrias Ghukasyan will do any of the abovementioned acts when released from jail.
At the moment of Andrias Ghukasyan’s arrest the defense hadn’t provided the court with footages and testimonies by witnesses denying the alleged accusations and showing that Andrias Ghukasyan and his friends didn’t incite disorders. However, during one of the hearings on extending the detention, the defense was able to provide the abovementioned footages and numerous testimonies. After having examined the footages and having been told that Andrias Ghukasyan in fact didn’t encourage the mob to take over buildings, but talked about having a peaceful demonstration, that his speech in Sari Tagh was aimed to prevent the fraternal clash and that Andrias Ghukasyan, Armen Martirosyan and Davit Sanasaryan did not encourage the mob to throw stones at the policemen, didn’t call out to join Sasna Tser, but only did their best to prevent instigations, the court, however, continuously refrains from mentioning the provided evidences and keeps basing the allegations on the testimonies by policemen that have been long refuted by the witnesses.
Moreover, the investigating body keeps providing the first pages of the witness testimonies that have been recorded per the appeal by the defense as an evidence of “proper diligence” in extending the detention period. The testimonies by the journalists and the participants are the ultimate proof that Andrias Ghukasyan is not guilty. The court, however, keeps turning down the appeals to interrogate the witnesses and requesting evidences from the prosecutor, taking the latter’s allegations that those are confidential materials realted to the investigation.
So here we are, the court hearings are closed because the provided materials are confidential as they are a part of preliminary investigation; nevertheless, the mentioned materials are not exposed even for the sides involved in the hearings. By the way, the court refuses even to request the testimonies by witnesses that have been interrogated per the defenses appeal. This happens despite the resolution by the European court on Human Rights on the case Sefilyan against Armenia as of 02.10.2012, stating that according to the section 4 of paragraph 5 of the Convention, in order to prove the legitimacy of the detention, the defense has to be provided with all the exculpatory materials of the case. This might also require the court to interrogate witnesses whose testimonies can affect the legitimacy of extending the detention.
Our court, however, deprives Andrias Ghukasyan of his constitutional right to appeal to the legitimacy of his arrest and detention. In their decisions, the courts mention that on this stage they can consider only the evidences proving the grounded suspicion, but not those that eliminate the grounded suspicion. Such a decision was made by the Arabkir and Kanaker-Zeytun Court of General Jurisdiction on 26.01.2017, in accordance with which the detention was extended for another 2 months, while refusing the appeals to either request the testimonies by witnesses or to interrogate them.
This is how Andrias Ghukasyan is still being held in detention as a political prisoner.
Attorneys Karen Mejlumyan