What was the principle and the logic underlying the questions on the Harsnakar incident prepared by three National Assembly groups – the Armenian National Congress (ANC), the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) and the Heritage Party – and made public yesterday? In response to our question during a conversation with www.aravot.am, Gagik Jhangiryan, a former military prosecutor, said that by those questions, the authors had tried
to find out whether objectivity and comprehensiveness of the investigation had been ensured and what measures had to be taken to prevent such incidents in the future. www.aravot.am tried to understand whether questions included in the list like “were curses voiced during the beating or not, what items and/or tools were used?” and other such questions would be useful for the case itself, Mr. Jhangiryan said, “If we reveal one or two things, the whole kitchen will be revealed.”
As for Vahe Avetyan civic initiative council member Garegin Chugaszyan’s concerns that counselors had not been allowed to get acquainted with the case materials, Gagik Jhangiryan opposed, “A counselor has no right to get acquainted with the progress of a preliminary investigation Chugaszyan is not a counselor, that is why he says such ‘smart’ things.” As for the issue of the victim’s legal successor, Jhangiryan noted, “They cannot help but do that; they will necessarily do that.”
Read also
Let us note that the victim’s counselors applied for finding the family members legal successors only a week ago. Chugaszyan, however, says, “They officially say ‘they have not applied to us,’ whereas inArmenia, it is a common practice that investigators themselves always apply. It is a common practice, even in case of serious crimes, the investigators apply.” According to Chugaszyan, it testifies once again to the fact that the government circles are inclined to conceal the case up to the end.
Nelly GRIGORYAN
