In February 2013, “Aravot” inquired from the Chairman of “Rights and Freedom” NGO, also former political prisoner, Vardan Harutyunyan, what is the proceeding of rendering the verdicts of the Soviet years’ political prisoners to him. In the meantime, the National Security Service had twice rejected him. Vardan particularly replied, “On February 22, I had a meeting with the representatives of the National Security Service. The meeting discussed the issue of rendering the verdicts against the Soviet years’ political prisoners to me. An agreement was reached that they will be rendered to me in compliance with the requirements of the RA Law on Freedom of Information. Currently, we can state that the problem solution is underway.”
In 2014, Vardan Harutyunyan’s “Dissent Soviet Armenia” was published, and it became clear that the NSS, in fact, had lied. Recall that in 2011, the human rights activist had applied to the National Security Service asking to render the verdicts of the people who were convicted in the Soviet years for political reasons. However, the NSS had rejected the request-form.
Some time later, the National Security Service press center issued a statement, particularly clarifying, “The verdicts and accusation judgments are not rendered according to the requirements of the RA Law on “Archives” and the RA Law “On Freedom of Information” as the requested documents contain also information on other individuals, the publication of which, without the consent of these individuals, would violate their personal and family life confidentiality. The National Security Service of Armenia is ready to render extracts from the verdicts of the persons convicted by aforementioned Articles in case of appealing in prescribed manner, and in case of the death of them, with a written permission from the heirs.”
Note that according to the RA Law on “Archives”, rendering archival information can be limited if they contain state, service, personal or other type of confidentialities. But the verdicts of the 1960-1980-ies were made at the open-door court sessions, hence, they are not confidential.
Read also
Nevertheless, Vardan Harutyunyan had collected written consent, in some cases, from the persons against whom the judgment was made, and in some cases, from their heirs, and in December of 2012, he has sent them to the NSS, however, he was rejected again. The mass media response was followed, a group of former political prisoners came up with statements. Caption: Vardan Harutyunyan
Vardan Harutyunyan
“The NSS had to invite me for an interview to resolve the issue, which were attended by senior representatives from the National Security Service, headed by the NSS Deputy Director. With an incomprehensible obstinacy, they were insisting that these verdicts contain names of the people, let’s say, the witnesses talking at the trial, who would perhaps be reluctant that a document with their names comes out of the National Security Archives. To my claim that we are taking about the people against whom the verdict was issued, which should not but rendered to the one against whom it was issued, they responded that they do not consider these verdicts as verdicts, for them they are archival materials containing names of the people, and period. The point that they are actually verdicts and regardless of their claims, they were are and will remain as such, and they must be given to those against whom they were made, was not an argument for them, – writes Vardan Harutyunyan in the book. Such a solution of the problem was offered: to mention the initials of the names and last names of the people instead of giving the full names, and I, according to my capability, having the initials of the names would try decoding them.
They even promised to assist me in this difficult task. This was unexpected for me. My task becomes complicated but I agreed hoping that will remain true to their promise, and when I come across to challenges, they will assist me. But in the phase of rendering the verdicts to me, they broke their promise. Instead of the initials of the actual names of the people, they mentioned arbitrary letters, the decoding of which was impossible and they denied the assistance promised to decode them. If in the beginning, when I was asking the actual name of the person with the initials, they were responding, but a few days later, they informed me that they were forbidden them to assist me even for this matter. In short, as befits to a true official of Cheka, they failed to do as promised”.
Vardan Harutyunyan, however, has restored a lot of verdicts. Moreover, some of the verdicts, which were preserved in the private archives of former political prisoners, or the author has received from the Judicial Department, was not necessary to restore at all, and they were was published in the book in a complete form, with the names and last names of all witnesses. Now, a question arises, why independent Armenia’s National Security Service is so consistently trying to veil the name of the people servicing the Soviet KGB. The majority of the names of essential witnesses in majority cases of the verdicts are well-known now too, however, we have not heard about the attempts of retribution or “fratricidal wars” after the publication of the book.
“The country that was accusing people for being dissidents no longer exists. The political prisoners of that period were long ago been acquitted, but Armenia’s National Security Service, in accordance with the spirit of old times, continues considering the verdicts published in the Soviet times top secret, – noted a group of political prisoners in their statements of February 2013, – It is just amazing why so many years after the collapse of the ill-fate Soviet state and the proclamation of Armenia as an independent Republic, the National Security Service adjacent to the Government of independent Armenia continues remaining loyal to the Soviet mindset and morals and does everything to demonstrate its intolerance towards people who once have fought against these morals and the mindset”.
Anna ISRAELYAN
P. S. To the point, Andranik Margaryan’s relatives were the only ones who refused to give consent to get the verdict from the NSS Archives brought in against him. We mentioned this with a regret because, in the “Dissent Soviet Armenia” book, the sections about Andranik Margaryan give rise to many questions, which would be clarified in the event of complete reflection.
