I am a resident of Gndevaz village of the enlarged community of Vayots Dzor province, Armenia. As an environmentalist and journalist, I have covered the Amulsar issue for 10 years, I have authored dozens of videos on the mentioned case, as well as an investigative documentary called «Amulsar – Strong Mountain» .
As a member of the affected community, I have been the plaintiff party at RA Administrative Court in the Amulsar case for already 7 years. Besides, I am the President of “Green Armenia” environmental-educational NGO.
Lydian Armenia CJSC filed a court case against me, demanding 1,300,000 AMD, allegedly for defamation of business and good name.
Background
The photos in my hand represent concrete evidence of the activities of Lydian Armenia CJSC in 2017-2018. I spoke about this live on August 24, 2019 on the Public TV channel during the “News. 60 Minutes” program. Lydian Armenia CJSC was blasting with explosives the area located at 1 km from my house in Gndevaz, as a result of which the gardens were being covered with dust. The next photo, taken in May 2018, shows the water flowing from the drinking water pipes of Gndevaz village; the pipeline was damaged during the construction works carried out by the mentioned company. This is the water that the residents should have used, should have given to their children, livestock, using it for domestic purposes.
Read also
Lydian Armenia CJSC admitted its own guilt and supplied the village population with water in plastic containers. In a sociological survey entitled Amulsar gold-bearing quartzite mining project in Armenia, the report states that during the repair of damaged water pipelines, residents were “supplied with clean water in bottles” for two days.
Having already seen the material and vital damage during the construction, hundreds of residents realized that it is no longer possible to allow mining activities in the territory of Jermuk community and in the summer of 2018 they blocked the dirt roads leading to the mountain.
On the 51st day of the protest against the project, the public gathering was preceded by a Car Rally of Solidarity, in which around 100 cars from Jermuk, Kechut, and Gndevaz participated. According to the participants of the solidarity action, the purpose of the event was to neutralize the conflicts provoked by the employees of Lydian Armenia and to call for solidarity. In his speech pronounced during the gathering following the solidarity rally, Aharon Arsenyan – who fell victim to the 44-day war – clearly points out at minute 9:10 how the employees of Lydian Armenia CJSC had provoked a conflict with the population on the eve of the rally.
During the public gathering my speech was the following: “Hello… welcome… and especially to all those people who have been defending our Amulsar positions for 51 days and have not allowed a criminal like Lydian to continue its crimes…
…I would also like to say that in the course of these years Lydian has made provocations many times, spreading false information, trying to incite community, inter-community, and inter-state disputes, both in Gndevaz, Jermuk, Kechut, as well as in Gorayk, Saravan and among a number of other communities…”
According to the judgment of the “fair” judicial system of Armenia, these words are worth 1,224,000 AMD, that is, if you give a judgmental assessment to the situation, you should pay the company 1,224,000 drams.
I saluted the people who stopped the illegality, because for me, such an action against nature and humanity has no other definition but that of a crime. If your country’s government and law enforcement entities do not give a legal assessment to the incident, it still does not mean that what happened is not a crime. If the judicial system is filled with acts that are not in the interest of justice, it does not mean that this specific judicial act is legal.
The next part of my speech pronounced during the rally concerned the conflicts of inter-community, intra-community and interstate level, provoked by the company in question. Those regard the meeting of Lydian’s representatives with the residents of Jermuk and Gndevaz in November 2011, during which the head of the company was urging a member of his own team not to «make a row here», that is, not to provoke a dispute publicly, in front of the cameras, between the residents of Jermuk and Gndevaz on the one side and the company employees on the other.
On May 23, 2018, the residents of Gorayk village, who were in favor of the exploitation of Amulsar, blocked the Jermuk-Vayk highway in response to the complaints of the residents of Jermuk, demanding the opening of the roads leading to Amulsar.
In July 2018, the press and social networks already wrote about Lydian’s intention to sue the Armenian government through international arbitration. Different figures of the compensation claim were circulating in the press, ranging from 700 million to 2 billion USD. It was obvious that a legal dispute between the company and the Republic of Armenia was also brewing. Since Lydian has repeatedly emphasized its foreign origins, I have seen the announcements to sue Armenia in international arbitration, as well as the active defense of the Amulsar mining project by foreign embassies as the brewing of an interstate dispute.
On August 12, 2018, at the rally held in the Jermuk mineral water gallery, I aimed to raise these issues, having a premonition that one day these disputes might have turned into a real conflict, which actually did come late.
As early as August 27, 2018, the company’s employees, among whom there were citizens of various communities, came and tried to forcibly enter the premises of Amulsar, which was followed by a terrible clash with the defenders of Amulsar.
After this episode of August 27, 2018, the RA Investigative Committee initiated dozens of criminal cases against the residents; some of them face from 3 to 5 years of imprisonment. So the inter-community or intra-community dispute (who knows, maybe inter-state as well) is a mild description of the situation that was created and continues to be maintained in Vayots Dzor province.
About the courts
The Vedi Court placed the onus on the company to prove its good or bad reputation during the distribution of evidence, after which it had to be discussed whether I had defamed and harmed the mentioned business reputation. A few months later, this judge was transferred to Yerevan, and the case was handed over to H. Darbinyan, judge of the first instance of Vayk, in Vayots Dzor province.
As a result of the investigation of the case, the Vayk Court, with its decision dated 15.12.2021, partially satisfied the claim, obliging to deny the above-mentioned allegedly defamatory data. As to evaluating the word “criminal” as an insult, the Court found that the Respondent, being an environmentalist by profession and not a lawyer, might not have understood the true meaning of the word expressed. Therefore, the claims regarding monetary compensation for moral damage were rejected.
The Court of Appeal, by its decision dated 22.07.2022, the appellate complaint of “Lidian Armenia” CJSC was satisfied, the lower court’s decision was reversed and amended, thus fully satisfying the claim and obliging me to publicly deny the slanderous information, as well as confiscate from me 500,000 AMD as defamation and 500,000 AMD as material compensation in favor of Lydian Armenia CJSC.
The Court of Appeal also imposed an obligation to pay the court costs, including 24,000 AMD as a pre-paid state fee, as well as 200,000 AMD as a reasonable attorney’s fee.
In the meantime, the appeal filed by me was rejected. The judges of the RA Court of Appeal examining the case are M. Hartenyan, G. Torosyan, D. Serobyan.
A cassation appeal was filed against the decision of the Court of Appeal. By its decision dated 09.12.2022, the Court of Cassation refused to process the cassation appeal, noting that the Appellate Court had not allowed violations of such norms of material and procedural law, which would violate the essence of justice. The decision of the Court of Appeal has entered into force. The judges of the RA Court of Cassation also rejected my complaint. Their names are: Mamikon Drmeyan, Arsen Mkrtchyan, Suren Antonyan, Artak Barseghyan, Gor Hakobyan, Stepan Mikayelyan, Edgar Sedrakyan, Tigran Petrosyan, It should also be noted that the Information Disputes Council considered that “Tehmine Enokyan justified those judgments by the fact that there are many informational materials on social platforms, particularly on www.google.com, which cannot be denied. It is also known that a criminal case was initiated in relation to the activities of “Lydian Armenia” on the basis of environmental issues, the investigation of which is ongoing.”
Moreover, the courts showed a different approach when Hovsep Asoyan, one of Lidian’s employees, slandered me, Ani Khachatryan and Levon Galstyan; in that case, the court partially satisfied the plaintiffs’ demand, estimating a compensation of 150-200 thousand AMD, and that only for the lawyer’s expenses. The fact is that the damage caused to our honor and dignity by the Company’s employee is worth 150-200 000 AMD, whereas “tarnishing” the good business reputation of the Company is worth 1 224 000 AMD. By the way, there were also two members of parliament involved in 20 civil cases: thus, for example, in relation to Sergey Bagratyan the Court estimated the due amount to be 0 AMD. In fact, Armenian MPs receive around 800,000 AMD; the claim for compensation was 0 drams, whereas in my case it was 1,224,000 drams, although they did not even verify my property status.
So what should we do? Should we shut our eyes and consider that Lydian Armenia is a pure and impeccable company, it has not provoked any disputes in the communities, there are no criminal cases against the people of Jermuk, there are no protests, there have been no statements to threaten Armenia with an arbitration court?
One group of my lawyers is currently preparing a case that will be submitted to the ECHR, the other group is applying to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia, and until then, according to the Court’s decision I have to deny what was said, and I have to pay the corresponding amount to the company in question; a sum that, I am sure, will be returned. I have to take these actions so that I do not have a lien on my account or seizure of property by the State Tax Agency.
It may be difficult to find justice in Armenia, but such disputes have concrete value in the ECHR. And until then, I have to pay for the unfair and biased decisions of the judges.
Tehmine Yenokyan
