Is Shant Harutyunyan a political prisoner or criminal?
Who is Shan Harutyunyan? Is he a political prisoner or a hooligan that was arrested for violating the public order? Should he be treated as an activist who was arrested for his struggle against the government or someone that violated laws and order? People are trying to judge him by saying that he is a former policeman and cannot judge and make an announcement like a thief in law (Russian institutionalized mafia that has certain rules). Such people say he has mental problems and his aggressive behavior could have bad consequences.
Shant Harutyunyan used to be a political prisoner during the Soviet times. Shant was arrested for campaign against the Soviet ideology, and he was freed only after the collapse of the Soviet Union as he was recognized as a political prisoner. He was again arrested on after the clampdown of March 1, and he was announced by ANC opposition force to be a political prisoner. Shant Harutyunyan was the only person that was set free after the events of March 1 as he was kept in a mental house for a certain period of time. Shant announced that he had been taken to a mental hospital by the order of Russian security services and he could be killed. Later Shant announced that he had not been killed due to the intervention of the Americans.
What do the people that considered Shant a political prisoner in the Soviet time and 2008 think about him now? The only person that believes Shant is a political prisoner is the head of the Helsinki Committee in Armenia, Michael Danielyan. “Certainly I consider Shant Harutyunyan a political prisoner as his activity was politically motivated. He announced political goals and was trying to achieve those goals,” says Michael Danielyan. In answer to our question whether the fact of having clubs and explosives is not enough to consider that there were factors of crime in his actions he said, “There is no crime in that action as it is called political struggle with force methods.”When the police prohibit demonstrators to hold peaceful march, they make them use force methods. The first party to violate the law was the police as they prohibited the demonstration participants to hold a parade. It was their civic right. Accordingly, Shant Harutyunyan and his supporters who were arrested should be considered political prisoners and be set free immediately.”
Vardan Harutyunyan, lawyer and former political prisoner, says that Shant is not a prisoner in order to discuss whether he is a political or criminal prisoner. In answer to our comment that processes are going to that direction as the investigation bodies have instituted a criminal case the lawyer said, “Firstly Shant should make an announcement to claim that he is a political prisoner. If he does that, I will say it too.”
Shant’s friend Azat Arshakyan, who used to be a political prisoner as well, says he does not want to discuss Shant’s status.
Number one political prisoner Paruyr Hayrikyan says he was not in Armenia on November 5th and does not know what happened in the Freedom Square. Paruyr Hayrikyan’s cousin was among the arrested people as well.
RPA members who were political prisoners in the past have turned off their phones. They have gone deep into hiding – deeper than during the totalitarian regime as their critical statements can have even worse consequences now than during Brezhnev’s or Antropov’s times.
In answer to our question whether after November 5th there may be new political prisoners, Levon Zurabyan, who considers himself as opposition representative, said that it is not excluded.
Going back to the issue about who can be called a political prisoner, let’s discuss the international institutions’ definition of such status. According to the PACE’s definition, there are five things that make one a political prisoner. If Shant Harutyunyan’s actions were formally a law violation but he is persecuted, the PACE will consider him a political prisoner if his punishment is disproportional. We should not hurry to offer presumptions and should wait for the society to make its assumption and consensus, like it happened in case of Tigran Arakelyan. “The situation is complicated because we cannot say that there were no illegal actions. If Shant Harutyunyan’s situation complies with any of those five criteria, we will raise his issue,” said Levon Zurabyan.
As you see, Levon Zurabyan does not hurry and wants to wait and see what the majority will say. This is saying someone who is the deputy president of ANC, a political party that was formed as a result of March 1. Some people we talked to asked not to publish their name but said that Shant Harutyunyan is mentally sick and needs treatment – he needs help for the situation he is in. What does make him sick? What makes him sick maybe is that he believed that it is possible to make a revolution in Armenia, and he believed in it and claimed that it is enough for people to be brave and act. People who consider themselves mentally healthy do not believe in such things for many years already.
By Avetis Babajanyan
