The arrests of the former President of Armenia Robert Kocharyan “political and personal vendetta”, lawyers decry
On 7 December 2018, the Court of Appeal in Armenia ordered the arrest of the former President Robert Kocharyan. He was charged on 26 July 2018 with overthrowing the constitutional order during the 2008 post-election period.
The legal team battling for Kocharyan alleges that the arrests and the criminal charge have breached the former President’s fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 5 and 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and, undoubtedly, are politically motivated.
They allege that the Court of Appeal’s decision is a recent example of how the Kocharyan’s right to a fair trial in Article 6(1) has been breached by violating the domestic legal provisions on the establishment and competence of the Court. The legal team claims that the Kocharyan’s deprivation of liberty is unlawful not only by national law but also, by other applicable legal standards which have their source in international law, for example, Article 5 of the Convention.
The lawyers assert that due to “political vendetta” a false and unsubstantiated case was brought against the former President by the leader of the ruling party, Nikol Pashinyan by misusing law enforcement agencies. Furthermore, the representatives of Kocharyan claim that currently, the judges are not free from undue influences outside the judiciary, and from within.
The team also alleges that since the President Kocharyan’s first arrest in July 2018, his presumption of innocence has continuously been violated not only by the Armenia’s law enforcement authorities, but also the Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan. It is claimed that Article 6(2) prohibits statements by public officials about pending criminal investigations which encourage the public to believe the suspect guilty andprejudge the assessment of the facts by the competent judicial authority.
In addition, the lawyers say that the former President’s political rivals also launched a virulent press campaign which has adversely affected the fairness of a trial by influencing public opinion inArmenia and affected the President Kocharyan’s presumption of innocence.
The lawyers also assert that the Kocharyan’s trial is manifestly contrary to the provisions of Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention and the principles embodied there; they claim it is a flagrant denial of a fair trial, i.e. a flagrant denial of justice.
The legal teams says that they have lodged two applications to the European Court of Human Rights alleging gross violations of the President Kocharyan’s fundamental rights and there is powerful evidence that the criminal prosecution has been politically motivated.
Armine Vardanyan
