Who cared and why should Armen Ashotyan stop representing Armenia’s interests abroad? The Dark Sides of the Investigative Committee Response

On the night of November 16, Armen Ashotyan, the vice-chairman of the Republican Party of Armenia (RPA), was blocked from leaving Armenia. During the passport check at the Zvartnots airport, the decision to ban Ashotyan was explained by the fact that he was accused in some case, while the RPA vice-president claims that he was not charged with any case at that moment.

168.am thoroughly touched upon the details of this topic and, trying to understand whether charges were brought against the RPA vice president or not, also sent inquiries to the competent state bodies: the RA Police, the General Prosecutor’s Office, the Investigative Committee, the Human Rights Defender (HRD) office.

We wanted to figure it out from the police why Armen Ashotyan’s exit from the country was blocked, when the decision to block Armen Ashotyan’s exit from Armenia was made, we asked to specify the day and time of the decision, on what basis was the decision on Armen Ashotyan’s exit ban from Armenia made, what was the status of Armen Ashotyan at the time of the ban on his entry from the country, in the decision or letter regarding the ban (we asked to indicate the type of legal act) were the grounds for closing his BMIS mentioned?
The main department of the criminal police considered that the information related to the highly publicized criminal proceedings was personal information and refused to answer our questions.

“The provision of the requested information is subject to rejection, as it contains information about Armen Ashotyan’s personal life and the corresponding power of attorney given to you by the latter is missing,” was mentioned in the response
We also sent these questions to the General Prosecutor’s Office and the Investigative Committee at the same time.

The prosecutor’s office avoided answering our questions and urged us to direct them to the pre-investigation body. And when answering the rest of the questions, they repeated their answer to the survey addressed a few days ago.

You can contact the body implementing the criminal proceedings to get information about the specific time limits for the accused Armen Ashotyan to cross the RA border.

Actually, the only body to determine the details related to the topic, and especially the day and time of the decision to block Armen Ashotyan’s exit from RA, was the Investigative Committee (IC), which we asked to answer on what basis the decision of the ban on Armen Ashotyan’s exit from RA was made, what was Armen Ashotyan’s status at the time of his ban on leaving the country, in the decision or letter regarding the ban (we asked to indicate the type of legal act) were the grounds for closing his BMIS mentioned.

The response from the IC was quite remarkable.

In response to your request received on November 18, 2022, I would like to inform you that within the framework of criminal proceedings No. 58217019, which is being investigated in the Property Crimes Investigation Department of the Main Department of the Cases of Special Importance of the RA Investigative Committee, on November 16, 2022, the body conducting the proceedings brought a criminal charge against Armen Ashotyan, a motion to initiate prosecution was submitted to the supervising prosecutor, which was accepted by the prosecutor on the same day and a decision was made, apparently due to carelessness, causing severe consequences, in relation to Armen Ashotyan for abusing official powers and money laundering on a particularly large scale, pursuant to Article 190 of the RA Criminal Law adopted on April 18, 2003, on initiating a public criminal prosecution under Article 308, Part 1, Clause 1 and Article 308, Part 2.

Taking into account that the legal conditions stipulated by the criminal procedure law were present, the pre-trial body, in 2022, in the decision made on November 16, the ban on absenteeism was applied to the accused as a preventive measure, which, according to the requirements of part 2 of Article 127 of the RA criminal procedure, was immediately sent to the authorized body carrying out border control.

In other words, according to the response received from the Investigative Committee, on November 16, literally hours after Armen Ashotyan wrote on his Facebook page that he would go to Lisbon to participate in the meeting of the European People’s Party (EPP), about initiating criminal prosecution against Armen Ashotyan, a petition was submitted to the supervising prosecutor, which was accepted on the same day, and on the same day a decision was made to initiate a public criminal prosecution against Ashotyan.

In fact, on November 16, the Investigative Committee made a decision to impose a restraining order against the RPA vice-president, banning him from being absent, which was “immediately sent to the authorized body carrying out border control”.

Can an outsider who gets to know these realities think that they initiated the sloppy proceedings and organized everything in order to prevent Armen Ashotyan from going to Lisbon and participating in the EPP meeting? Most probably, because at least we didn’t get another answer from the IC.

Thus, who caredand why was it necessary for Armen Ashotyan not to go to Lisbon and not to participate in the EPP gathering, to stop dealing with Armenia’s interests abroad? The question is not rhetorical…