Epress.am News from Armenia
The examination of the appeal by Hayk Sandaljyan, Artur Pokharyan, and Vram Baghdasaryan (the latter accused in the May 12, 2010 murder of 23-year-old Khachik Mkrtchyan and sentenced to 14 years in prison) continued in the Court of Appeals today. At the last hearing, Pokharyan refused legal counsel and asked the court to grant him amnesty.
Baghdasaryan’s attorney, representative of the Yerevan-based Helsinki Association for Human Rights Gayane Khachatryan, presenting the appeal, noted that her client did not commit this murder, there was no evidence acquired through the criminal case, and furthermore, the facts were distorted during the investigation — in order to bring charges against her client.
“The Court of First Instance carried out a biased examination, why not, commissioned by the prosecution, because the court took no independent action. Consequently, the defense motioned and motions to first examine this case through a review procedure, as well as to issue a verdict of acquittal on Criminal Code Article 104 [“murder”] Section 2 Paragraphs 6 and 10 [and] mild punishment based on Criminal Code Article 235 Section 1 [“illegal procurement, transportation and carrying of weapons, ammunition, explosives or explosive devices”] and Article 258 Section 4 [“hooliganism”],” she said.
After the motion, the judge postponed the court session to Jan. 19 at 2:30 pm.
Note, just as at the previous court session, so too during today’s hearing, the accused and their attorneys were sitting in separate areas and were not given the opportunity to consult.
At the start of the hearing today, Vram Baghdasaryan’s attorney made a motion to the judge to be allowed to sit next to her client. Presiding Judge Gagik Avetisyan said that the accused cannot be brought closer, but the attorneys’ table could be brought closer to their table. However, standing between Baghdasaryan and his attorney were police officers.
Speaking to Epress.am, Helsinki Association President Mikail Danielyan, present in court, gave his opinion on the matter:
“By law, an attorney has to have contact with her client as at any moment, questions might arise. The judge allowed the table to be brought closer. But in this case police officers were standing in between Vram Baghdasaryan and Gayane Khachatryan, and, why not, perhaps they were listening in. The accused’s contact with his attorney is restricted, as are their rights. After the hearing, when I approached presiding Judge Avetisyan and said that that’s unlawful, he said this wasn’t his jurisdiction. So a question arises, who is presiding, who is ruling the courtroom? Who is the ringleader: the police or the judge? If the judge, then he can command this not to happen; if the police, well that’s a different issue. And secondly, if there’s a fear that the attorney might pass on something to her client, then why do they inspect us, let them not inspect us,” he said, referring to inspections by security prior to entering the court.