Appeal Dismissed: Artists Could be Fined for Graffiti of Imprisoned Political Activist

The RA Administrative Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of four members of Art Laboratoria, who were appealing a lower court's decision to reject the petition to reinstate a missed deadline to appeal and refuse to accept their claim. 

As told to Epress.am by Helsinki Association for Human Rights attorney Gayane Khachatryan, who is representing Art Laboratoria's interests, the claim was submitted two days late, after the prescribed two-month period, because the postal service belatedly delivered the return notice receipts that must be attached to the claim; otherwise, the court will return it. 

Recall, the artists are asking the court to annul RA Police Arabkir Division Chief Grisha Amirkhanyan's December 2013 decision to slap them with an administrative fine of 30,000 AMD (about $75 USD) each for stencilling on the walls of Armenia's National Assembly on Nov. 10, 2013, the portrait of Shant Harutyunyan, a political activist detained during clashes with police in Yerevan on Nov. 5, 2013.

Khachatryan said that earlier, the Administrative Court found that presenting these is not obligatory, since the RA Constitutional Court in its December 10, 2013 decision ruled that the legislative act in Article 73 of the RA Administrative Procedure Code (which is no longer in effect since January 7, 2014) contradicts Article 18 Section 1 of the RA Constitution and is invalid. According to this act, attached to the claims are "documents affirming receipt of the claim and copies of the documents attached to it by the respondent and other individuals in the case."

Under the new RA Administrative Procedure Code that came into effect in January 2014, the legislative act that was considered invalid was again established, which caused misunderstandings for the plaintiffs. 

"This case proves once again that decisions adopted by the RA Constitutional Court are ignored by the National Assembly, as well as that the Constitutional Court does not follow up in the implementation of decisions it's made, which is expected also in the decision it adopted regarding the mandatory funded pension," she said. 

The plaintiffs intend to submit a new claim to the Administrative Court.