Home / Video / Family Forcibly Removed from Outside Presidential Palace Appeals Case in Court

Family Forcibly Removed from Outside Presidential Palace Appeals Case in Court

By refusing to initiate criminal proceedings concerning the illegal removal of Etchmiadzin resident Ashot Khudoyan and his family from outside the presidential palace on December 2, 2013, the Special Investigation Service (SIS) becomes a subdivision of the police. The lower court, by sustaining the SIS decision, also becomes a subdivision of the police. This was said today by head of the Vanadzor Citizens' Assembly Vanadzor Offfice Artur Sakunts, who is representing the Khudoyan family, at the Court of Appeal.

Recall, the Khudoyans were removed from their place of protest across the street from the presidential residence at around 6:15 am on December 2, 2013, the day of Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to Armenia, then stayed a full day at home under police supervision. The family is asking a criminal case be launched against the police, which was rejected by the trial court. 

Attorney Tatevik Siradeghyan noted in the justification of the claim that the SIS was clearly biased. Prior to rejecting the demand to launch criminal proceedings against the police, SIS investigator H. Harutyunyan took into account only police officers' testimonies and paid no attention to the remarks of the plaintiffs Ashot Khudoyan and his wife Heghine Makaryan, as well as those of another protestor, Emma Sahakyan, who was present at the scene of the incident. 

Also ignored were media reports, including articles in which an Ombudsman's Office employee speaks about Khudoyan being subjected to violence. 

Emma Sahakyan and Heghine Makaryan, in particular, said that 15 police officers in plainclothes, through the use of force, removed Ashot Khudoyan from outside the presidential palace then returned for his wife and children.

Police officers claim that they picked up the entire family together. According to the appeal, SIS investigator Harutyunyan also didn't take into account any testimony related to the injuries Khudoyan sustained and was satisfied only by the results of the medical examination, which, however, was carried out about 2 months after the incident when, for example, Khudoyan's head wound had healed. 

In addition, the SIS did not answer the question what does the expression "regime security zone" mean. 

Tatevik Siradeghyan reminded the Court of Appeal that the police officers from Arabkir division explained their removing the family from outside the presidential palace by defining that area as a "regime security zone"; meanwhile, the SIS did not explain what this means.

"The investigator did not explain this expression, reasoning there was no need because no violence was inflicted upon Khudoyan," she said. 

Artur Sakunts, in turn, said that, in fact, the police can consider any area in the territory of Armenia, including the court, a regime security zone and implement punitive actions.