Judge Asks Domestic Violence Victim if She Stayed With Husband “For a Piece of Bread”

Yesterday, March 17th, after the Court of Appeals heard the appeal of domestic violence victim, Gavar resident Hasmik Khachatryan, the three judges, Ruzanna Barseghyan, Sergei Chichyan, and Gagik Avetisyan, asked various questions to clarify the reasons for Khachatryan staying in her former husband’s home after being continuously subject to beatings.

“The court wonders why you didn’t divorce earlier,” “You did leave in the end, didn't you? You should’ve left on time,” “Did you stay for a piece of bread?” “Did they tie your hands up for you not to leave the house?", asked the judges Hasmik Khachatryan, who answered stating the reason was fear. According to the woman, she was afraid because her husband, Sargis Hakobyan, threatened her; in the case of her leaving, he would have deprived her from the possibility of seeing her two children.

Note, that Sargis Hakobyan was found guilty by the Gegharkunik Court of First Instance for torture and sentenced to 1.5 years imprisonment; however he was granted amnesty and was set free from the courtroom.

Hasmik Khachatryan’s side appealed the Court of First Instance’s verdict to the Court of Appeals stating that the court did not take into consideration that Hasmik Khachatryan was subject to beating by an individual who she was dependant on and for that reason he was given a lesser punishment.

According to Khachatryan’s lawyer Tigran Muradyan, the woman’s dependency has been confirmed by various instances present in the case; for example, once, when noticing one of the children had fallen and was injured, Sargis beat Hasmik, in another episode the husband pulled his wife from the hair, while Hasmik pleaded for Sargis not to beat her. The third incident was when Sargis asked whether Hasmik doubted if he was a “good guy” and if he had any doubts that Hasmik was being disloyal to him, he would “take her eyes out.”

During the hearing in the Court of First Instance, Khachatryan had explained that she had fled her husband’s home to take shelter at her parents' house. Hakobyan went after her, with the intention of bringing her back, however, Khachatryan refused. Since she had physical injuries, her father took her to the hospital the next day and from there they appealed to the police. 

During yesterday's hearing, the Court of Appeals’ judges stated that it was especially surprising that Hasmik stayed at Hakobyan’s home for the past two years, because Hasmik and Sargis did not live a “married life” for the duration of that time.

Since there is no opportunity to direct questions to the court, those present at the court were left to assume what the court meant by “married life.” Tigran Muradyan assumed the court’s understanding of “married life” was sexual relations. 

“You, yourself, admitted in your preliminary testimony that you did not live a married life,” said the presiding judge Ruzanna Barseghyan, without clarifying what “married life” means.

Hasmik Khachatryan noted that during the last two years Sargis lived in Yerevan for the most part, and would come home once or twice a week, but would say that he would find work and the whole family would move.

“As to having a mistress, Sargis’ parents used to say that all men have mistresses, but that I was his wife,” noted Hasmik Khachatryan.

In the appeal suit, the plaintiff’s side is also demanding to overturn the decision to grant Sargis Hakobyan amnesty. According to Khachatryan’s lawyer, an act of amnesty could not be implemented if he is also involved in another civil suit currently in the investigation stage. The case pertained to a civil suit where Hasmik Khachatryan is demanding moral compensation. The prosecutor also appealed the Court of First Instance’s verdict demanding 5 years imprisonment, while Hasmik Khachatryan’s side demanded 7 years imprisonment for Hakobyan.

During yesterday's hearing, Sargis Hakobyan’s (currently imprisoned on different charges) supporters, one male and a few women, accused the journalists covering the case, stating “Do you know how much money they get to cover this?” One of the women kept commenting on Hasmik’s answers, saying “He didn’t do enough; he should have smashed your head.” 

Photograph: Women’s Support Center