European Court of Human Rights Delivers Judgement Against Armenia

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) handed down on September 29 a judgement on the “Saghatelyan v. Armenia” case in favor of former Gegharkunik Regional Court judge Anahit Saghatelyan. The Court found that Armenia violated the applicant's right to fair trial (Article 6 of the Convention) and that Saghatelyan was denied access to any Armenian court in order to dispute a 2004 presidential decree dismissing her from her post. ECHR ruled that Armenia is to pay Saghatelyan EUR 3,600 in non-pecuniary damages, and EUR 1,300 in respect of costs and expenses. 

Back in 2005, Saghatelyan lodged a claim with a Yerevan First Instance court seeking to annul the presidential decree; however, the court terminated the proceedings on the ground that the former judge's claim was not subject to examination by the courts of general jurisdiction. 

Saghatelyan appealed the decision at the RA Civil Court of Appeal which, subsequently, examined and dismissed the applicant’s claim as unsubstantiated. The Court of Cassation, however, soon quashed the judgment of the Court of Appeal and decided to terminate the proceedings on the same grounds as the First Instance court.

“I think the [ECHR] judgement will serve as a cornerstone [for future similar cases]. The question was whether there is a court in the world where such decisions can be appealed. I was dismissed from my post for ‘gross violations of the rules of criminal procedure;’ however, the parties in the disputed criminal case had no complaints against me; they had complaints about the preliminary investigation, which means the Council of Justice could not examine a motion on my [alleged] violations,” Anahit Saghatelyan said in a conversation with Epress.am. 

After lodging an application with the ECHR, the former judge said, Armenian authorities began to persecute her, brought a criminal prosecution against her, accusing Saghatelyan of fraud during her time in office.

“They wanted to terminate the case on grounds that the statute of limitations timeframe had expired. It took us years, but we managed to get the criminal charges dismissed for lack of criminal intent. That was exactly what I wanted. If the timeframe had expired, why initiate a case in the first place? They had to acquit me,” Saghatelyan stated.