The Prosecutor's Office Wins the Surprise of the Week Category: Arpine Hovhannisyan

This week, the Prosecutor's Office won the Surprise of the Week category. Former Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly Arpine Hovhannisyan wrote about this on her Facebook page:

She particularly noted:

“The politicization of the Prosecutor General's Office and the Prosecutor General

This week, the Prosecutor's Office won the Surprise of the Week category, but since we no longer wish to be surprised, here is a small guideline.

• According to various international documents and guidelines, such as the opinions of the Advisory Council of European Prosecutors from the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, prosecutors must respect the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, equality of arms, the separation of powers, and the binding nature of the final decision of the court while performing their duties. At the same time, it is emphasized that the Prosecutor's Office must respect freedom of the media.

This means that yesterday, in relation to the press conference of Robert Kocharyan's lawyers, the Prosecutor's Office should not have succeeded in grossly violating a number of fundamental principles (such as incomplete explanations), and presenting its decision to the public about who is right and who is wrong before the final decision of the court, but also depriving the media, thereby violating freedom of expression in the country.

• According to Article 176 of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia, the Prosecutor's Office supervises the legality of pre-trial criminal proceedings.

This means that the Prosecutor's Office must ensure that the Investigative Committee does not present absurd charges and, moreover, does not file petitions to the court for preventive measures to arrest based on these charges.

Of course, yesterday we all assessed with amusement the Investigative Committee’s approach regarding the multifunctionality of a bottle in our reality, but I believe that these discussions distracted from the most important point: the act itself, that is, there was no hooliganism, with or without a bottle. In this regard, the position of the Court of Cassation is important, which states that hooliganism can only be committed with direct intent. This means that the guilty person not only realizes that their actions violate public order and demonstrate open disrespect towards society but also wishes to carry out those actions.

A hooligan act can only be performed based on hooligan impulses. It is clear that the incident that occurred during the gathering, which is absent from the characteristics defined by the aforementioned position of the Court of Cassation, cannot be regarded as hooliganism. If, in any case, the law enforcement system adopts a different approach, I would like to inform all those who wish to participate in gatherings. From now on, if you participate in any rally and a situation arises where we express rude remarks and there is even a mild push (which is the case in 90% of public rallies), then you will most likely be charged with hooliganism.

This means that within a year, the demonstrator smoothly transformed into an ordinary hooligan.

• According to Article 176 of the Constitution, the Prosecutor's Office initiates criminal prosecution.

What does this mean? At a minimum, read the call-out outburst of MP Hayk Sargsyan today regarding forcing the judge to make decisions. Dear Prosecutor's Office, today the MP was able to include a series of criminal compositions in just one post, ranging from obstructing justice to overthrowing the constitutional order, ending with the abuse of official authority. If you are so impartial, promptly initiate a criminal case against Hayk Sargsyan.

Note: Regardless of whether the MP has deleted the post or not, an immediate criminal case must be initiated since the trend is obvious. The Prime Minister is right; think before you speak.”