Prosecutor's Office Responds to Robert Kocharyan's Defense Team Statement

The Public Relations Department of the RA Prosecutor General's Office reports that today, mainly as a defendant in the criminal case known as "Robert Kocharyan and others," Robert Kocharyan's defense lawyer Hayk Alyumyan addressed a press conference concerning two appeals submitted by the Prosecutor's Office to the RA Court of Appeals regarding this criminal case (requesting a change in the precautionary measure applied to R. Kocharyan, as well as suspending the proceedings of the criminal case and filing a complaint with the Constitutional Court).

During the press conference, he made statements that can only be interpreted as predetermined, imperatively framed, manipulative tricks, and distorted interpretations of legal acts aimed at exerting pressure on the Court of Appeals, especially concerning the judge's decision on whether to accept the presented appeals for proceedings.

“During the press conference, the defense made claims that cannot be interpreted otherwise than as a blatant attempt to exert moral and psychological influence on the judge regarding the forthcoming decision to accept or reject the appeals, as well as misrepresenting the authorities of the Prosecutor's Office,” the statement reads.

Without providing any legal basis, the defense argued that the judge would be grossly violating the law if they accepted the appeals submitted by the Prosecutor's Office. Furthermore, the defense mentioned plans to approach the RA Court of Appeals to scrutinize the objectivity of the process of assigning the appeals to the judge. Yet, preemptively, they hastily declared that there had been interference and would attempt to ascertain the nature of it.

By making such statements without even addressing the court, and while simultaneously labeling and making offensive remarks towards the judge, there is a blatant attempt to instill public distrust in the court and guide the judge's decision-making, effectively warning what kind of categorization may be assigned in the case of an unfavorable outcome for them.

The RA Prosecutor's Office has repeatedly clarified its right, with clear legal grounds, to appeal any acts issued by the court at any stage of the proceedings, including changing precautionary measures against specific defendants and suspending criminal proceedings based on appeals to the Constitutional Court. These justifications can be referenced in previous statements and announcements issued by the RA Prosecutor General's Office related to the subject matter.

It is excessively concerning and puzzling that under these circumstances, the defense continues its informational campaign aimed at depriving the Prosecutor's Office of these constitutional and procedural rights, resorting to manipulative methods and subjectively interpreting legal acts and regulations solely in favor of the defense in this case, all while seasoning it with unwarranted and offensive expressions directed towards the Prosecutor's Office.

Another example of such manipulation was evident during lawyer Hayk Alyumyan's press conference when he referred to Articles 53 and 54 of the RA Criminal Procedure Code, attempting to persuade that these articles do not stipulate that the Prosecutor's Office has the right to submit appellate complaints at this stage of the proceedings. Setting aside the fact that the esteemed lawyer did not explain why, if they do not argue that the Prosecutor's Office violated the criminal procedural law by submitting complaints, the Prosecutor's Office is deprived of the right to submit appellate complaints— a claim strangely asserted during the press conference.

The reality is that Article 53 of the Criminal Procedure Code pertains to the powers of the prosecutor during pre-trial proceedings, which is absolutely irrelevant to the current stage. Article 54 (referring to the powers of the Prosecutor's Office during trial) clearly states that the prosecutor may appeal court judgments, and in the cases provided for by the same Code, may also appeal other decisions of the court.

In the case where the esteemed defense merely “forgets” to mention this legal provision during the press conference, they claim the right to state “half-truths” or accuse the prosecution side of actions driven by whims.

The RA Prosecutor's Office continues to assert that it is inadmissible to deviate from the legal framework regarding the processes surrounding this significant criminal case for the state and society, subjecting them to emotional, political, or any other manipulations and distortions.

Therefore, we again appeal to the defense to refrain from turning this unacceptable conduct into the main guideline of their defense strategy while exerting moral, psychological, and informational pressure on the judge regarding the appeals, which have not even been accepted for proceedings by the court yet,” the statement concludes.