Ara Babloyan and Arsen Babayan's Actions Were Incorrectly Classified: The Case is with the Special Investigation Service

The prosecutor responsible for overseeing the legality of the pre-investigation has decided to return the criminal case involving Ara B. under Article 300, Part 1 and Article 314, Part 1 of the RA Criminal Code, and Arsen B. under Article 38-300, Part 1 and Article 314, Part 1 of the RA Criminal Code back to the investigator for further examination, considering that the actions of the accused were not correctly classified. This was reported by the Public Relations Department of the RA Prosecutor General's Office.

Specifically, the factual data obtained during the pre-investigation apparently indicate that officials, abusing their powers and using their official position contrary to the interests of the service, ensured the appointment of their party representative Hrayr Tovmasyan to the position of the President of the Constitutional Court before the entry into force of the amendments to Chapter 7 of the Constitution in 2015, creating the illusion of a normal procedural process in the interest of a group, committing official forgeries guided by currently ineffective legislative regulations. They accepted the resignation of the then current President of the Constitutional Court, nominated Hrayr Tovmasyan for the presidency of the Constitutional Court, and he was appointed as the President of the RA Constitutional Court during the regular session on March 21, 2018. As a result, substantial damage was inflicted on the legal interests of the RA Constitutional Court.

This action resulted in severe consequences for the legal interests of the RA, leading to the failure of the citizens of the RA to express their will as enshrined in the constitution. This expression manifested itself in the fact that as a result of the referendum on the constitutional amendments in 2015, the citizens of the RA formed the procedure for electing the President of the Constitutional Court by the judges of the Constitutional Court from among themselves for a 6-year term without the right to be re-elected, as stipulated in Article 166, Part 2 of the proposed draft text submitted for voting, having a legitimate expectation for its implementation after the enactment of that regulation, which was artificially obstructed and was not realized as a result of the aforementioned actions.

In other words, with the sufficient combination of evidence collected during the pre-investigation of the criminal case, Ara B.'s actions apparently correspond to the features of the crimes defined by Article 308, Part 2 and Article 314, Part 1 of the RA Criminal Code, while Arsen Babayan's actions correspond to the characteristics of the crimes defined by Article 38-308, Part 2 and Article 314, Part 1 of the RA Criminal Code. Therefore, the prosecutor, exercising procedural oversight, deemed it necessary to amend the charges brought against the accused and to present them with new charges during the additional pre-investigation in accordance with the established procedural law.