Who Benefits from the ECHR's Sent Response on Kocharyan's Case: 'Jhoghovurd'

The newspaper 'Jhoghovurd' reports: 'The publication of the European Court of Human Rights' response regarding the Constitutional Court's request in the case of Robert Kocharyan, accused in the events of March 1, continues to provoke conflicting statements. On one hand, Kocharyan's defense team considers this a victory, while on the other hand, representatives of the government believe that the ECHR's opinion is in their favor.

It is noteworthy that the ECHR judges stated in their advisory opinion that in order to assess the situation, one must take into account the specific circumstances of the case, rather than relying on abstract interpretations. Essentially, the main issue concerns the principle of non-retroactive application of law, particularly regarding the criteria for comparing laws amended at the time of the offense and afterwards. The former president’s defenders argue that he cannot be charged under an article that did not exist in 2008—specifically, the charge of overthrowing the constitutional order.

Thus, 'Jhoghovurd' attempted to understand what the judicial system thinks about this. We learned that many in the judicial system have examined the ECHR's response, but have not understood to whom it ultimately benefits. Among judges, there was even an opinion expressed that the ECHR's advisory opinion resembles decisions issued by the Constitutional Court during the tenure of former president Gagik Harutyunyan. It is worth recalling that opposition considered the decisions of the Constitutional Court as their victory, while the government viewed them as their own.'

For more details, refer to today's issue of the newspaper.