No Grounds for Continued Detention of Karen Khachatryan, Lawyers State

Just now, the Yerevan Court of General Jurisdiction, presided over by Judge Arthur Mkrtchyan, announced its decision regarding the measure of restraint for the former head of the Internal Security Department of the Armenian State Revenue Committee, Karen Khachatryan. The court decided to continue the detention of Karen Khachatryan, who has been in custody unlawfully for 12 months, during the trial process.

“My imagination fails to comprehend how it can be justified in the court ruling that Karen Khachatryan should continue to be kept in custody when there is no basis for keeping him in custody,” said Amram Makinyan, a member of the Khachatryan legal team.

The lawyer reminded that during the preliminary investigation, Karen Khachatryan was at liberty twice and did not attempt to hide. Furthermore, no actions have been taken that would indicate that the investigating authorities see risks regarding the possibility of him exerting illegal influence on trial participants.

Makinyan also noted that this is discriminatory treatment towards the Khachatryans, which contains elements of punishment regarding Karen Khachatryan's case, while Gagik Khachatryan's case involves torture.

During today’s court session, which Karen Khachatryan also attended, the lawyer stated that he is the only person currently in custody in Armenia on the specified charges, and he informed that for 1 year now, the damage caused to the state amounting to 236 million drams has been paid to the prosecutor’s deposit account.

According to Makinyan, there is no second case in judicial practice where a person would be charged under the first part of Article 179, Section 3, after having compensated the damages to that extent, and still be kept in detention while misleading the courts.

It is noteworthy that Karen Khachatryan is charged with embezzlement and official forgery and does not accept the charges brought against him. During the preliminary investigation phase, his measure of restraint was changed, and after briefly being at liberty, not only did he not hide from the investigation, but after reading the information online regarding the change of the ruling, he personally appeared before the relevant authorities.

According to the legal team's perspective, the