No one has had any influence on me as a judge, nor could they. Khundkaryan

During a conversation with reporters in the National Assembly on September 14, candidate for the Constitutional Court judge, Ervand Khundkaryan, stated that he is not familiar with the conclusion of the Anti-Corruption Committee, nor could he be, because it is confidential. This statement comes in light of media reports suggesting that the Anti-Corruption Committee has issued a negative conclusion regarding his integrity, casting doubt on his impartiality to serve on the Constitutional Court.

“The conclusion of the Anti-Corruption Committee is provided only to those who are conducting the selection. I can only be familiar with the part that has been published in the media. The information presented in the media raises serious doubts for me regarding whether such an analysis could have been conducted by that committee. I am left wondering whether those accusing Judge Khundkaryan of violations and of closing the ‘A1+’ television station have read the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision or not. The relevant ECHR decision indicated that there was no violation of the right to a fair trial in Judge Khundkaryan's case. On the contrary, it created a balance between the parties for competitive purposes,” he stated.

When asked whether he believes that the conclusion casts doubt on his selection as a Constitutional Court judge, Khundkaryan replied, “I cannot evaluate it, as this opinion is merely a guiding opinion for the legislators. If the deputies find that it is an obstacle to the election, the election is their prerogative, and I cannot influence it in any way.”

Regarding the decisions he has made leading to judgments against Armenia in the ECHR, the Constitutional Court judge candidate stated, “According to the media, the discussions pertained to the Teghut cases, and if you analyze, you will see that I had no association with some of the cases at all. There are several cases that should be analyzed to determine where real violations occurred, which were due to shortcomings in the court. The Court of Cassation is constrained by the grounds for appeal; it cannot go beyond the grounds and reasoning for appeals and address issues that it recognizes itself.”

He denied that Serge Sargsyan or his relatives could have had any influence on him. “No one has had any influence on me as a judge, nor could they. Be assured that no judge administers justice to please anyone. I do not accept such a judge’s persona,” he declared.

He also addressed the statement from the owner of “Old Yerevan,” who accused him of receiving a bribe. “If there are people making such statements, there are relevant bodies authorized to conduct investigations and make decisions as a result,” he noted.

In response to the comment regarding the ease with which accusations could be made, he answered, “Everything is possible, considering that these escalations arise when specific cases are under consideration by the Court of Cassation.”