The Essence of the Incompatibility Requirement is Distorted: Corruption Prevention Commission on Tsarukyan's Activities

The Corruption Prevention Commission of the Republic of Armenia, consisting of Haykuhi Harutyunyan, Lilit Aleksanyan, Aramais Pashinyan, and Narek Hambardzumyan, has concluded that Gagik Tsarukyan, the head of the "Prosperous Armenia" faction in the National Assembly, violated the rules of incompatibility outlined in the law.

According to a document published on the Commission's website, the Commission found that the provisions of Article 31, Part 6, Points 1 and 4 of the Law on Public Service were violated.

The Commission stated, "In the framework of the proceedings regarding the obvious violations of the incompatibility requirements, information has been clarified that was obtained from the state administration of the Republic of Armenia, local self-government bodies, databases, and from the participant in the proceedings." Among other circumstances, the Corruption Prevention Commission noted significant facts for the proceedings:

- On May 20, 2017, a contract for fiduciary management of shares and participation interests was signed between Gagik Tsarukyan and Sedrak Arustamyan.

- On June 23, 2020, an extraordinary general meeting of "Multi Group" Concern LLC was held, attended by the company's participants Gagik Tsarukyan and Samvel Tsarukyan. The general meeting decided to dismiss Sedrak Arustamyan from the position of General Director of "Multi Group" Concern LLC and appointed Arayik Kesoyan as the temporary General Director. Gagik Tsarukyan signed as the head of the meeting.

- On July 2, 2020, an extraordinary general meeting of "Multi Avtotrans" LLC was held, attended by Gagik Tsarukyan (holding 90% of the shares) and Javahir Tsarukyan (holding 10% of the shares). The meeting was chaired by Gagik Tsarukyan, who proposed to dismiss Arthur Avetisyan from the position of General Director and appoint Hovhannes Poghosyan as the new General Director. Gagik Tsarukyan signed as the head of the meeting.

"The study of information regarding the individual's activities within the framework of this case indicates that, although formally, by transferring fiduciary management of his stake in commercial organizations, the legal requirements were preserved, nonetheless, due to the general activities, the essence of the incompatibility requirement has been distorted," the conclusion stated.