Until Now I Have Maintained Restraint: Davit Tonoyan

Considering the questions raised by various media outlets during the pre-trial investigation of the criminal case, as well as the completion of the pre-trial investigation, former Armenian Defense Minister Davit Tonoyan felt compelled to address some of these issues.

– Mr. Tonoyan, in all statements made by your legal team, it is noted that your arrest and detention were illegal. In particular, in the statement dated October 11, 2021, it was mentioned that "we are dealing with a classic example of malice". Who are the malice-makers and what are their motives?

– The malice-makers are those on whose information the criminal case was initiated, charges were brought, and former and current officials were detained. They are those based on whose reports, as mentioned from the National Assembly podium, "political will manifested itself for the uncovering of such cases". Moreover, after the completion of the pre-trial investigation, the arguments of former and current officials, which had a direct interest in providing and reporting the aforementioned information against me, were not substantiated. Their names are not worth mentioning; besides, the statements of these individuals have been public.

Even if the unfounded criminal case initiated against me were to be dismissed, I would still demand an open trial to present the baseless allegations of the pre-trial investigation to the public. Now, after the completion of the pre-trial investigation, if an accusatory conclusion is drawn and the case is sent to court with the prosecutor's approval, I will demand an open, public trial, of course, taking into account the limitations related to state and military secrecy.

– “After being relieved of the post of Minister of Defense, Mr. Tonoyan has refrained from commenting, considering the state secret, national security of the Republic of Armenia, and the interests of interstate relations. Even today, Mr. Tonoyan prioritizes these interests over his own and, possessing a large volume of information, does not use it in the public domain for his defense.” This part of the October 11 statement was much discussed and manipulated. In particular, assumptions were made that you are thus sending a "message" to the authorities. What do you say about this?

– Until now, I have maintained restraint regarding involvement in political processes, and that is what my lawyers' statement has been about. There will still be opportunities for me to present my clarifications to the public regarding the 44-day war through the investigative commissions to be established, provided that their work is ensured with objectivity and impartiality.

– Your lawyers have expressed confidence that the results of a specialized expert examination will provide substantiated and impartial answers to the claims regarding “low-quality” and “non-compliant” weapons and ammunition for the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia. Do you believe it is possible to organize an independent examination, and in your opinion, why was the examination commissioned by the pre-trial body left incomplete for the purpose of clarifying the quality of the missiles?

– I had no basis to reject or ignore the reports of qualified personnel from the General Staff and responsible structures regarding the suitability for exploitation, preservation, and extension of the service life of the ammunition. Particularly since in many other countries, prolongation was done according to the regulations in force there, and missiles produced in the same years (1988-1991) are still in service. Even the completed non-objective pre-trial investigation did not confirm the poor quality or unsuitability of the missiles due to the incomplete technical examination and the fact that the missiles were not tested. It was clear that the conduct of the examination would confirm the usability of the missiles. I am more than confident that even with great desire, it will simply be impossible to oppose the results of independent professional expertise.

Moreover, due to the seizure of the missiles and the delay in the pre-trial investigation, and also due to the prolonged outlook of the trial, the possibility of prolongation will be obstructed, which presents a more real danger to our army than the harm that is attempted to be attributed to those involved in the case. At the same time, it should be noted that formulations in the presented accusations, such as "being informed due to the office about the expiration of the missiles' terms", "coming to a preliminary agreement with officials and others of the RA Armed Forces", "being significantly more expensive than the market price", "for selfish motives", "not taking into account the actual demand for similar missiles in the Ministry of Defense", etc., have not been substantiated in any way by the criminal case. On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence in the case that refutes them.

– Your lawyers invited the political leadership's attention to the non-objective investigation being conducted against Davit Tonoyan, the vivid evidence of which is the subjective and unprofessional interpretations in the criminal case, based solely on assumptions. Did the political leadership, in particular, the Prime Minister, ever point out the issues related to “low-quality” weapons and ammunition during your tenure?

– I do not recall any such remarks from the Prime Minister. I believe that if he had any, he would have mentioned them, as he did not lack information, and since my appointment, the entire procurement process of the Ministry of Defense has been under the daily supervision, inspection, and examination by the NSS, the Prosecutor's Office, the Investigative Committee, and the Anti-Corruption Committee. There have been many instances when several governmental agencies have conducted investigations regarding the same procurement episode. The procurement decision was made for the assurance of the utilization of the RA Armed Forces, and the ammunition in question was used in readiness for combat, even during military operations, and this is an undeniable fact. The Prime Minister stated in his interview on December 24, 2021, that he has a reliable specialist whom he calls upon to study and assess the judgments if necessary. Was the “case of delivering unfit missiles” given for investigation to the reliable specialist of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia or not?

– There are opinions in the media that you are being made a “scapegoat” for the defeat suffered in 2020. What do you say about this?

– The visible desire to find a “scapegoat,” so to say, is hovering in the political arena, but I believe there will be surprises in this regard. One thing is clear that we are dealing with an enthusiastic desire to discredit me and the defense system. The vivid evidence of this is that even having information that the “unfit” missiles have been within the term, were even used during the 44-day war and solved combat problems, nonetheless, the prosecuting body issued a statement that “missiles acquired with the funds allocated to the RA Ministry of Defense do not comply with the technical specifications and the requirements of the RA armament, bought at a significantly higher price than market value, and that their operational validity terms have expired,” the evidence of which is also that some of the missiles were not fired and removed from the balance some time after the delivery, and the rest were not used at all, including during the 44-day war that started on September 27, 2020.

Rest assured that if the outcome of the war had been different, such criminal cases would not have been initiated. Much older munitions have been poured on the enemy’s head and have destroyed them. As I stated in my message on November 20, 2020, I am ready to bear my share of the responsibility. But only for what I have done and not for what I have not done.