Prosecutor's Office Responds to Rector of Armenian-Russian University

The Prosecutor's Office has responded to the post made by Armen Darbinyan, the rector of the Armenian-Russian (Slavonic) University, regarding the initiated case against him. Below, we present the statement.

Considering that the Facebook post made today by the rector of the Armenian-Russian (Slavonic) University could lead to certain misinterpretations regarding the initiation of a criminal case related to the university's activities based on the request of the Russian Prosecutor's Office, I find it necessary to respond to this.

Firstly, regarding the claim that the initiation of a criminal case is baseless, it must be stated that the Office of the Prosecutor General of Armenia has received documents through the Russian Prosecutor General's Office concerning the planned, comprehensive, and mixed inspection conducted by the Federal Service for Supervision in Education and Science of Russia in 2021, which included information about alleged violations of budgetary and procurement laws, apparent inefficiency in the use of budgetary funds, unjustified salary payments (mismanagement or embezzlement), and alleged distortion of accounting records and reporting data during the years 2020-2021.

Given that the materials contained data indicative of alleged criminal acts, which can be clarified only through a thorough, objective, and comprehensive investigation conducted within the framework of a criminal case, on January 7, 2022, a criminal case was initiated under Article 214, Part 1 and Article 179, Part 3, Point 1 of the RA Criminal Code, and the investigation began.

In this sense, there was both a legal basis and grounds for initiating a criminal case, thus the claims regarding the initiation being baseless do not correspond to reality.

There will be a fully objective investigation conducted, the results of which, based on the evaluation of both exonerating and incriminating evidence, will determine whether to initiate criminal prosecution or to terminate the proceedings of the criminal case for exoneration.

Thus, I am confident that the Prosecutor's Office, as well as the investigative body, will be guided exclusively by the evidence obtained, rather than by a presumption of guilt or, as phrased in the post, a predisposition to 'fabricate corruption.'

Moreover, this applies especially when discussing an institution that holds significant authority and a prominent place in the higher education system in the Republic. The realities mentioned are the reasons why the Prosecutor's Office has not publicly issued a special statement regarding the initiation of the criminal case, aimed at preserving the university's reputation.

As in previous cases, our necessity to publicly provide information stems exclusively from the need to respond to information and comments that have already been publicized and presented under certain light.

The Armenian-Russian University is not the only educational institution facing criminal cases related to its activities. These cases have resulted both in decisions to terminate proceedings based on exonerating grounds and in criminal prosecutions. Hence, there is no basis and cannot be for doubting the objectivity of the conducted investigation.

Moreover, it is precisely within the framework of the criminal case that the esteemed rector of the Armenian-Russian University can cooperate with the investigative body and present relevant arguments to substantiate that the violations recorded in the materials sent to the competent authorities of Armenia are unfounded.

Additionally, the investigation is conducted by the RA Anti-Corruption Committee not 'to instill more horror into the situation,' as Mr. Darbinyan has framed it, but because the competent pre-investigation body for investigating criminal cases regarding corruption offenses is, as per our legislation, the RA Anti-Corruption Committee.

Therefore, I urge all to refrain from actions aimed at inciting unnecessary passions regarding the criminal case.