Police Officer Damages Vehicle on Freedom Boulevard: What Violations Did the Ombudsman Register?

The rapid response teams of the Ombudsman’s office have conducted visits to various divisions of the police department in Yerevan, including the Central, Arabkir, Erebuni, Kanaker-Zeitun, Malatia, and Mashtots divisions.

Individual conversations have taken place with 46 persons detained, and videos of administrative arrests have been examined. It has also been documented that 5 minors were brought to police stations, one of whom was under 16 years old. With the intervention of the Ombudsman’s office, no administrative proceedings were initiated against this minor, and he was immediately released.

Based on published videos and the visits to police stations, instances have been recorded where individuals were detained without explanation for deprivation of liberty, without clarification of minimal rights (such as rights to a lawyer, to remain silent, and other rights), and through the application of disproportionate force.

Past studies conducted by the Ombudsman’s institution, as well as ongoing ones, show that the problematic practice of administrative arrest and detentions is widespread, notably against those participating in protests. This practice must be excluded; any case of administrative arrest or detention, or in other words, deprivation of liberty, is illegal if the minimum rights of the person are not guaranteed during the process of deprivation.

Additionally, during the protests on Freedom Boulevard, a case of a police officer damaging an individual's vehicle was registered.

There have also been noted cases of poor documentation of detained individuals in police registers. For instance, during a visit to the Kanaker-Zeitun police division, it was recorded that an individual subjected to administrative arrest under Article 182 of the Administrative Offenses Code of Armenia was released, but there was a lack of timely documentation regarding the release time in the register, even though the individual allegedly acknowledged and confirmed the authenticity of the recorded entries with his signature.

The identified issues are being summarized in the Ombudsman’s office, and necessary measures will be undertaken within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

The initial results of monitoring social networks and media publications indicate that political actors from both ruling and opposition forces, as well as individuals influential in public opinion supporting their political agendas, are using highly condemnable and, at times, extremely provocative rhetoric, making dangerous calls to the public.

We call on public and political leaders to refrain from irresponsible, dangerous, and ineffective discourse that leads to internal conflict among the public, and propose engaging the public agenda and their constituents in civil discourse on specific issues.

Furthermore, media outlets covering political processes are propagating extremely dangerous discussions, including active participation from fake users, inciting hatred, and at times, making veiled calls for violence.

Emphasizing the crucial role of the media in providing the public with professional, quality, and accurate information, as well as in lowering the levels of polarizing and hate speech in public discourse and fostering reasoned discussions, it is necessary for media leaders to take measures to remove such comments that proliferate below the news articles and allocate sufficient resources to do so.

In the realm of social media, the Ombudsman calls on users with an audience to delete comments and calls for hatred and violence that are sometimes presented as jokes.

The rapid response teams of the Ombudsman’s office continue to conduct 24-hour monitoring, including concerning expressions of extreme and dangerous speech.