Police Used Physical Force Against MPs, Ombudsman Says

During the gatherings held on May 30, 2022, incidents occurred that resulted in the apprehension of individuals, and the guarantee of citizens' rights in police departments has been under the constant monitoring of the Human Rights Defender's office, as previously, it was reported by the Ombudsman's office.

“Rapid response teams from the Ombudsman conducted visits to six police departments in Yerevan on May 30, 2022, and provided assistance in exercising rights to around 100 individuals. Based on the rapid response and the constant monitoring of media publications, the following has been noted:

1. In several cases, the physical force used by police officers while apprehending individuals was evidently disproportionate and not warranted by the necessity of detaining the person. Numerous instances were recorded where rough physical force was applied to individuals who were already in the hands of police officers; moreover, compared to previous days, there were significantly more reports of individuals sustaining various types of injuries—ranging from bruises and scratches to fractures—during the enforcement of detentions. Complaints have been raised by citizens in police departments regarding suffering from varying intensity blows to the head at the hands of police officers.
2. At the same time, the Defender noted incidents of various degrees of bodily harm inflicted by police officers on participants of gatherings, which is also strictly condemnable and unlawful. The right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental right of an individual and a democratic process, and all participants must adhere to the rules of the democratic game.
3. Monitoring has revealed incidents in which physical force was applied by police officers against members of the National Assembly, including damaging their clothing, shoving, and the use of chokeholds, among others. The Ombudsman deems the use of physical force against an MP in such circumstances unacceptable, especially considering that MPs cannot be arrested or deprived of their liberty (except during the commission of a crime or immediately thereafter). In this case, the physical force used against the deputies cannot even be justified by the necessity of minimal force for their apprehension. Thus, police officers are required to eliminate such instances and act strictly within the bounds of the law.
4. Furthermore, previous observations by the Ombudsman indicate that collaboration between police and participating MPs generally ensures the peaceful conduct of gatherings. Therefore, the Defender calls on the lead MP of the gathering to continue the collaborative practices established with the police in previous days.
5. During rapid response visits to police departments, some apprehended individuals raised concerns about the legality of using special means/hooks when they were detained. In this aspect, the Defender notes that when deciding to use special means, police officers are guided by the situation, the nature of the offense, and the individual's characteristics. In this situation, where the peaceful progress of the gathering was significantly threatened due to clear actions by participants aimed at attacking a state institution, the use of special means (handcuffs) by the police was evidently justified.
6. Simultaneously, the application of special means by police officers in each case must pursue a legitimate purpose, among other things, to ensure the further control of the actions of the individual and to prevent potential escape attempts by those committing offenses.
7. Reports from rapid response visits indicated that after actual detention—up to two hours later—individuals were not informed of the reasons for their detention, the legal basis, and in several cases, they were deprived of the possibility to exercise minimum rights, including the right to make a phone call and the right to be informed of the grounds for their detention, among others. The Defender notes that police officers must inform individuals about the reasons for their detention in every case and provide information about their minimum rights while ensuring unobstructed realization of those rights. Any other approach in this regard is unacceptable.
8. Media publications have highlighted incidents where police officers used special means (handcuffs) to force citizens to lay on the floor in one of the buildings they were guarding (reportedly at the entrance of Government House 3).
9. The Defender again urges individuals to exercise their right to freedom of assembly peacefully and to refrain from provocations that threaten the peaceful conduct of the gathering.
10. Regarding all reported incidents, the Human Rights Defender will address competent authorities demanding a thorough and comprehensive investigation and will follow up on the developments.