Former MP and Son Accused of Hiding Significant Assets; Case Back in Court

It has been reported that based on an article published by "Hetq.am" titled "Houses of Wealthy Armenians and Officials in Luxury Complexes of Dubai," materials were prepared by the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Department of the RA Police under the instruction of the RA Prosecutor General. This relates to a case where the declared officer and persons among his family allegedly concealed significant assets that are subject to declaration in their official statements, leading to charges under Part 2 of Article 314.3 of the RA Criminal Code against a member of the National Assembly from the sixth convocation.

It was established through sufficient evidence gathered during the pre-trial investigation that they did not mention several immovable and movable properties they owned in the respective declarations, thus concealing information regarding their ownership rights, transactions, and financial obligations.

With the established indictment conclusion, on April 28, 2021, the criminal case was sent from the Prosecutor General's Office to the Court of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan for substantive examination. The court accepted the defender's motion and on November 10, 2021, decided to terminate the criminal prosecution against Arsen and Grant Davtyans based on a change in circumstances, thereby closing the proceedings.

Upon reviewing the reasoning of the court’s decision, the RA Prosecutor General's Office found that the issuance of such a decision was unfounded. During the completion phase of the pre-trial investigation, the defense filed similar requests to terminate the prosecution against the accused, which were rejected with appropriate justifications.

Consequently, an appeal was filed against the aforementioned decision of the Court of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan in December 2021. The appeal argued that no change in circumstances existed, emphasizing that Grant Davtyan had re-nominated himself in the extraordinary parliamentary elections held in 2021 and submitted his declaration for 2020-2021. This indicates that there has been no substantial change in circumstances, and he or related persons were not ultimately deprived of the opportunity to cause similar harm to public relations.

Furthermore, according to the Prosecutor's Office, the interpretation underpinning the decision to terminate the criminal prosecution renders the law concerning criminal liability for concealing required declaration information almost meaningless. The issue is that under such interpretations, only those who had the obligation to submit a declaration during the criminal proceedings could be held criminally accountable for the act of concealing required data.

Considering the Prosecutor General's appeal and essentially agreeing with the positions presented by the Prosecutor's Office, the RA Court of Cassation upheld the appeal, overturned the decision of the First Instance Court, and sent the case back to the same court for substantive examination. This was reported by the RA Prosecutor General's Office.