Businessman's Wife Asks Court to Allow Payment for House Purchased from Hovik Abrahamyan's Son

The Anti-Corruption Court continued on May 16 the examination of the lawsuit filed by the Prosecutor General's Office against former Prime Minister Hovik Abrahamyan and related individuals regarding the confiscation of property of illegal origin. The presiding judge was Karapet Badalyan.

At the beginning of the session, representatives of the head of Hovik Abrahamyan's security detail, Bagratuni Barseghyan, and one of the defendants, Anna Hayrapetyan, presented a motion to postpone the hearing. They stated that due to the judge's administrative issues, they had been unable to obtain the CDs containing the case materials despite having paid the state fee for their provision. Minasyan noted that they had paid a fee of 14,000 drams on April 28; however, five days before this session, on May 11, the court informed them that the payment had not been complete, and today the representatives had paid an additional 1,500 drams. The lawyers indicated that the court could at least have provided the materials based on the first fee paid.

Smbat Minasyan expressed dissatisfaction that during the previous court session, the court had also not regarded their request to familiarize themselves with the case materials, obtain copies, and postpone the session, resulting in their inability to present positions on motions and other issues.

Judge Karapet Badalyan noted that the receipt for the payment of the state fee for acquiring the CDs was dated today. He announced that the representatives of the defendants had not acted diligently, as they had paid the receipt only 30 minutes before the session, while blaming the judge's administrative staff. The court rejected the motion.

The next motion was presented by Karen Tonoyan, the lawyer of Lilith Petrosyan, the wife of businessman Narek Nalbandyan involved in the case. It is noteworthy that Lilith Petrosyan was the buyer of the 'Monument' house belonging to Hovik Abrahamyan's son. According to civilnet.am, the price of the transaction was 2.5 billion drams, of which 48 million drams was the down payment, and the main part was to be paid by Narek Nalbandyan's wife to Argam Abrahamyan by August 1, 2022. However, the businessman's wife did not pay the 2 billion 452 million drams within the stipulated time. Consequently, on February 8, 2023, an amendment was made to the purchase agreement. According to the new agreement, Narek Nalbandyan's wife will pay Argam Abrahamyan 2 billion 452 million drams by December 31, 2024.

Lilith Petrosyan is considered a good-faith buyer in this case. Tonoyan stated that the court had prohibited Lilith Petrosyan from making payments for the house, and they are now requesting to lift that ban.

In response to our question about why Lilith Petrosyan is highly motivated to make the payment when there is this court case, and her failure to make payments would not be considered a breach of contractual terms, lawyer Karen Tonoyan stated, 'There is a contract that stipulates a timeline for payment, and Lilith Petrosyan wants to fulfill her contractual obligations. She is trying to build her life in accordance with her obligations.'

The lawyer informed reporters that Argam Abrahamyan's accounts are frozen, and any payment made by Lilith Petrosyan cannot hinder the enforcement of the court act.

Tigran Yenokyan, the deputy head of the department for confiscation of property of illegal origin, expressed concern that if payments were allowed, an agreement might be reached between Lilith Petrosyan and Argam Abrahamyan to make payments to a different account and transfer balances to accounts registered abroad, making it difficult or impossible to seize that money. Lawyer Karen Tonoyan stated that any account under Argam Abrahamyan's name is prohibited by the court, and such a risk does not exist. He also excluded the possibility of transferring funds to a third party, as such a provision is not stipulated in the contract.

The court inquired about the opinions of the representatives of other defendants concerning the motion, but they stated that they had not received the motion. The court announced that the motion had been sent to everyone and indicated that it would make a decision regarding the motion in a separate act.

Representative Smbat Minasyan of Bagratuni Barseghyan expressed that if the court's inquiry regarding their stance is not merely formal, the court should allow time for them to familiarize themselves with the motion to provide their position.

Next, Smbat Minasyan and Lusntag Bejanyan filed a disqualification motion against the judge. They questioned the judge's impartiality. 'The respondent party is in a less favorable situation, and equal conditions are not created for the plaintiff and the defendants in defending their interests and rights, which could also raise suspicion in the eyes of an impartial observer,' said Lusntag Bejanyan.

The court will announce its decision on the disqualification motion on May 19 at 10:30 AM.

Further details are available in the original source.