Human Rights Defender Comments on the Arrest of Kochubaev

On October 16, the Office of the Human Rights Defender (HRD) received information through monitoring mass media and social media that lawyer Alexander Kochubaev had been arrested due to public speech on his Facebook account. It later became clear that a public criminal prosecution had been initiated against the lawyer under Article 490, Part 2 of the Armenian Criminal Code, and he was subjected to pre-trial detention for a period of two months.

Human Rights Defender Anahit Manasyan has repeatedly raised concerns about the widespread use of unlawful public speech by representatives of various professional communities, including the legal community. She emphasized that it is essential for professional communities not just to establish rules of ethics and conduct but to enforce them consistently. In this regard, there are serious issues in the Republic of Armenia, as disciplinary procedures prescribed for community members are hardly applied to statements that contradict ethical and behavioral norms along with modern human rights standards.

At the same time, the Defender considers it unacceptable that any such speech could lead to criminal liability. According to international standards, criminal liability should only be imposed in cases of the most severe forms of unlawful speech and based on substantial justifications. Furthermore, applying coercive measures or penalties that restrict an individual's freedom is particularly concerning.

Therefore, the Defender views criminal prosecutions based on speech as unacceptable, particularly when the public is not provided with adequate information about why a specific statement is deemed to have crossed a serious threshold of public danger and why a person should be deprived of their freedom. This is especially problematic when a person is deprived of liberty through the use of force.

Without addressing the legality of pre-trial detention in specific cases, Human Rights Defender Anahit Manasyan has repeatedly highlighted the systemic issues related to the practice of applying detention as a coercive measure.

In this context, the Defender reaffirms the position that strict adherence to the criteria regarding the legality of applying detention is necessary when selecting it as a coercive measure, considering that detention can only be applied when alternative measures are insufficient to ensure the accused's appearance, prevent their commission of further crimes, or secure compliance with their obligations.

The misuse of the detention institution can seriously undermine public trust in the entire criminal justice chain and lead to other systemic problems. Additionally, it has been noted that discussions on this issue have been initiated on the Defender's own initiative, and representatives of the HRD are visiting the correctional facility to meet and speak with the lawyer.

The issue is under the direct attention of the Human Rights Defender.