Azat Arshakyan Triumphs Over Samvel Karapetyan

On May 11, 2026, the First Instance Court of Lori Marz rejected Samvel Karapetyan's lawsuit against Azat Arshakyan, which demanded a public retraction of defamatory statements, a public apology, and compensation of 6 million drams. The court noted that even the most severe criticism cannot be automatically considered defamation if it is presented as an opinion and relates to matters of public interest. This information was reported by the Vanadzor office of the Helsinki Civil Assembly.

The court emphasized the principle of freedom of expression, stating that evaluations concerning individuals operating in the public sphere should be considered within a broader tolerance framework. Azat Arshakyan's interests were represented in court by Ani Chatinyan and Samson Galstyan from the Helsinki Civil Assembly’s Vanadzor office.

The basis of the case stemmed from statements made by former Supreme Council member Azat Arshakyan during interviews conducted by journalist Narek Kirakosyan on July 12, 2025, and by First Channel’s program “Open Platform” on July 22, 2025, where he expressed critical views on Samvel Karapetyan's activities. The plaintiff argued that these statements contained false and defamatory information that tarnished Karapetyan's honor, dignity, and business reputation.

Specifically, the lawsuit claimed that Arshakyan publicly alleged that Karapetyan acted against the interests of the Republic of Armenia, favored another country’s interests, did not pay taxes, and “robbed and took away the circus,” along with other similar statements, which Karapetyan regarded as facts rather than opinions.

The lawsuit requested that the court order Arshakyan to publicly refute this information, issue a public apology, and pay 6 million drams in compensation for damages resulting from defamation.

Following examination of the case materials, the court concluded that the defendant’s statements were evaluative in nature, reflecting his personal opinion on matters of public interest. It was also highlighted that throughout the interviews, Azat Arshakyan repeatedly stated that he was expressing his opinion and that the sharp and sometimes incorrect expressions used were stylistic devices to enhance the impact of his speech.

As a result, the court concluded that there was no basis for defamation liability in this case, and the statements were protected under freedom of speech. Consequently, Samvel Karapetyan's lawsuit was completely rejected, and the demands for public retraction, apology, and compensation were left unfulfilled.