Bring Allen’s verdict, and I will admit again that we have committed a crime. Of these

Satik Seyranyan’s guest in “Pressing” program is human rights defender, lawyer Ruben Melikyan is

The main points of the interview are below.

• I have seen our justice system from inside and outside for many years. Much more important is not the state, but the direction of development. From the 90s to 2019-2020 the system has been better every year than the year before. Hard work has been done, but starting from 2019-2020, we are constantly regressing. The current government is an anti-democratic government. If we remember what words Nikol Pashinyan used to describe judge Mnatsakan Martirosyan, and what cases they are putting him under now, the last example was the case of Davit Minasyan, I will prove what was said. Those values, whose default guardians were the international structures, do not work today because they are politicized. Nikol Pashinyan is given the green light to be anti-Russian, and everything is forgiven him along the way. In terms of global geopolitics, Nikol Pashinyan is allowed to do everything, including something unheard of, for example, to change the law 2 months before the elections, that is, to change the rules of the game during the game. As if you sit down to play chess, and a minute before turning on the clock, someone says: I’m sorry, but we have changed the rules of the game, we have to play a different way… 

• Let me give an example of the 2 cases of “Imnemnim” podcast hosts: 2024. and now. Let’s compare two similar cases. 2024 they were not allowed to enter people’s houses, wearing masks, armed, to conduct searches, they did not enter the media, taking everything, but in 2025 they did it. Until now, computers and many other devices, including those confiscated from the boys’ homes, have not been released.

• The case with the incident that happened during the liturgy in “St. Anna” has a personal and psychological component, because the injustice towards the Minasyan brothers is extreme. I got involved in this case on the 3rd day, because before that I was busy defending another 18-year-old boy, Mikael, who spat on Nikol Pashinyan’s car, not the Prime Minister, but Nikol Pashinyan himself, because he was not performing the Prime Minister’s function that day, but was engaged in concrete propaganda. Spitting is not a good thing, you don’t need to take an example from Alen Simonyan, but we did not accept the crime, because maybe the expression is ugly, but it is not a crime, it cannot qualify as hooliganism. The charge is not certain. Mikael’s words are a disagreement with Nikol Pashinyan’s policy and his behavior due to which we lost a part of our homeland. Bring Allen’s verdict, and not only Michael, but I will admit that we committed a crime. In other words, spitting in a person’s face is not hooliganism, spitting on a car is hooliganism, and let me repeat, at that moment Nikol Pashinyan was not a state symbol, he was not performing the functions of prime minister, but propaganda.

To remind: in another case, this 18-year-old boy spat on Nikol Pashinyan’s car, and when asked why he did it, he said: the Turk sold our fresh lands. That sentence is the basis of the boy’s accusation, the act was described as hooliganism.

• Davit Minasyan’s classmates show a very good example of how to consistently fight for the protection of the rights of friends who are in trouble.

• We got involved in this case with certain stereotypes that it is alleged that Davit Minasyan committed the pre-aggressive action during the liturgy in “St. Anna” church, which is absolutely not the case, and it is also an absolute lie that David’s actions were directed against Nikol Pashinyan. It’s not like that either. But the Nicolaitan Goebbelsian propaganda presented the situation like that for several days. There was nothing to suggest that Nikol Pashinyan would go to that church that day. No one could have known that he would decide to go to that church at that moment. I suppose he decided to enter at that very moment, during the liturgy. David and Michael, no one knew that they would have a “guest”. Therefore, the case investigation’s hypothesis that this was organized is not only contrary to law, but also to common sense. This is the crux of this case.

• That incident in the church happened after Pashinyan left. The preliminary investigation, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the court recorded that Nikol Pashinyan carried out political activities in the church. He should be interrogated, we should understand whether he was there in the capacity of a believer, in the church, or politically? If I say yes, I came as part of political activities, the question arises: why did you interfere with the ritual, why did you disturb people? The children were not just in the church, but were participating in the liturgy, as they always did:

• Pashinyan and the bodyguard are already disturbing the children while passing through the dense crowd, they separate the two brothers. Mikael hugs David, holds his back. This also has a medical component. David’s illness is such that he must be constantly under the supervision of a relative in order to provide help if necessary. And when Mikael saw that his brother was not by his side, because Pashinyan and the bodyguard broke through and cut them off, he was worried… it is also in the footage that he was looking for his brother. Nikol Pashinyan passed by him, but Mikael didn’t even react, because he wasn’t interested in him, but was looking for his brother with his eyes… They made it so that the parents had to make the child’s entire medical history public so that they could protect themselves.

• Akhrannik, who committed a crime by hitting Davit, and one day he will answer for that, comes back, instructs him to step aside. What has the right to instruct? Yes, David does not follow the instruction, he says: I will stand here. David had no obligation to step aside. They are rushing him and coming and going. David’s act of putting forth his hand was due to his being hindered by the achrannik. Akhrannik’s blow was not a disruptive blow, because Nikol Pashinyan had already been taken out of the church. It was a punitive blow and it was the instigator who should have been held accountable, not David. Moreover, this crime has no statute of limitations. Their leader is not forever, he will not be one day, and even 1000 years will pass, the time of responsibility will come.

• Judge Mnatsakan Martirosyan decided that even the parents do not have the right to see the sick child in the hospital, the mother is forbidden to visit the son. I don’t remember such a strict restriction, even in political matters, being applied, even in the case of adults. I don’t know whose initiative it is, but the signatory is Mnatsakan Martirosyan, therefore, the responsibility is his:

• The boys didn’t do anything, they came to touch them, then imprisoned Davit, sent him to a detention center and hospital. The boys had just gone to mass.

• The Minister of Health, Anahit Avanesyan, “being a mother who brought up good children”, talks about Davit’s upbringing… Or that crocodile breeder who was evil. As they say, for a person who allegedly received a “bad education”, it is already the third week, his classmates are standing every day, would they?

• My attitude towards HRD Anahit Manasyan’s work is well known. I have stated that he is the worst MP of Armenia. Since today is April 7th and I have a sale for her today, I won’t say much. But there was a sentence in his incomprehensible statement yesterday, he said: I wrote a letter and requested that the possibility of applying an alternative restraining order against Davit Minasyan be discussed. 

• Human rights defender is not a bureaucrat, but Anahit Manasyan behaves like a bureaucrat. I mentioned the HRD tool, he went, he said, I am resigning. The strength of HRD is its reputation, if there is no reputation, the work is meaningless. In any case, I have the impression that Anahit Manasyan understands the problem. So much:

• Do we want a humane or an inhumane society? 2022 Armen Grigoryan, who died in the courtroom on July 15, was a righteous man, and staying under righteous blood is a hard thing. I am sure that Mnatsakan Martirosyan would have extended the detention, but he did not manage to do so. Therefore, I cannot take the blame and say that he was guilty of Armen’s death. Armen Grigoryan was detained by another judge named Arusyak Aleksanyan, who later ended up behind bars (of course, not in Armen’s case, but in another case, and was later released). One day, whenever, when the country is freed from the Nicola disaster, I will file a special appeal. Armen should be acquitted:

• The target of the Nicolas politics of these years is our self-esteem, that we should always live with our necks crooked like a lamb. But the response to this incident in “Saint Anna” church was different, people wrote, asked, approached on the street… The information field and all of us should do to keep this case in the center of attention, not to allow Goebbelsian propaganda to be carried out.

Details in the video.

—