The sessions of the Constitutional Court in the case of disputing the results of the parliamentary elections of June 7 have been criticized by experts because of the controversial questions raised by the judges regarding external interference and electoral violations.

As is known, the results of the elections ended with the victory of the ruling political force were not accepted by the opposition. The latter speaks in the Constitutional Court about the misuse of administrative resources and unprecedented foreign interference. All this is happening in the conditions of deep geopolitical polarization, which has become a reason for mutual accusations about foreign influence.

Referring to the June 29 court session, a political analyst Hakob Badalyan expressed confusion regarding the questioning of one of the judges of the CC, who tried to draw parallels between the negative impact of wiretapping published by the authorities and the positive statements made by the Russian President to the opposition. According to the analyst, it is surprising when the judge of the highest instance equates pre-trial materials obtained with questionable legality and public political speech.

Badalyan emphasized that the words of the Russian leader actually served the interests of the anti-propaganda of the government, when the officials of the USA, EU and Turkey openly supported the current government. Summarizing the situation, the expert noted that although the Constitutional Court has never distinguished itself with absolute political independence, such a low professional benchmark is recorded for the first time.

—