A group of six UN human rights experts have raised concerns over Armenia’s use of counter-terrorism legislation against members of the opposition Holy Struggle movement, as well as the police crackdown on anti-government protests in 2024, warning that the authorities’ actions may violate the country’s international human rights obligations. The Armenian government rejected the allegations, saying it was within its rights to prosecute criminal offences.
Holy Struggle, formerly known as Tavush for the Motherland, emerged in spring 2024 in opposition to the Armenia–Azerbaijan border delimitation process before evolving into arguably the largest anti-government protests since the 2018 Velvet Revolution, demanding Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s resignation.
The concerns were outlined in a communication sent to the Armenian government on 11 May and later made public under the UN’s special procedures.
The letter was signed by the UN special rapporteurs on counter-terrorism, freedom of _expression_, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, extrajudicial executions, the independence of judges and lawyers, as well as the UN working group on arbitrary detention.
The move followed an appeal by the Holy Struggle movement alleging ‘the excessive use of force, the misuse of counter-terrorism and national security charges, and administrative restrictions’ had been used by authorities against its members and supporters.
The experts cited allegations that police used flashbang grenades against protesters outside parliament on 12 June 2024, injuring around 100, including journalists. They warned the actions ‘may violate the duty to respect the right to life’ and stressed that ‘the use of force must not be used to disperse peaceful and legitimate protests’.
The letter also addressed the June 2025 arrests of Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, the leader of the movement, along with 17 of his affiliates, who were charged with plotting terrorist acts and attempting to seize power.
While Armenian authorities alleged they had uncovered a coup plot, the UN experts noted that the evidence ‘reportedly concerns political opposition, protest actions, and civil disobedience’ as well as ‘the possession of ordinary household, festive or construction objects, without any reference to or indications of violence or threats of violence, intent to use weapons, or genuine terrorism’.
They also cited allegations that investigators selectively released intercepted conversations while withholding recordings in which Holy Struggle members rejected violence.
The experts warned that the ‘apparent abuse of counter-terrorism offences’ against Holy Struggle members for exercising their rights to peaceful assembly, association, _expression_, and participation in public life ‘could also violate international law’.
The letter also noted allegations that the measures against Holy Struggle formed part of ‘a broader campaign of repression and silencing of dissent’ targeting opposition groups, public figures, political parties, and the Armenian Apostolic Church.
They further asked the Armenian government to explain the legal basis for the arrests and restrictions imposed on the group, how the terrorism charges comply with international standards, among other issues.
Weeks after the letter was sent, Galstanyan, who denied plotting to overthrow the government, was released from pre-trial detention and placed under house arrest in early June.
In a roughly 30-page response dated 9 July, the Armenian government rejected the allegations, insisting the case concerns an alleged violent attempt to seize power rather than political opposition.
‘The criminal charges do not concern the political, religious or ideological views of the accused’, the government wrote, adding that the prosecution was based ‘solely on evidence allegedly demonstrating preparation of violent criminal offences against the constitutional order’.
Addressing the June 2024 protests, the government said demonstrators attempted to enter the parliament, which is a protected area and ignored police orders while ‘throwing various objects at police officers’.
It added that authorities are continuing to examine ‘the lawfulness, necessity and proportionality of any force used’.
Galstanyan’s lawyer Tatevik Soghoyan told RFE/RL that while the UN experts’ letter is not legally binding and Armenian courts are not obliged to follow it, it could carry significant weight if the case reaches international courts.
—