When we read the government’s answer, we see that they are clearly lying.

“Although the reports of UN experts do not contain an element of legal coercion and even a final conclusion, this is an essential position. 168․amreferring to the UN-RA government correspondence regarding the “Holy Struggle” case, he mentioned human rights defender, in this case Hovhannes Khudoyan, the defender of Bagrat Archbishop Galstanyan’s interests and drew attention especially to the episode of June 12, – In other words, the observations made by us seemed credible to them, and especially the part that the use of force by the police on June 12 was illegal, and the use of terrorism contradicts the logic of that article.”

Earlier became known that the UN published the official correspondence between the Armenian government and the six UN mandate holders in the “Holy Struggle” case, experts question the use of terrorism articles.

“As it is our responsibility under the mandates given to us by the Human Rights Council to clarify all cases brought to our attention, we would be grateful for your observations on the following issues:

1. Additional information

Please provide any additional information and/or comment(s) you have regarding the above claims.

2. Use of force by the police

Please clarify whether the cases of alleged abuse of force by the police against peaceful protestors and journalists described in this letter have been investigated in accordance with international standards, and indicate the results of these investigations. Please also explain what measures have been taken to prevent their recurrence, including adequate training of security forces.

3. Legal basis for arrests

Please provide information on the factual and legal grounds for arresting, detaining and charging the above-mentioned persons and explain how these actions comply with Armenia’s obligations under international humanitarian law.

4. Definition of terrorism

Please indicate how the charges of terrorist crimes against members of the Holy Struggle movement meet the definition of terrorism according to international standards, including the requirement of legality (clarity of law).

5. Fair trial and presumption of innocence

Please indicate how criminal proceedings, including bail restrictions, meet the requirements of due process, a fair trial, and the presumption of innocence.

6. Administrative Restrictions

Please explain how the administrative restrictions placed on members of the “Holy Struggle” are compatible with international law, including the rights to personal liberty, freedom of movement, privacy, as well as freedom of association, peaceful assembly and expression.

7. Prevention of criminalization of rights

Please outline the measures that will be taken to prevent repression and criminalization of the exercise of the legitimate rights to freedom of peaceful assembly, association and expression, as well as participation in the administration of public affairs.

8. Examination, Indemnification and Liability

Please indicate what administrative, legislative and judicial measures have been taken or will be taken to investigate the above allegations of violations, provide effective legal remedies and compensation for victims, and hold potential perpetrators accountable under international law,” the publicized letter said.

Official Yerevan presented the answer in 31 pages, assuring that the events of June 12 were not exclusively a peaceful demonstration.

About the latter, Hovhannes Khudoyan gave a brief response: “they are bullshit, and about that terrorism article, they translated the same accusation into English and sent it.”

The human rights defender responded to the observation of whether this reveals the truth about Pashinyan’s “democracy” in international courts, and shows that it is “not what is being presented”.

“It is very obvious that it is not, but it is a question of how different actors respond to the situation based on their personal or state interests of that day. Otherwise, if we look at it from the point of view of pure jurisprudence, it will be clear to a first-year student that something is wrong here. Just different international organizations are guided not only by jurisprudence, but also by certain political, state, interests of themselves or others. That is why the addresses are not always sharp, sharp and operative. However, even in that case, international representatives cannot, like our law enforcement officers, say that yogurt is black.”

Summing up, Hovhannes Khudoyan informed that they will continue the work.

“When we read the government’s response, we see that they are clearly lying about various things. We will again present the reality in a little more detail. for example, when they say that expert examinations were appointed on the victims, but after 1 year they told the beaten victim: let’s go to the forensic expert to see if there is a bruise or not. It is obvious that they blacken the formal paper in order to have such answers in the future,” explained the lawyer.

—