AN INTERVIEW WITH PROSECUTOR GENERAL OF ARMENIA AGHVAN HOVSEPYAN
By Mariam Levina
arminfo
2008-03-31 13:00:00
No matter how many people were detained and arrested after mass
disorders, it is much more important how grounded are the accusations
against them
An interview with Prosecutor General of Armenia Aghvan Hovsepyan
A number of international organizations levered criticism at the
actions by the authorities on the day of mass unrest in Yerevan and
on the following days. Do you think the criticism is grounded?
Criticism based on facts must be welcomed. Moreover, such criticism is
necessary and vital, in particular, for raising the efficiency of the
law-enforcement, liquidating omissions and fighting negative phenomena.
However, I’d like to stress that the criticism based on objective
facts and on voluntary opinions and some political interests is in
question. The country’s law-enforcement displayed legal response to
the events in the capital city that were organized with violation of
relevant order and resulted in mass unrest. Some politicization of the
issue may be admissible to political figures, but it is very dangerous
in the law-enforcement sphere to conceal crimes under political
veil. Eight were killed, 265 were injured, 68 cars were burnt, about
10 private facilities were damaged and robbed during March 1-2 unrest
in Yerevan. Not only shops, but also a pharmacy was robbed. Not only
police cars but also an Ambulance was burnt. Policemen keeping public
order faced armed resistance. Not only colds but also weapons and
explosives were applied against the police. The investigation exposed
facts that allow stating that everything was organized. Part of the
active protesters were supplied with everything necessary to disturb
public order and conflict with police. What happened those days was
a crime, and I am more than convinced that law-enforcement agencies
in Europe would not bear such unrest and would resort to tougher and
stricter measures to maintain the constitutional order and security
of the people and the country.
PACE Monitoring Committee met in Paris on 18 March. It is deeply
concerned about the arrest of more than 100 people in Armenia and about
the circumstances of those arrests. Would you, please, comment on this?
As of 27 March 102 people were arrested within the frames of the
criminal case being investigated by special investigation service. They
were accused of specific actions. All arrested, accused and suspected
people were explained their rights, foreseen by Armenian Criminal
Code and they were given an opportunity to fulfill their rights. The
great majority of the accused people have lawyers, some of them
– several. All the accused people were charged for the following
committed crimes: organization and holding of mass measures breaking
of the order set by the law; challenges not to comply with the legal
demands of the power representatives; violation regarding the power
representatives; the actions directed to forceful capture of power;
breaking of the Constitutional order; illegal weapon possession;
firing and robbery of state and private property. According to the
acting Legislation of Armenia, participation in the mass measures
that were organized with breaking of the order set by the law is not
considered to be a crime and no participant is detained or arrested
if there is no sign of a crime in his actions. Of course there are
politicians among the arrested people, but they did actions which
should be legally punished. For this reason they as well as people
having other professions were accused. Among the participants in
mass disorders there are people with higher as well as elementary
education, former policemen, recidivists. Their actions were legally
assessed. As Prosecutor General I am concerned about not groundlessly
accusing any person, and about all the accusations to have a specific
evidence base, as all the criminal cases will be directed to the court,
and open court processes will take place, and the community will have
an opportunity to learn all the evidences. In such conditions not the
number of the detained and arrested people is important but relevancy
of accusations. Legislation of no country foresees limitation of
the number of the people which should be criminally answerable, or
for instance, that not more than 100 people maybe accused within the
frames of one criminal case, especially that we mean mass disorders,
during which more than 200 people were wounded. The prior task of
the law-enforcement agencies is to disclose not only participants in
mass disorders but also their organizers; to clarify legality of the
actions of the law-enforcement agencies. And we shall be consistent
in making all the people that committed crime answerable. Another
point is the problem of individualization of punishment. Certainly,
not all the accused people will be sentenced to imprisonment. Anyway,
the accusing party is not going to demand from the court to punish
all the accused people with imprisonment. At the investigation stage
other punishment measures were chosen regarding many accused people. On
the basis of written order of the controlling prosecutors only seven
accused people were given the measure of restrained which is not
connected with imprisonment. Everything mentioned by international
structures, i.e. about inadmissibility of political persecution and
making people answerable for their views, are not relevant in Armenia
today, since we are guided just with such an approach in our work,
especially in the context of the last court reforms in the country,
over which strict legal mechanisms to rule out any voluntarism and
groundless persecution were formed. Sometimes representatives of
international structures that visit Armenia make conclusions about our
reality having no imagination where Armenia is located on the world
map. I have got an impression that these people are more concerned
about the destiny of our country than we are. I love my native land,
my people, our statehood. And within the frames the authorities of
the prosecutor’s office I will do everything not to put a little
shadow at the democratic principles formed in our country.
How much substantiated is the opinion of PACE Committee, saying
that the arrest of numerous opposition representatives and three
parliamentarians is inevitably perceived as a strike to the opposition
by the authorities and does not relieve the tension in Armenia? How
do you treat the Committee’s demand to set free all the arrested
activists, having committed no grave crimes?
I think that it would be also unacceptable for this respectful
international structure if RA law enforcement agencies were not guided
by the law requirements, but brought charges against the persons,
having committed criminal crimes, or set free them on demand of local
or international organizations. I am sure that they are also concerned
about all the citizens be equal to the law and all our actions be
performed in a legal field, yielding to no political affect by any
instances, including the international ones. Of course, the remarks
and proposals of the international structures are rather useful from
the viewpoint of increasing our work efficiency, as well as reveling
and eliminating omissions. However, when its becomes clear that there
are neither women nor minors among the arrested persons within the
frames of this criminal case, and it is immediately followed by a
demand to set free all the minors, this is obscure enough and it is
just impossible to fulfill this demand.
What do you think about the statement by US Assistant Secretary General
for Europe and Eurasia, OSCE MG American Cochairman Matthew Bryza,
who expressed disagreement with the opinion of RA authorities saying
that the people at the Liberty Square were in a state of psychosis?
Yes, I repeatedly stated and now insist that the people were subjected
to psychological diversion by a specially developed method. Moreover,
psychotropic substances, drugs and alcohol were also used. The
prosecutor general has enough data for such statements. The political
statements and assessments based on the analysis of evidences received
during investigation are in the different legal fields.
Earlier you charged paying special attention to the actions taken by
law-enforcement agencies during the unrest. Are there any preliminary
data?
Does it satisfy the demand of the Committee to conduct independent
inquiry of the circumstances that led to 1 March incidents?
It is known that the Special Investigation Service investigates
the criminal case on the fact of organization and provocation of
unrest in Yerevan to seize state power and violate the constitutional
order. The Special Investigation Service is an independent agency. To
control over the legality of the investigation and the following
presiding over the case, Prosecutor General instructed forming a
Prosecutor’s Group. We attach a great importance to versatile and
objective study of all the circumstances of the criminal case. I
gave a written instruction to the head of the Group to fully and
objectively reveal all the circumstances when police officers applied
force, special methods and weapons, including the grounds for every
case of their application and non-application. A list of questions
has been given to the Investigation Group. The investigation of the
question will give full explanations. In this context, witnesses
and convicts are interrogated as well. It is of extreme importance
for us to reveal the objective reality. That is why every episode is
investigated. If the investigation shows that a policeman or an officer
of internal troops acted voluntarily, it will get an adequate legal
treatment. Forensic-medical examinations are made to reveal the reasons
and circumstances of the bodily harms of all the killed and injured. We
also proposed OSCE Yerevan Office, UN Resident Representative in
Armenia to send for forensic-medical examination the video records
by the specialists of other states. However, no official response
has been received so far. Creation of a parliamentary commission
for complex study of the cases and the incidents preceding them is
currently studied. Prosecutor’s Office attaches a great importance to
providing public with verified information. For this purpose, a Public
Awareness Group has been formed, which gives comprehensive answers
to all the questions of public interest. As soon as the results of
the expertise are known they will be made public.
Do you think that Thomas Hammarberg’s statement on violations and
unworthy behavior towards the detainees was grounded?
All the detained and arrested persons underwent medical examination
at both the places of detention and penitentiaries. All the bodily
injuries were recorded. Not a single statement remains without
response and each complaint is studied thoroughly. 12 offenders have
bodily injuries, and an expert examination is to find out the reasons
of the injuries. Among the detainees there are people who took an
active part in the mass disorders. They say themselves that they
got the bodily injuries during the disorders. There are people who
offered resistance to the police while being detained. In any case,
all statements and complaints are checked, expert examinations will
be carried out and if any cases of violence are revealed, I assure
you that the culprits will be brought to responsibility. However, I
have to state with bitter that sometimes international structures come
out with conclusions based exclusively on some offenders’ statements.
One can observe a strange phenomenon: everybody speaks only of the
bodily injuries of civilians and violence against the detainees. First
and foremost, it makes no difference for the investigation whether
the killed or injured were civilians or policemen, they are all
equal and the investigation should impartially find out the cause
and effect relationship.
To find out the real number of people who received bodily injuries,
the investigative body directed inquiries to all the medical
establishments of the country and as of March 27, according to
the data received by the investigation, 55 citizens out of several
thousands of demonstrators got bodily injures, and the number of
injured policemen exceeds 200. They are said to be peaceful unarmed
demonstrators, however, it is obvious that a squadron commander died
of a grenade explosion, covering the grenade with his body and saving
other people. Who and why armed the demonstrators with fire weapons,
explosives, grenades, things specially meant for inflicting bodily
injuries? Where were those things and metal rods made? Who and why
encouraged the demonstrators to disobey the legal demands of the police
and to resort to armed resistance? Under what circumstances did the
police start the specific actions? Was a demonstrator sleeping and the
policeman struck him/her with a baton? Or were the relevant measures
stipulated by the Armenian law "On the police" applied to temperate
the resistance of the demonstrators armed with explosives and cold
steel arms and to restore the public order and protection of the
constitutional system? We have heard not a single word of public
condemnation of the shots vividly showing that the demonstrators
were throwing grenades at the police and were excited at the fact
that the demonstrators beat the police and took away their batons.
So did the police have to remain silent observers and display criminal
inactivity? The armed demonstrators proved that the organizers of the
mass activities violated the order established by the law and held
mass disorders. The investigation should give exhaustive answers
to these questions. This is a large and difficult criminal case,
and the investigation has no right to make a mistake.
How will you comment on the statements about the necessity of starting
a dialogue?
Dialogue is a political process and I would like to touch on the
conditions of the dialogue, which I think are only of a legal nature. I
regret that the first Armenian president Levon Ter-Petrosyan has not
understood that our country passed a significant way towards the legal
state and that only the Central Electoral Commission or Constitutional
Court may cast doubt on the results of the election. As for the
decision about setting free of the detained and arrested persons,
only the crime investigator, prosecutor and court can make such a
decision. I assess such demands as a pressure upon the law-enforcement
system. And I would like to recall that no political force or top
official or politician have a right to make decisions instead of the
above mentioned law-enforcement agencies and court and to interfere
into their activity.
Such statements are evidence of the fact that Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s
imaginations about ruling the state have not changed since his the
period of his presidency. For this reason I would like to recall
about the lawlessness over those years when the ministers did not
submit to Levon Ter-Petrosyan as a president, and every minister
was the owner of his sphere. Moreover, the prosecutor already had
the signed permissions for arrest and only a name had to be written
in. Even the Extraordinary Commission of the Stalin time did not do
that! Thank God, we got rid of that. I regret that masses are inclined
to believe lie. But one should remember that the lie has a short life.