An advocate is subject to disciplinary responsibility in Armenia for violation of the requirements of the “Law of the Republic of Armenia on Advocacy” and the “Code of Advocate’s Ethics”.
Pursuant to the “Law of the Republic of Armenia on Advocacy” after consideration of the issue the Board of the Chamber of Advocates of the RA files one of the following disciplinary actions upon the advocate except for the cases foreseen in the law:
2) Severe reprimand,
3) Partial training courses
5) Termination of advocate’s license.
2. Penalties imposed upon the advocate must be equal to the infringement. When assigning disciplinary penalties, person who committed the action, severity and recurrence of the action, as well as its consequences and incurred damage and other circumstances shall be taken into account.
3. The Board of Chamber of Advocates decides the hours of participation in additional training courses. Participation in such courses may be considered as additional punishment under part one paragraphs 1, 2 and 4 of the respective article.
4. The amount of fine is defined by the Board of Chamber of Advocates, which cannot exceed 200 minimal salaries. The fine shall be paid to the Chamber of Advocates.
5. The Board of Chamber of Advocates may assign penalty of termination of advocate’s license only in case of intentional and evidently gross violation of the disciplinary requirements.
The following are the causes for imposing disciplinary proceeding upon the advocates:
1) Applications (complaints) of the state and local state government bodies, non-state entities, as well as other individuals, and publications in mass media.
2) The court sanction on calling to responsibility the advocate sent to the Chamber of Advocates.
3) The receipt on failure to pay membership dues in time provided by the accountant of the Chamber of Advocates.
4) The notice provided by the director of the advocates school on failure to participate a training course in due time.
5) Solicitation of the Head of Public Defender’s Office on imposing a disciplinary proceeding upon the public defender.
Below is the information on the advocates who were imposed disciplinary responsibility by the Board of Chamber of Advocates of the RA in 2012:
Liana Grigoryan: The Board decided to impose severe reprimand on 6 August 2012.
Edik Maysuryan: holds an advocate’s license since 1977. The Board decided to impose severe reprimand on 27 October 2012.
Kristine Stepanyan: holds an advocate’s license since 1998. The Board decided to impose a reprimand on 15 June 2012.
Gevorg Shirinyan: holds an advocate’s license since 1996-1999 and 2005. The Board decided to impose reprimand on 16 November 2012.
Ashot Voskanyan: holds an advocate’s license since 2005. The Board decided to impose 4 (four) reprimands on 6 August 2012.
Ayvaz Tonoyan: The Board decided to advocate’s license on 31 May 2012.
Lida Hakobyan: The Board decided to advocate’s license on 31 May 2012.
In 2012 the Board of Chamber of Advocates annulled two disciplinary proceedings against Arthur Grigoryan. Board of Chamber of Advocates annulled the disciplinary proceedings against Vahe Grigoryan, Ashot Voskanyan, Tamara Poghosyan, Hrant Gevorgyan, Stepan Voskanyan and Emin Khachatryan.
Advocates Arthur Grigoryan and Romen Aharonyan appealed the decision of the Board of Chamber of Advocates in court.
Penalty assigned to an advocate may be appealed in court, within one month from the date of assignment of the penalty. The decision of the Board of Chamber of Advocates comes into effect after expiration of one month for appeal of the decision.
According to information provided to Iravaban.net by the Board of Chamber of Advocates, disciplinary punishment was imposed upon 43 advocates in April 2012, for failure to pay the membership dues. The disciplinary proceedings against 16 advocates were annulled. Reprimands were imposed against two advocates, and 5 advocates were imposed sever reprimand. The Board had imposed disciplinary proceedings on the same grounds upon 14 advocates in October as well. The disciplinary proceedings against 8 advocates were annulled, 2 advocates were imposed reprimand and 4 were imposed sever reprimand.