Judge Syuzanna Ulikhanyan of the Court of First Instance of  Tavush Region submitted a report to the Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council on 5 February, which was forwarded to the Disciplinary Committee of the General Assembly of Judges on 18 February and which was the basis for initiating disciplinary proceedings against Arman Kurekhyan, Chairman of the Court of First Instance of the same region.

On 4 June, the sitting of the Supreme Judicial Council convened for the examination of the motion to disciplinary liability of the judge took place.

Judge Syuzanna Ulikhanyan of the Court of First Instance of  Tavush Region

Mkhitar Papoyan, Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee of the General Assembly of Judges, presented the conclusion of the commission to the members of the SJC. “Judge Suzanna Ulikhanyan of the court noted that the chairman of the court Arman Kurekhyan on 1 February, 2020, discussing with her issues related to the organization of work, allowed behavior inappropriate for the Chairman of the court. In particular, the Chairman of the Court made the following statement about Judge Suzanna Ulikhanyan: “You are occupying someone else’s place, soon everyone will understand that, you may perceive this as you want, but you didn’t grow from the position of a clerk, get out of that psychology, wearing a robe and making a couple of decisions doesn’t make you a judge yet,” Mkhitar Papoyan said citing the Kurekhyan’words.

Mkhitar Papoyan, Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee of the General Assembly of Judges

He also presented Arman Kurekhyan’s position on the issue. In response to all this, on 16 April, the chairman of the court presented the note, in which he noted: “In general, I don’t remember what discussion Ulikhanyan mentioned in the application addressed to the Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council. Moreover, on 1 February, 2020, I was on vacation, about which I informed the commission in the prescribed manner. However, if, under any circumstances, due to the expediency, the fact of the discussion of the organization of work on 1 February, 2020 and its content is considered justified, I am ready to publicly present my position. Until then, based on the provisions of Article 143 of the Judicial Code (The obligation to prove that there is a ground to impose disciplinary action against a judge), I do not see the need to provide an explanation, and I do not want to waste time counteracting baseless statements,” Mkhitar Papoyan read.

It was mentioned at the sitting that Judge Suzanna Ulikhanyan did not present any other evidence.

Mkhitar Papoyan said that the commission had recorded that Judge Arman Kurekhyan had allowed violation of the code of conduct of the judge provided in Article 70, Part 2, Clause 5 of the Constitutional Law, Judicial Code (to treat the participants of the proceedings, judges, the staff of the court, and all persons with whom he or she communicates ex officio with respect and politeness). At the same time, the commission found that the violation committed by the Chairman of the court was gross, as it was committed intentionally, which led to the discrediting of the judiciary. Based on all this, the Committee on Disciplinary Affairs of the General Assembly of Judges found that Arman Kurekhyan should be brought to disciplinary responsibility.

Ruben Vardazaryan Chairman of the SJC

The Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council Ruben Vardazaryan gave the floor to Judge Arman Kurekhyan, who mentioned that he had questions, first of all, mediating that he ask the questions to the Chairman of the commission sitting in his place. n response, Mkhitar Papoyan said that in any case he would answer the questions standing. Kurekhyan asked a number of questions to Mkhitar Papoyan, in response to which he informed that the answers to all the questions have already been presented in the report.

Arman Kurekhyan, Chairman of the Court of First Instance of Tavush region

“I am interested in the violation of that disciplinary behavior that you attributed to me. Did I commit it as a judge or as a chairman of the court?” Arman Kurekhyan asked Mkhitar Papoyan. In response to which he mentioned that the chairman of the court is a judge himself and the commission did not discuss that issue, taking into account that the issue was not important.

Kurekhyan’s next question was about his vacation, in particular, he asked if he could be on duty while on vacation. The chairman of the commission informed that if the judge is on vacation and publishes a judicial act, it will mean that he allows a disciplinary violation.

Hayk Hovhannisyan, member of SJC

The members of SJC also asked questions to Mhitar Papoyan. Hayk Hovhannisyan asked how the commission justified its intentions, and even if it turns out that Arman Kurekhyan made such statements, is it considered an insult, a behavior that reduces the public’s trust in the judiciary, and discredits the judiciary? The Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee of the General Assembly of Judges noted that the judge is obliged to show respectful and polite attitude towards his fellow judges, which is a direct provision of the law. And if such an expression is made, it is difficult to imagine that it is one of the ways to show disrespect or polite attitude. “It is incomprehensible to me how a judge can address a judge with disrespectful remarks and it will not affect the discredit of the judiciary.” Mkhitar Papoyan said that the phrase is considered completely, but there are also separate expressions that can be considered as disrespectful.

Grior Bekmezyan, member of SJC

“If Mr. Kurekhyan had said that he did not allow or did not make such statements, was that satisfactory for you so that you would not initiated a proceeding?” Grigor Bekmezyan, member of SJC asked. Papoyan mentioned that he could not say what would have happened if something had happened before.

“Does the chairman of the court, who is on vacation, have the right to come to court and give instructions for compulsory execution, instructions that the chairman can give if he was not on vacation,” was Grigor Bekmezyan’s next question.

 The answer of the chairman of the Disciplinary Committee of the General Assembly of Judges was negative. According to their question and answer, if the chairman of the court allowed the same expressions towards another employee of the court, for example, the cleaner, he would still receive the same assessment of the commission, and if it was another person outside the court staff “no”.

Bekmezyan also raised the issue of proof in the case, as no one other than the two judges was present at that conversation. “You are a judge investigating criminal cases and I, for some reason, am sure that if you have a case based solely on testimony, without any other evidence, I do not think that you will file an indictment in that case,՞ member of the SJC said.

Ani Mkhitaryan, member of SJC

Ani Mkhitaryan, a member of the Supreme Judicial Council, said that she had the impression that if Kurekhyan had presented an explanation to the commission and mentioned some circumstances, there could have been a change in the commission’s position. “Mr. Kurekhyan presented an answer to the Supreme Judicial Council with the attached documents. Maybe we will provide those documents to the commission, and then, as a result of forming the full position of the new commission, we will continue the question and answer session,” she said.։

Ruben Vardazaryan mentioned that he was not familiar with the content of the answer either, it consisted of 64 pages and should be provided to the commission and the sitting should be postponed.

Notably, Mkhitar Papoyan asked Arman Kurekhyan to invite Judge Suzanna Ulikhanyan as a witness, for which Kurekhyan mentioned that he would think in that direction.

The next sitting is scheduled for 11 June.

Alisa Chilingaryan

Video by: Vahe Vardanyan