The Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council Gagik Jhangiryan a few days ago, expressed an opinion on the vetting of advocates saying, “I can say that the process of cleansing and purification should also refer to the advocates’ service, because, unfortunately, it is accepted in our country, for the most part, I do not want to offend anyone, but here the those advocates who communicate with law enforcement agencies and courts in various cases very easily get recognition. In other words, this vetting must include the entire judicial system and all the bodies that serve and support it.”
“When those conversations started, it was about vetting of judges. It is not clear why judges were not vetted, the state system was not vetted and, in fact, they focused on the advocates,” advocate Norayr Norikyan told Iravaban.net.
The advocate is in favor of the need to conduct vetting of all the competent institutions in the society. “The mere fact that advocacy is being targeted today without vetting the judiciary or without raising public confidence in the judiciary, gives me the impression that by not cleaning up their system, they are focusing on other areas.”
According to him, there is a problem of institutional perception: how they perceive vetting, what they mean by it, how they imagine the way of its implementation. “Let them undergo vetting and then move on to other areas. Who should vet me? Let those who will carry out vetting be vetted themselves, then think about the possibility of vetting other institutions.”
According to Norikyan, the entire judicial system needs to be transformed and steps should be taken to change the quality of people’s lives, both in the judiciary and in the field of advocacy.
Referring to the possible shadow connections between lawyers and judges, he noted. “If these connections are aimed at distorting justice, I definitely condemn it and find it, regardless of who it will be, if any problem is solved in an illegal way, I consider it reprehensible.”
Norayr Norikyan attaches importance to the independence of the advocacy institute. It does not matter if it is done through one or several chambers of advocates.
