On 12 April, the Anti-Corruption Court continued the examination in the case of the claim for confiscation of property of allegedly illicit origin from the wanted ex-Minister of Nature Protection Aram Harutyunyan and others

The Prosecutor General’s Office demands to confiscate from Aram Harutyunyan and 2 persons related to him in favor of the Republic of Armenia, in particular:   

• 2 apartments in Yerevan, the residential house, the hotel-restaurant complex, the garage, the 2 plots of land in Aragatsotn and Gegharkunik marzes (in full, in some cases, partially), and in case of impossibility, their average market value, which in total is more than 2 billion 500 million AMD, 
• the shares of 3 joint-stock companies, of which the market value of the real estate of only one company is more than AMD 8,166,400,000,
• USD 1,661,628 deposit invested in the bank, 
• 3 billion 962 million 560 thousand AMD as the balance of illicit funds, as well as 272.975.855 million AMD, which is not justified by the legal income of the person, has an illicit origin and cannot be confiscated, taking as a basis Part 4 of Article 20 of the Law on Confiscation of Property of Illicit Origin

The journalist of Iravaban.net applied to the court for permission to photograph and videotape the session. Aram Orbelyan stated that he is not against taking photos of the session, but he objects to video recording. The presiding judge Karapet Badalyan allowed the session to be photographed and videotaped, except for Aram Orbelyan. The latter stated that he objects to the actions of presiding judge. Karapet Badalyan said that there are no provisions for raising objections against the actions of the presiding judge in the  Civil Procedure Code.

– Will you allow me to make a statement?

– If it is about the objection against the actions of the court, no.

At the beginning, the claimant side, Head of the Department for Confiscation of Property of Illicit Origin of the General Prosecutor’s Office, Siro Amirkhanyan, presented his position regarding the facts to be proved. According to him, it should be a fact subject to proof that the competent authority made the decision to start the study and set a new term for the study.

“The competent authority must also prove that the properties that are the subject of the claim belong to Aram Harutyunyan by right of ownership and the competent authority must prove that according to the data known to it, the acquisition of the property is not justified by the data on the sources of legal income. At the same time, it should be proved that A.Harutyunyan transferred AMD 272,975,855 to a bona fide acquirer or it is impossible to identify and confiscate these funds. It must be proven that property transformations took place, as a result of which A.Harutyunyan had about 55 million AMD. It must be proven that he deposited around 98 million AMD, and then that money was cashed out. It must be proven that the defendant received illicit income and did not use 275 million 600 thousand AMD of them, that is, it continues to belong to him. It must also be proved that that he made a deposit in the amount of 1 million 700 thousand USD in “ID” bank, which was also considered as property of illicit origin, which belongs to Aram Harutyunyan. In addition, it must be proven that Mr. Harutyunyan has 3 billion 962 million 560 thousand AMD equivalent to 8 million US dollars as the balance of illicit funds. The responsibility of refuting the stated factual circumstances bares the responding party,” Siro Amirkhanyan said.

According to Aram Orbelyan, in case of confiscation of property, the Prosecutor’s Office must always prove the fact of the right of ownership and the existence of the property. “If the Prosecutor’s Office did not find money, it cannot confiscate it.”

According to him, the Prosecutor’s Office must prove the existence of the money, and they must prove that it is legal. The prosecutor stated that he does not see any problem in this regard and the plaintiff will present information that these funds belong to Aram Harutyunyan. However, the Prosecutor’s Office cannot say where these funds are now. “At some point, these funds belonged to Mr. Aram Harutyunyan. If these funds do not belong to him, then the person in possession of these evidences is the defendant.”

The prosecutor mentioned that the location of 8 million USD in question identified by them. According to their data, the respondents have that amount in cash. “Non-cash funds of such an amount were not found in the RA.”

Aram Orbelyan also raised the question of the legality of the start of the study and the extension of the study periods.

Details in the video.