On 7 June, the trial in the case of Judge Arusyak Aleksanyan, her assistant Tamara Petrosyan and Lawyer Erik Aleksanyan was continued in the Anti-Corruption Court.
On 17 October, 2022, the Supreme Judicial Council approved the petitions of the General Prosecutor’s Office regarding the initiation of criminal prosecution against Judge Arusyak Aleksanyan and provided consent to deprivation of liberty. Within the framework of the same case, the lawyer Erik Aleksanyan was also charged under Article 46-441 of the Criminal Code, that is, he assisted an official in abusing office or official powers or the influence caused by them or exceeding the powers. In the framework of this case, Arusyak Aleksanyan’s assistant Tamara Petrosyan was also charged.
The defendants do not accept the charges against them.
According to Iravaban.net, public prosecutor Armen Gevorgyan made an opening speech at the beginning of today’s session. He presented the factual basis of the accusation, as well as the legal assessment of the act attributed to the accused.
According to the indictment, Arusyak Aleksanyan, occupying the position of a Judge of the Yerevan Court of General Jurisdiction, being informed about the presence of the same court’s decision to apply arrest as a preventive measure to her brother Rustam Aleksanyan’s friend and her close client, lawyer Erik Aleksanyan’s defendant Sergey Grigoryan, intended to commit illegal acts in favor of Grigoryan and release him from custody.
It is noted that in order to implement the above, the judge reached a preliminary agreement with hrer assistant, Tamara Petrosyan, and an official of the Yerevan Court of General Jurisdiction, whose identity has not yet been determined. According to the accuser, Arusyak Aleksanyan made an obviously illegal court act; she changed the preventive measure chosen against Sergey Grigoryan to arrest with a bail of 2.5 million drams.
On 26 August, 2022, Arusyak Aleksanyan informed Eric Aleksanyan through the Internet application about her intention to release Gigoryan from custody, after which she received his consent. “…Arusyak Aleksanyan urged to submit several petitions to the court at the same time about replacing the detention with another preventive measure during her duty days. In this way, by creating an artificial workload for the judges, ensuring the increase of the probability of assigning one of the petitions to her.”
On 29 August, the judge also informed her assistant about it and asked her to develop other ways and mechanisms to implement the plan. Tamara Petrosyan, in her turn, advised to apply to the competent judge to examine the petition so that the latter submits a report on refusing to examine the petition. On the same day, a petition was submitted to the court to change the detention as a preventive measure against Sergey Grigoryan, on the grounds that a new substantial argument had arisen, which was signed by Judge Armen Shiroyan. Shiroyan, in turn, made a decision to reject the initiation of proceedings on the basis that new essential arguments were not presented.
Then, on 2 September, Tamara Petrosyan, on the instructions of Arusyak Aleksanyan, received information from an unidentified person from another judge of the same court regarding the process of the presented petition, its probable results, and the publication of the court act.
“…Tamara Petrosyan secretly received the electronic versions of the petition regarding the mentioned person, the court acts made in this regard, which she brought and downloaded to her computer, and transferred all the information to Arusyak Aleksanyan,” prosecutor Armen Gevorgyan said in the court.
After all this, according to the public prosecutor, Eric Aleksanyan learned from Arusyak Aleksanyan about the duty schedule of the judges, on 12 and 17 September he submitted 2 petitions to the court, expecting that one of them would be assigned to Arusyak Aleksanyan. One of them was examined by Judge Armen Shiroyan and rejected.
The accuser informed the court that earlier, on 8 August, Arusyak Aleksanyan called Erik Aleksanyan and informed him about being included in the duty schedule on 12 September and urged him to submit the motion to change the restraining order on the said day. The lawyer did so. However, the petition was addressed to Armen Shirosyan, who rejected it.
After all this, on 13 September, around 14:15, Arusyak Aleksanyan met with Erik Aleksanyan in her office. “…During the meeting, with the intention of reaching mutual agreements as covertly as possible and not revealing the realization of their criminal purpose, Arusyak Aleksanyan urged Erik Aleksanyan to speak in a low voice, turned on music on the office computer, and then began to discuss with the lawyer the decision made regarding the next petition which was submitted regarding the release of Sergey Grigoryan from detention. “.
After that, according to the accuser, Arusyak Aleksanyan discussed the issue of appealing the decision made by Armen Shiroyan. During a private interview, Erik Aleksanyan expressed his willingness to submit a motion with the same content.
The detained judge and the lawyer reached an agreement after submitting a motion to the investigator to organize a face-to-face interrogation, to consider the answer given by the latter as a new essential argument and in that way justify the motion to be presented.
On 16 September, Arusyak Aleksanyan informed Eric Aleksanyan about her inclusion in the duty schedule on 17 and 18 September, first by voice message, and then during a telephone conversation through the Internet application. On 17 September, the lawyer presented a new petition to the court through lawyer Zhirayr Gharagyozyan. The Acting President of the Court, Gagik Poghosyan, assigned it to Arusyak Aleksayan, but on the same day, Poghosyan assigned it to Armen Shiroyan, taking into account the fact that the other motions regarding Sergey Grigoryan were examined by Shiroyan.
“…With the intention of assisting Arusyak Aleksanyan, Erik Aleksanyan included in the petition submitted on 17 September untrue information that there is no need of face-to-face examination in criminal proceedings, when the latter applied to the body implementing the proceedings with such a petition only on 20 September 2022, the answer to which was received a few days later, on 23 September,” the prosecutor noted, adding that the basis of both the petitions of 12 and 17 September was the fact that a new substantial argument had arisen.
It is also noted that Tamara Petrosyan received Erik Aleksanyan’s 17 September petition by hand and did not hand it over to Judge Armen Shiroyan until 20 September. Instead, on 20 September, Arusyak Aleksanyan examined the said petition and changed the order of restraining against Sergey Grigoryan, releasing him from detention.
“… In this way, as well as by uttering obscene and insulting expressions regarding the administration of justice to the court that refused to hear the previous motions to replace arrest with bail as a measure of restraint against Grigoryan, in the form of discrediting the authority of the judiciary, she caused significant damage to the legal interests of the state, negligently causing the proper administration of justice stipulated by Article 162 of the Constitution. another serious consequence manifested in the form of disruption,” Armen Gevorgyan declared in court.
During this court session, the defense attorneys and the defendants could also give their opening statements, but due to Arusyak Aleksanyan’s defense attorney Andranik Manukyan being busy with another session, this session was postponed. The next court hearing will be held on 14 June.
Yevgenya Hambardzumyan
