On 27 November, the Anti-Corruption Court continued the investigation of the case against Gagik Tsarukyan, the leader of “Prosperous Armenia” Party and Sedrak Arustamyan Director of “Multi Group”. Judge Aram Grigoryan chaired the session.
According to Iravaban.net, at the beginning of the session, Tsarukyan’s defense attorney Emin Khachatryan petitioned to recognize all the evidence obtained in the case as inadmissible.
“During the search of the Yerevanshin Company, the records of the 2017 elections with the inscription “Number of voters and paid amounts” were found and seized, which according to the preliminary investigation body were studied and examined immediately after they were obtained. Those documents were actually about election expenses, and if the documents, according to the investigator, contained information about an alleged crime, then the issue of initiating a new criminal case should have been resolved within the ten-day period defined by the law, which was not done, proceedings were initiated only months later,” the defender said.
In addition, according to Emin Khachatryan, investigative subordination in the case was violated as well. The investigation of the case should have been carried out by the Special Investigation Service, but it was investigated by the Investigative Department of the National Security Service. “Materials obtained in violation of procedural laws and rules of investigative subordination are considered to be obtained by an improper entity and cannot be used as evidence.”
Prosecutor Davit Aghajanyan drew the attention of the Court and the parties to the decision of the Court of Appeals on this issue in July 2020. According to the Prosecutor, the Court addressed both the subordination, the initiation of the case, and the admissibility of the evidence and recorded their legality. “The regulations of the former legislation provided the Prosecutor an exclusive opportunity to take any criminal case from one preliminary investigation body and transfer it to another body.”
The Prosecutor also referred to the failure to file a criminal case within ten days after documents were found during a search in the “Yerevanshin” Company. Davit Aghajanyan said that after the discovery of those documents, the director of the company, Vazgen Poghosyan, did not give any testimony, and the documents themselves did not prove the crime.
“Months later, when a number of investigative and judicial actions had already been carried out, Vazgen Poghosyan testified, after which there were sufficient grounds,” the Prosecutor insisted, the motion should be rejected.
The Court, under the chairmanship of Aram Grigoryan, decided to postpone the resolution of the petition until the essential circumstances for the resolution are clarified.
The parties did not have other motions, the Court decided to end the stage of preliminary hearings and proceed to the main hearings.
After the announced break, the Prosecutor delivered an opening speech and presented the indictments of the 2 defendants.
Gagik Tsarukyan’s ,defense attorney Yerem Sargsyan stated that the defendant does not accept the charges brought against him, as he did not commit any crime. “An entire Prosecutor’s office and the National Security Service conducted an investigation, they say thousands, tens of thousands of millions of dollars were distributed, but what is described in Gagik Tsarukyan’s accusation… there is no factual data that Gagik Tsarukyan personally gave a bribe. There is no evidence.”
The PAP leader also made a statement in Court. He mentioned that he did not bribe anyone; the money was intended for pre-election expenses.
“I will reveal the truth so that they will be ashamed and fall through the floor. You can’t pin a case on a person. I’m still patiently listening. It’s not allowed. Have a little shame at least. I also have many things to say, but powerful people are always restrained, always moderate, and respectful. I am listening carefully. If a person is accused without prove that I gave money to someone,” Gagik Tsarukyan said.
After the announcement, Prosecutor Davit Aghajanyan announced that the defense side had gone beyond its “boundaries”, and the Court did not respond to it. The accuser also referred to Tsarukyan’s assertion that he personally did not bribe anyone. “And who says that you personally gave someone an election bribe?” This is the second time you are making some kind of moral appeals, who should gp through the floor and who should be ashamed? Let the person who committed the crime go through the floor and be ashamed.”
Sedrak Arustamyan also pleaded not guilty. “I believe that during the Court sessions, all issues will be clarified.”
Further some of the evidence in the case was examined. The session was postponed due to the workload of the Court.
Yevgenya Hambardzumyan
