“When we have rooted the idea of inevitability of punishment, proper anti-corruption education, and professional employees having the integrity values, we will have a truly independent and professional judicial system, we will be able to overcome this evil called corruption” Iravaban.net talked with Sasun Khachatryan, the Chairman of the Anti-Corruption Committee.
– Mr. Khachatryan, the Anti-Corruption Committee has been operating for about 2 years. Do you consider its creation justified? What kind of results have you achieved?
– I definitely consider it justified. The creation and establishment of the committee is already a result. These 2 years were exactly that period. It is quite complicated to form the staff of the officials, it is also connected with the filters operating in the committee, which are quite strict. Candidates also pass a background check and very few candidates manage to pass that stage. To date, 50 percent of the positions are not filled. But along with that, serious work was done by both the operative block and the investigative departments.
Let me present my vision in terms of evaluating the activity of the anti-corruption body. We have crime statistics that we study regularly. Suppose, when evaluating the increase in violent or property crimes, it is surely viewed as a negative indicator, then, according to the rules of legal statistics, the increase in latent crimes should be considered as a positive phenomenon. They consider such crimes as an iceberg. Only a small part is visible, and the underwater part, which is many times larger, is hidden. As a result of good work, we reveal that invisible part.
One may get the impression that corruption crimes have increased recently, according to statistics, this is exactly the case. It speaks of the effectiveness of the work being done in that direction. In 2 years, we established the committee, we created the operative-investigative unit from zero, and we are equipping it technically. We have signed memorandums of cooperation with our foreign colleagues.
1047 proceedings were examined in the period between 1 January and 1 December, 2022, of which 89 were sent to court with indictments against 201 persons. In the same period of this year, 1697 proceedings were examined, of which 160 were sent to court with indictments against 351 persons.
– Mr. Khachatryan, there is a lot of talk about the importance of international cooperation, what steps have been taken in this direction?
– We are trying to ensure close cooperation with our partners. Last year, we signed a memorandum with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), we are actively working with that organization. A few days ago, we signed a memorandum with the Italian Financial Guard (Guardia di Finanza). We have a partnership with the Basel Institute on Governance dealing with asset recovery. Other memorandums are also being prepared, but apart from them, we are actively cooperating with other structures and international organizations performing similar functions.
Recently, the Federal Bureau of Investigation organized a major refresher course for our operatives to impart practical knowledge. Therefore, international cooperation is one of our priorities, we pay great attention to it.
– In practice, do those memoranda and visits in any way affect the disclosure of cases?
– Of course, we send many requests for mutual legal assistance to our partners, we receive answers. These answers are not always complete, but very often information is provided that is quite helpful for the exam. We have quite good results especially in money laundering cases. Not only have ours, but also other operative bodies started to work better. The invisible part of the iceberg has come to the surface.
I do not claim that we reveal all the cases, but their course and coverage itself leads to the rooting of the idea of the inevitability of responsibility. When we have that idea rooted, we will have proper anti-corruption education, we will have professional and having integrity values employees, we will have a truly independent and professional judicial system, and we will be able to overcome this evil called corruption.
– During the Government session on 23 November, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan mentioned that the anti-corruption fight is not at the proper level. In your opinion, was this a criticism directed at the committee or the judicial and prosecutorial circles?
– I think this applied to everyone. You have to work better, harder, work more, that’s obvious. Studying our statistics, it becomes clear that the effectiveness of the Committee has almost doubled. This was due to the increase of capabilities, technical re-equipment, as well as the rooting of the idea of the inevitability of responsibility in the society. We have more than 50 cases when patrol officers themselves arrest people offering bribes and present them to a Committee.
Haven’t the drivers tried to pay a bribe before? Of course they did. Just a redesigned structure, the patrol service works better. Is there anyone who can prove to me that this increase is a negative phenomenon? The cases have not objectively increased, only the exposure has improved. If you ask me whether there is corruption in Armenia or not, I will say that there is corruption in Armenia, but the structure of corruption has changed. The most dangerous type of corruption is systemic corruption, it has a pyramidal structure, when the system is corrupt from top to bottom. We do not have such a phenomenon today. They are local cases, 1 or 2 rings may be involved.
There is a political will to eliminate corruption.
– You mention that there is no systemic corruption. However, the index of perception of corruption indicates something else. According to the methodology, if the points received by the country are below 50, then systemic corruption in the country has not disappeared.
In January 2023, the international non-governmental organization “Transparency International” published the 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). Armenia has not overcome the stagnation, but in addition it weakened its position, losing 3 points, and now with 46 points it is in 63rd place, instead of 58th last year.
– To be honest, I am not familiar with the structure of that evaluation, I do not know what standards it is based on, that is why I cannpt say how that evaluation was given. I draw my conclusions based on the criminal cases examined by us. Analyzing the criminal cases examined by us, I came to that conclusion.
– During the Government session on 23 November, you also touched on the corruption cases being investigated in the court, you said that there are problems in the judicial system. Can you deytail what you meant?
– It is no secret that the cases sent to the court drag on for years, one of the reasons for which is the abuse of the right. The defense side changing the same motion, resubmitting it, not appearing at the court session… Maybe this “not appearing” is considered respectable because they bring some medical document or present other grounds, but we have the fact that very often this happens. Here have abuses of rights. It is a question that the abuse of that right is not assessed as such. As a result, we have cases that drag on for years. During the Government session, I specifically spoke about the choice of preventive detention, because in practice, this “abuse of the right” occurs mainly in cases when another preventive measure is chosen, unrelated to deprivation of liberty.
The accused has certain responsibilities, not only rights. They include not obstructing the criminal proceedings. The criminal procedure regulations, which deal with means of obstruction, clearly state that one of the obstructions is used in order to ensure that the accused fulfills his duties properly. It turns out that the courts, recording that there is an abuse of rights, can evaluate it as a failure to fulfill their duties and hinder the criminal proceedings. Based on that, they can change the order restraint.
When the courts show courage and give a proper assessment to the abuses of the law, more reasonable terms of judicial investigation will be established. No one can assess today’s terms as “reasonable”. It is a well-known fact that justice delayed is justice failed. The dissatisfaction of the public that there are detentions, arrests, cases go to court, but we do not have verdicts is appropriate. What I said referred to that circumstance. A proper assessment should be given to the abuse of rights.
There is no attempt to discredit the judiciary in what I said.
– We mentioned that the courts should be bolder. Aren’t the courts bold today?
– I didn’t talk about courage in general, I talked about a specific case. We have a problem that court processes are prolonged for years. We clearly see that in many cases there is an abuse of rights. If, for example, the motion is not accepted, a motion for recusal is presented to the judge, after that they express an objection to the accuser, after that they bring another motion related to another process, if it is rejected, a motion for recusal is brought again. We are also witnessing this in multi-episode cases with a large number of defendants. One day someone’s lawyer doesn’t show up, one day the accused doesn’t feel well. I cannot say with certainty that in all cases abuse of rights occurs, but I can say with certainty that we have many cases where abuse of rights occurs and this should be given a proper assessment.
– Mr. Khachatryan, I wanted to talk about the 3 pillars of the fight against corruption, in particular, the inevitability of punishment. In your opinion, do the investigative, prosecutorial and judicial systems today work in such a way that the punishment is inevitable?
– I certainly cannot make such a judgment, we all work together so that responsibility is inevitable, but everything is being done for that. I can say that not only about our Committee, but also about other law enforcement agencies. It is visible.
– Your election as the chairman of the Committee raised many questions regarding its veiled nature. In your opinion, can the election process be considered open and transparent?
– If you want to know, my opinion was more than open and transparent, more than it was required. I drew a ticket live, in front of the cameras, like a student, in which there were professional questions, I answered them, after which other questions were also asked, which were related to integrity and organizational abilities. Here, everything was more than open and that independent commission was composed of representatives of various bodies, including civil society representatives, and an international observer was present. The evaluations given to me were the highest, and despite that, the Commission presented the candidacy of all three of us to the Government.
– The Commission did not work with its full composition, Mr. Khachatryan. Do you not see a problem when the election of the chairman of such an important body was passed with minimal votes? Only 4 out of 7 members did it.
– Of course, it would be desirable if the Commission worked with a full composition, but you cannot present those pretensions to me. I have no fault there.
– Before the election of the chairman of the Committee, the competition, were there ever any discussions with Nikol Pashinyan about your election, nomination and other similar issues?
– No, and such a procedure is not planned. I say again: the election was open and transparent, in front of the public. What you saw was just that. Do not look for anything else.
Interview: Yevgenya Hambardzumyan
Details in the video.
