On 20 March, the investigation in the case of former Chief of Police Vladimir Gasparyan was continued in the Anti-Corruption Criminal Court. Judge Suren Khachatryan was the presiding at the court session.

The indictment, stated that Gasparyan, knowing that Susanna Sardaryan (Gasparyan), who is in a de facto marital relationship with him, did not show at workplace at the Military Police of the Ministry of Defense and never performed the official duties arising from the position, and she was paid the salary.

The state suffered a particularly large loss of 17 million 275 thousand 721 drams.

According to Iravaban.net, witness Gegham Petrosyan appeared at the court session. The court sent summonses to the other witnesses: Levon Sukiasyan, Mushegh Khachatryan, Grigor Badiryan and Arshavir Mkhitaryan. The court had not yet received proof that the they had been duly notified.

Gegham Petrosyan stated in the court that he knows all the participants of the trial and is in good relations with all of them. The witness also stated that a long time had passed since his previous interrogation, and in response to the question about Vladimir Gasparyan’s wife’s attendance at work, he stated that he worked within the framework of his functions, he had seen Mrs. Gasparyan at work, but he did not have any information about her work.

In response to the prosecutor’s question about the years the witness served in the police, Petrosyan answered that he served in the post-investigative legal department of the investigation in 2002-2018, and in 2015-2018 he served as the Referent of the Chief of Polices.

– What duties were assigned to you in your position?

– The investigation of applications and complaints related to police officers; I also organized receptions on behalf of the Chief of Polices, execution of other current documents.

– Were there any orders regarding your functional duties or were they carried out verbally?

– As far as I remember, there was no order, there were specific verbal instructions.

– Where did you perform your work functions?

– In the central building of the Police.

– Which floor and who were stationed there?

– On the 4th floor, one part was the office of the Chief of Police, and the other part was for the staff opf the Chief of Polices.

– Have you fulfilled your official duties in another place?

– No.

The witness answered other question of the prosecutor regarding the frequency and format of contacts with the Chief of Police, regarding the reception of citizens. The work schedule was mandatory from 9 to 6, in case of additional work; they stayed at the workplace even longer.

Gegham Petrosyan stated that Susanna Gasparyan held the position of senior referent, there were cases when they met at the workplace, but there were no frequent contacts.

The witness stated that there were no cases of not going to work, and the leave was only based on the report of the Chief of Polices.

In response to the question of Public Prosecutor Armen Gevorgyan, regarding the number of offices in the section on the 4th floor and who worked there, the witness answered: as far as he rememberd, there were 5 offices: the Assistant Chief of Police, the Head of the Staff, the Head of the Secretariat, the Assistant to the Head of the Secretariat performed their functions there. And he occupied one room himself.

Defense attorney Erik Aleksanyan asked questions to the witness as well.

– Can you say whether the functions of the senior referent are regulated by some normative legal act or not?

– As far as I know, no.

– How is it determined what specific functions this or that referent should perform?

– As far as I remember, my functions were defined by verbal agreement with the Chief of Police and the Chief of Staff.

– In response to Mr. Muradyan’s question, you said that the working hours are from 9 to 6 and there were also cases when you worked after 6. Can you tell the Court whether the referent’s work was mandatory in general?

– The position of the Referee of the Chief of Police cannot be irregular.

In response to the attorney’s question, the witness stated that events were often organized in the police; and there were cases in which he participated. In response to the question whether Mrs. Gasparyan had an active role in the  organization of those events, the witness stated that those were organizational works that were performed prior to the beginning of the event, and she was present from the moment the event started, and there were cases when Angelina Gasparyan performed a song at that event.

The lawyer emphasized that there are materials in the criminal case regarding the organization of events by Susanna Gasparyan (we are talking about the existing video clips where her presence can be seen).

In response to the judge’s question regarding how many times the witness saw Susanna Gasparyan at work, Petrosyan answered: up to 10 times. He mentioned that he learned that Susanna Gasparyan was the Senior Referent when he was appointed as the referent of the Chief of Police.

After questioning the witness, Vladimir Gasparyan provided clarifications in the court. A part of the 4th floor was occupied by the section of the Chief of Police, with a large meeting room and the room for bodyguard. There were two or three rooms in that corridor.

“In connection with the work regime, there were cases when they worked 24 hours, including this guy, because there were meetings, demonstrations, many people were brought, lawyers were needed to draw up protocols, etc.,” Vladimir Gasparyan emphasized.

According to him, Susanna Gasparyan was “engaged in cultural work”, was in the culture center, which was located on the 2nd floor with a separate entrance. “When I was the Chief of Police, people did not walk in the corridors, they worked in their offices, I did not allow excursions in the corridors, going from cabinet to cabinet. The regime was very strict.”

Erik Aleksanyan made a statement saying that the implementation of the functions of Gegham Petrosyan as a referent and Susanna Gasparyan as a senior referent cannot be equated, because the referent’s functions are not regulated by any legal, normative act.

Vladimir Gasparyan also made a statement regarding the witness. “He was officially a referent, but I assigned him to the Head of Staff as an assistant, they did the same work together, because there was a lot of work.

As for culture: Susanna Gasparyan used to go to sewing workshops to order to sew national clothes, went to the dance groups, which was the hardest work. They worked until 3-4 am,” he said.

There were no other subpoenaed witnesses, the hearing was adjourned. The next court hearing is on 1 April.

Mariam Shahnazaryan