On 16 April, the court hearing in the case of confiscation of properties and funds of allegedly illicit origin of Hrayr Tovmasyan, Judge of the Constitutional Court and his wife Lamara Khudaverdyan took place in the Anti-Corruption Civil Court. Presiding Judge Lili Drmeyan.
Today’s session lasted about 15 minutes.
According to Iravaban.net, the plaintiff’s representative presented a position on the petition regarding the application of statute of limitations, which was filed today.
The petitioner also submitted a position regarding the calculation of the statute of limitations and a motion to allow written evidence.
Gevorg Kocharyan
Prosecutor Gevorg Kocharyan, representative of the plaintiff, noted that he had presented his position in writing as well. The position referred to the issue that within the framework of the confiscation of property of illicit origin, according to their position, 1 limitation period applies, which starts from the moment of making the decision to begin the study of the case and ends with the initiation of the lawsuit. The period between the two actions “should not exceed three years”.
Lawyer Artur Hovhannisyan stated in the court that it is stated in the petition that the statute of limitations provided for by the law “On Confiscation of Property of Illegal Origin” is complementary, and not exclusive.
“Regarding the transactions of public spaces on Baghramyan Avenue and Alek Manukyan Street, in 2019, the state observed that these properties are supposedly illegal properties and actually belong to its buyer, Hrayr Tovmasyan, and the lawsuit was filed in 2023, that is, in violation of the three-year deadline.” Hovhannisyan said.
Arthur Hovhannisyan
Among the supporting documents of what he said are the state registration certificates, copies of real estate alienation, in addition, copies of the declarations of Hrayr Tovmasyan and Lamara Khudaverdyan, the decision to include them as defendants, which stated that the state knew about the alleged violation of the law regarding the acquisition of these two properties since 2019, as well as the copy of the letter of the Corruption Prevention Commission.
Regarding the evidence, the prosecutor stated that there is no evidence contradicting their position; it is not about the facts, but the difference between the positions, legal assessments.
According to the judge, the presented evidence is admissible, relevant; they will be evaluated by a judicial act. The discussion of the petition is over.
The Court Act will be published on 22 April.
Mariam Shahnazaryan
