The Constitutional Court published its decision regarding the application of former judge Davit Harutyunyan.

According to Iravaban.net, the court recorded that as a result of the similar interpretation and application of the contested provision by the judge, Davit Harutyunyan’s right to guarantee the representation of interests, as well as the judge’s right to be heard, was unlawfully limited, which is evidenced by the application of the sanction in question. And which caused the impossibility to present his position, at least through the closing speech.

“In this context, the Constitutional Court emphasizes that the application of the judicial sanction in question should not lead to the neutralization of the person’s right to be heard in all cases.

…The Constitutional Court considers that Article 101, Part 1, Clause 2 of the Code of Administrative Procedure corresponds to the Constitution with the interpretation according to which, within the framework of disciplinary proceedings, the judicial sanction of “removal from the courtroom” can be applied to a judge under the conditions when the Council will make all possible and necessary efforts to ensure the right to be heard of the judge who is removed from the courtroom,” the CC stated in its decision.

Notably: On 14 April, 2023, the Press Secretary of the Minister of Justice presented the report to the Acting Minister of Justice regarding the need to investigate the grounds for initiating disciplinary proceedings against the judge of the Criminal Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan City, Davit Harutyunyan, with regard to the publication in the mass media.

It was initiated, on 19 June, the latter submitted a motion to the Council to hold the court hearing in the case of subjecting the judge to disciplinary responsibility behind closed doors, with the following reasoning. “(…) the nature of the disciplinary violations committed by the judge is such that it directly refers to the discrediting of the judicial authority by the public speech made by the judge, to questioning the independence of the Supreme Judicial Council acting as a court and the legitimacy of its decisions. On the other hand, the function of the Council to ensure the independence of courts and judges stipulated by the Constitution implies the prevention of any action that hinders guaranteeing the independence of courts and judges and discredits the judiciary within the powers assigned to the Council. Taking into account the above mentioned, we believe that the dissemination of the mentioned speech of the judge within the framework of the public examination of the case by judicial order may have an additional negative effect in the context of maintaining the public trust in the authority, independence and impartiality of the judiciary, and the holding of the court session behind closed doors stems from the need to protect the interests of justice.

The petition was granted.

The Council, in particular, noted: “(…) Taking into account the constitutionally enshrined function of the Council to ensure the independence of courts and judges, the dissemination of information about the above facts by a judge as part of the public consideration of a case in court may have an additional negative effect in the context of maintaining the authority of the judiciary and public trust, therefore the Council, based on the need to protect the interests of justice, decided to hold the trial behind closed doors.

(…) Taking into account the realities described, including the danger of discrediting the judiciary, the need to preserve the dignity of the judicial office and public confidence in the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, while emphasizing the need to maintain the principle of publicity, the Council, within the specified period, publishes this decision in full on the official website of the Judiciary.”

During the court session convened on 26 June, the Council applied the sanction “removal from the courtroom” to the judge, continuing the investigation of the case without the participation of Davit Harutyunyan and his representatives.

At the court session of 3 July, 2023, the decision of the Criminal Court of Justice was published, the powers of Davit Harutyunyan, Judge of the Criminal Court of First Instance of General Jurisdiction of Yerevan City, were terminated on the basis of a significant disciplinary violation.

Harutyunyan challenged the legality of the Council’s actions in the Constitutional Court.

Details here.