On September 10, the trial of Judge Arusyak Aleksanyan, her assistant Tamara Petrosyan, and advocate Erik Aleksanyan continued in the Anti-Corruption Criminal Court. The hearing is presided over by Judge Vahe Dolmazyan.
On October 17, 2022, the Supreme Judicial Council approved the Prosecutor General’s Office’s motions to initiate criminal proceedings against Judge Arusyak Aleksanyan and to consent to her deprivation of liberty. As part of the same case, advocate Erik Aleksanyan was also charged under Article 46-441 of the Criminal Code for aiding an official in abusing their authority or influence or exceeding their powers. Arusyak Aleksanyan’s assistant, Tamara Petrosyan, was also charged in this case.
According to the indictment, the judge rendered an obviously unjust judicial act and abused her official powers. She granted a motion by Erik Aleksanyan, the defense advocate of Sergey Grigoryan, known by the nickname “Faz” and considered a criminal authority, changing the latter’s preventive measure and releasing him from detention on a 2.5 million dram bail. Sergey Grigoryan is a friend of Arusyak Aleksanyan’s brother, Rustam Aleksanyan.
The defendants do not admit the charges against them.
According to Iravaban.net, at this court session, prosecutor Armen Gevorgyan’s written motion to extend the term of house arrest as an alternative preventive measure for Arusyak Aleksanyan was discussed. The prosecutor requested to extend it for another 3 months, until December 13 inclusive.
Written versions of the motion were handed over to the defense. Judge Vahe Dolmazyan read the motion presented by the prosecutor.
According to the motion, a legitimate need to extend the term of house arrest has arisen due to several circumstances.
The prosecutor argued that the potential influence of the accused on witnesses should be considered, as well as the possibility that the defense may need to question additional witnesses or re-examine already questioned witnesses. In the motion, the prosecutor also emphasized that the inspection reports, which are essential from the perspective of challenging the investigative jurisdiction in the criminal case, have not yet been examined.
The prosecutor states that reasonable assumptions about the commission of these actions by the accused Arusyak Aleksanyan are based on a comprehensive analysis of factual data obtained and attached to the criminal case within the framework of legal procedure.
Addressing the factual circumstances of the motion, the prosecutor noted that Arusyak Aleksanyan had taken actions aimed at having the motion to replace the detention applied to her brother’s friend and her close associate Erik Aleksanyan’s client Sergey Grigoryan with bail assigned to her, and then granting it.
In his motion, Armen Gevorgyan stated that operational-intelligence measures have substantiated that Arusyak Aleksanyan concealed her actions, turning on loud music on her computer during a conversation with advocate Erik Aleksanyan in her office on September 13, 2022, trying to encrypt the content of their conversation. The conversation was also examined through expertise, during which possible ways to release Sergey Grigoryan from detention were discussed.
Hovsep Sargsyan, the defense advocate for the accused Arusyak Aleksanyan, noted regarding the content of the motion that the public prosecutor based his motion on his own reasoning: “In his justifications, the public prosecutor puts everything on guesswork, that it’s possible, it’s possible, what’s possible, no one knows, and it’s vague, not specific. Everything is possible, and I think keeping Arusyak Aleksanyan under continuous house arrest based on possibilities is not justified.”
Regarding the questioning of additional witnesses, the defense advocate said: “Who should we bring and question regarding investigative jurisdiction? If we need to bring and question the Prosecutor General, that’s another issue.”
Regarding the prosecutor’s position on having illegal influence and committing a new criminal act, defense advocate Sargsyan said that the arguments presented about this are also not substantiated. According to the defense advocate, the circumstance of illegal influence should no longer be a matter of discussion, especially given that Gagik Poghosyan has been questioned, the other defendants have testified, and the conditions of legitimacy in qualitative and quantitative terms have been eliminated.
Regarding Arusyak Aleksanyan’s encryption of her conversation with Erik Aleksanyan, the defense advocate said: “If he wants to say that Arusyak Aleksanyan is so smart that she can understand that internal observation is being carried out against her, that’s another issue, in that case, let him say so, and we’ll understand too.”
The defense advocate also drew the court’s attention to the fact that Arusyak Aleksanyan’s classes at the Advocacy Academy have started since September 9, and house arrest also creates obstacles for normal participation in classes.
Summarizing his speech, Hovsep Sargsyan stated that the presented motion is not substantiated in real and factual terms, and asked the court to apply an alternative preventive measure of bail for the accused, and to accept as bail the real estate registered in the name of Arusyak Aleksanyan’s mother, worth 55 million.
The accused Erik Aleksanyan expressed his position regarding the motion.
“The prosecutor takes as a starting point for presenting such a motion the circumstance of similar motions previously presented by us, that is, he cites an assumption about the legitimacy of the preventive measure without presenting the starting point of that motion, when that is what he should cite. Here, it seems, the prosecutor tried to find a similarity between these two circumstances, but they are different,” he noted.
Erik Aleksanyan said that there has been a change in the situation, as Gagik Poghosyan has been questioned, and the defendants have gone through the questioning phase. According to him, a person’s freedom cannot be continuously restricted and conditioned on the future behavior of the participants in the proceedings.
After examining the presented motion and hearing the positions of the defense, the court decided to satisfy it, extending the term of house arrest chosen as an alternative preventive measure for Arusyak Aleksanyan for another 3 months.
The next court session is on September 18.
Mariam Shahnazaryan
