A court hearing in the case of Vahagn Vermishyan, former Chairman of the Urban Development Committee, took place in the Appellate Anti-Corruption Court, presided over by Judge Karen Amiryan, with the participation of Judges Armen Hovhannisyan and Mesrop Makyan.
According to Iravaban.net, Vahagn Vermishyan’s advocate, Alexander Kochubaev, had motioned to summon Natalya Chernikova as a witness to the court.
Defendant Vahagn Vermishyan, commenting on the motion, stated that Natalya Chernikova had been subjected to psychological pressure, was questioned without an advocate, and even faced a significant risk of losing her child. “To cover this up, the investigator organized Natalya Chernikova’s process of leaving Armenia, to conceal this incident. They treated the woman savagely, shouting at her, and so on. All of Aghajanian’s statements are lies from start to finish; he is a liar,” Vermishyan said.
After this statement, presiding Judge Karen Amiryan interrupted the defendant, again warning him about the possibility of a reprimand.
Vahagn Vermishyan continued, “I have my opinion about a specific person.” The presiding judge said that the participants in the trial may also have very different opinions about Vermishyan, but these are subjective perceptions and should not be voiced in court. In response, Vermishyan said, “He has said so many slanders about me, he is a liar, a ‘mutilovshchik’ in Russian, in Armenian – a ‘bansarku’ (intriguer). You need to talk to intriguers in the appropriate way.”
The court gave Vermishyan two reprimands, but for his last words, it applied a sanction, removing him from the courtroom.
The presiding judge told advocate Kochubaev that the court is getting the impression that as the trial nears its end, both from the perspective of the defense strategy and Vermishyan’s speech, it’s becoming problematic, which cannot be qualified as proper behavior by the court.
In response to the presiding judge, Alexander Kochubaev said, “This is already the second instance; this is a direct insult. We don’t have any strategy; our strategy is procedural. We are presenting an appeal; the legislation provides an opportunity to resolve unresolved issues at the appeal stage. There are no sacred cows in criminal proceedings, and Mr. Aghajanian is no exception.
‘Bansarku’ simply means someone who fabricates things, and according to Mr. Vermishyan’s assertion, a case has been fabricated against him, and this is our global thought. I object to your actions; please do not attribute to me behavior that I do not exhibit.”
It should be noted that the court rejected the last motion presented by Alexander Kochubaev.
Details are in the video.
