The court hearing on the case of former Chairman of the Urban Development Committee Vahagn Vermishyan was held in the Anti-Corruption Court of Appeal, presided over by Judge Karen Amiryan and with the participation of judges Armen Hovhannisyan and Mesrop Makyan.
According to Iravaban.net, prosecutor Tsovak Mnatskanyan and Vahagn Vermishyan’s defender Alexander Kochubayev delivered speeches at this court session.
Alexander Kochubayev began his closing speech with the first episode of the charges against Vahagn Vermishyan regarding bribery, which relates to the acquisition of Jim Torosyan’s commemorative medals.
According to the charges, Vazgen Poghosyan, together with Gagik Galstyan, with the aim of receiving the honorary title of Honored Builder of the Republic of Armenia, as well as motivated by mercenary motives to provide state and private orders to “Yerevan Shin” and “Horizon-95” companies, approached Vahagn Vermishyan in August 2019 to make their intentions a reality.
Gagik Galstyan, having reached a preliminary agreement with Vazgen Poghosyan, visited Vahagn Vermishyan’s office and gave him $5,000 as a particularly large bribe for the mentioned purpose.
The defender said that the fact that Gagik Galstyan refers to five thousand dollars as 5 books or five workers cannot be attributed as evidence of Vahagn Vermishyan receiving a bribe: “The discourse of other persons cannot serve as a basis for substantiating the factual side of the act.”
According to the defense’s arguments, Vermishyan provided appropriate explanations regarding the preliminary testimony, moreover, they were obtained without a lawyer. The conversations between Gagik Galstyan and Vazgen Poghosyan concerned Euro-windows and cement. The documents related to the act of acceptance and payment fact are legal, but even without it, there is no basis to assume that V. Vermishyan has anything to do with it.
Vahagn Vermishyan rejected Gagik Galstyan’s offered money for acquiring Jim Torosyan’s commemorative medals, saying: “No, no, don’t give it, don’t do such a thing, I don’t need it”. Kochubayev notes that there is a chronological discrepancy, as the petition was submitted on September 19, and the money was transferred on October 23.
The defender again insisted that violations of investigative jurisdiction took place during the preliminary investigation: “Taking wiretap conversations, cutting them out of context and trying to prove guilt, I think is not such an honest occupation.”
Details in the video.
