Today, on January 13, a preliminary court hearing took place in the Anti-Corruption Civil Court regarding the case of Constitutional Court Judge Hrayr Tovmasyan and his wife Lamara Khudaverdyan concerning the confiscation of allegedly illegally obtained property and monetary assets. The hearing is presided over by Judge Lili Drmeyan.

According to Iravaban.net, during this session, Arthur Hovhannisyan, the representative of the respondents Hrayr Tovmasyan and his wife Lamara Khudaverdyan, presented a motion. It concerned partially separating the case proceedings and applying expedited trial procedures.

Addressing the grounds and justifications for the motion, the lawyer stated that points 4 and 5 of the prosecutor’s claim demanded the confiscation of 221,675 drams from Hrayr Tovmasyan and Lamara Khudaverdyan in favor of the Republic of Armenia, which during 2002-2022 was not justified by their legal income and has illegal origin, was transferred to bona fide acquirers, or cannot be identified and confiscated. The 5th point presented a confiscation claim for 142,250,200 drams, which was viewed as funds received from the conversion of illegally obtained property, as well as income received from the use of illegal property.

Reference was made to Article 123, Part 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, according to which the court has the right to make a decision on distributing the burden of proof in separate proceedings by separating one or more of the joined claims, as well as Article 303, Part 1, Point 8, according to which the court has the right to apply expedited trial proceedings if there is a need to interrogate persons participating in the case, witnesses, experts or specialists and conduct other procedural actions, if the claim is obviously unfounded and if the claim requirement formulated in it is illegitimate.

“The basis and condition for initiating proceedings and confiscating illegally obtained property is a person’s property status, the person’s possession of allegedly illegally obtained property, and its value exceeding the legally established amount,” said Hovhannisyan.

According to him, in objective reality, a differentiated, discriminatory approach may arise towards a person who has generated allegedly illegal property and towards the property belonging to the latter, which has not been entirely transferred to other persons and continues to be possessed as property.

The respondent’s representative maintains that in terms of legal regulations, there is a violation of equality before the law and discriminatory treatment of persons, conditioned by their property status at the time of initiating proceedings, and the circumstance of having or not having allegedly illegally obtained property.

“The claims presented in points 4 and 5 of the lawsuit are clearly illegitimate demands, therefore in this case it is necessary to separate this claim in separate proceedings, apply expedited trial proceedings and reject the lawsuit on the grounds of being obviously unfounded,” said Hovhannisyan.

At this session, the respondent’s side also motioned to separate proceedings and apply expedited trial procedures for 3 real estate properties.

The 3 properties are:

• An apartment located at 91 P. Buzand Street, Yerevan, which is requested to be confiscated in full, or in case of impossibility – the average market value of the property (153,682,000 drams)
• An apartment located in building 2 of the 21st Street in Arabkir Administrative District, Yerevan, which is also requested to be confiscated in full, or in case of impossibility – the average market value of the property: 45,222,000 drams
• A residential house located in Darakert village of Ararat region, which is also requested to be confiscated in full.

Hovhannisyan stated that in the reasoning part of the lawsuit, it was noted that the study revealed that by law, 99% of the first property, 73% of the second, and 41% of the third were considered illegal property.

According to the respondent’s side, those parts of these properties that were considered legal (confiscation of 1% of the first apartment, 27% of the second apartment, 59% of the third house), the claims for these parts should be separated and as expedited trial proceedings, the claims for these parts should also be rejected.

Prosecutor Gevorg Kocharyan addressed the following issue in his speech, emphasizing that the constitutional prohibition of discrimination refers to something different than what was presented in the respondent’s motion: “By property status in Article 20 of the Constitution, I do not perceive that the constituent meant the volume of person’s properties assessed as illegal, discrimination based on property status, in any case, I understand is conditioned by person’s social status, and not that one person has an apartment, another has sold it, therefore they are in different property situations.”

Kocharyan referenced the “Law on Confiscation of Illegally Obtained Property,” noting that illegally obtained property is subject to confiscation regardless of whether it was acquired before or after the law came into force.

“The law is unequivocally about the confiscation of illegally obtained property, its purpose is exclusively the confiscation of illegal property, and this law cannot have any other purpose, as for how to achieve the confiscation of illegally obtained property, this is another question. The approach is based on the fact that a claim for confiscation of property is presented in full volume, because if it’s about real estate, it is 1 unit of property, there is no separated share to claim for its confiscation, since the property is 1 unit, which is not justified by legal income and is considered illegal in terms of law,” he noted.

According to Iravaban.net, the discussion of the motion concluded, and the presiding judge informed the parties that if the motion is rejected, at the next session the judicial act will be made in the form of a protocol decision, and if satisfied, the decision will be published as a separate judicial act.

Another preliminary court hearing was scheduled for February 12.

Mariam Shahnazaryan