Choosing arrest as a means of restraint has become a problem in Armenia. One of the brightest examples is the amnesty awarded time by time, told the advocate, Yervand Varosyan when talking to iravaban.net.
According to him, instead of an individual approach towards the accusers and suspects, the country often has to award amnesties in order to correct its mistakes. “In our country the arrest has become a presumption.
“If a person is suspected in medium, heavy or particularly grave crime, only the arrest is chosen as a means of restraint,” mentioned Yervand Varosyan.
According to the International Լaw Expert, Ara Ghazaryan, the necessity of additional examinations and investigations is not a basis for keeping a person under the arrest.
“It is a wide spread judicial practice that the courts in addition to other circumstances, mention in their decisions that investigation is still in progress and that is why it is necessary to keep a person under the arrest,” Ara Ghazaryan said. According to him, there is a precedent of Supreme Court which says that all this must be proved with the facts of the case but not with the clear statement of legislative norms.
The specialist states that today’s practice differs from the practice of 2006-2009. Then only legislative statements were narrated without facts, today we see the facts, there is analysis of facts but very often the analysis of facts are done formally and there is no real connection with the objective and the means. If the analyses of facts are done, we will see that in most cases there is no necessity for arrest. According to him, efforts should be taken to change this judicial practice.
The full version of the article in Armenian is available here
Nune Hivsepyan,
