Aimed to fulfill the requirements of the 13 November 2014 judgment issued by the European Court of Human Rights on the cases “Baghdasaryan and Zatikyan v Armenia”, “Gharibyan and Others v Armenia”, “Ghasabyan and Others v Armenia,” the RA Ministry of Justice shall receive 160.000 (one hundred and sixty thousand) EUROs equivalent in Armenian currency from the reserve funds of the RA State Budget for 2015 allocated for this purposes in the first half of 2015.
On today’s Governmental session, the RA Minister of Justice Hovhannes Manukyan introduced the corresponding draft and informed that the department had conducted a survey, which draws comparison with other states.
“Our analyzes show that in the period of 1 January 2010 through 1 May 2015, the number of cases referring to Armenia was 3. The amount for the reimbursement of on these cases totaled to 585.804 Euro equivalents in Armenian currency. We have drawn comparison with several countries. The analysis shows that Armenia is not in a bad condition, in addition we can say that compared with the overall situation Armenia is in rather favorable conditions from the aspect of the volume of the money to reimburse for the so called “lost cases, as well as from the aspect of the number of cases in which the which the country was defeated in the ECHR.” Mr. Manukyan said listing the countries.
It is noteworthy that Georgia was not among the states which the Minister listed, and where Mr. Manukyan served as the RA Ambassador Extraordinary and plenipotentiary in the past, but instead he compared the figures with Azerbaijan.
“The number of cases referring to Azerbaijan is 104 as compared with our 31 cases. The amount of the refund money is 1.575.000 Euros equivalent in AMD. The number of cases of Moldova is 179, the refund money 2.578.230 Euros equivalent in Armenian currency. Bulgaria – number of cases 300, the refund money a little more of 4.300.000 Euros equivalent in AMD. Thus, analyzes show that we are in a rather favorable situation in this sense. However this does not mean that we shall be satisfied with our work and refrain to undertake corresponding measures to improve the situation,” said Mr. Manukyan.
According to the minister it is not correct that after such decisions of supranational instances it should be viewed from the aspect of responsibility of a definite judge or other subject. It is not correct and is inadmissible from the aspect of the European Law. “Our analyzes also referred to this topic; we did not find any country member of the Convention, which provides for the judges’ financial responsibility for such cases,” noted Hovhannes Manukyan, who had been the Chairman of the Cassation Court in 2005-2008.
It is worth mentioning that the Cassation Court denied only of these three cases (“Baghdasaryan and Zatikyan v Armenia”) under presidency of Hovhannes Manukyan. The denials of the other two cases by the Cassation Court were one month before Hovhannes Manukyan’s assuming the office.
