As of 20 August, candidates for Constitutional Court judge are:
- Nominated by the RA President, Artur Vagharshyan (his candidature was nominated on 15 May, 2019, the National Assembly rejected on 29 May, 2019).
- Nominated on behalf of the Government, Vahram Avetisyan, who refused his candidacy.
- Nominated by the General Assembly of Judges, Yervand Khundkaryan.
It should be reminded that at the regular general meeting of RA judges held on 31 July, 2020, as a result of summarizing the voting results of the candidate for a judge of the Constitutional Court, the following was recorded:
- Number of registered participants: 194
- The total number of ballots: 194
- Number of invalid ballots: 11
- Number of ballots cast in favor of Yervand Khundkaryan: 145
- Number of ballots cast in favor of Arman Kurekhyan: 38
It should be noted that Iravaban.net had made a written inquiry to the Head of the Judicial Department Karen Poladyan, asking to provide copies of the election protocols held during the general meeting of judges, copies of samples of all ballots. It should be noted with regret and surprise that 20 days later we have not received the answer to the letter, which raises doubts, about which a separate article will be published in the near future.
According to our information, Judge Arman Kurekhyan also applied to the Judicial Department to receive the protocols drawn up as a result of the voting. However, without receiving an answer, he submitted an application for recount of the voting results in his presence.
Arman Kurekhyan had self-nominated for the position of a candidate for a judge of the Constitutional Court.
Here is the information on the property and income of Arman Kurekhyan and Yervand Khundkaryan.
Let’s move on to Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s point of view on the judicial system.
“The time has come to carry out surgical interventions in the judicial system.” The Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan mentioned this in his speech on 20 May, 2019, speaking at the Government session about the judicial system. He mentioned 5 points for expressing that process, the first 2 of which were:
«1. All judges in Armenia must be subject to, so to speak, vetting. In other words, the public should have complete information about a judge’s political connections and background, property status, status as a judge and his/her activities, personal and professional characteristics in the previous period.
“All judges, authors of decisions with gross violations of citizens’ rights that are approved by the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, must resign, leave or be removed from office.
That part in the video is from 6:45
It should be noted that a year later, the so-called “vetting” among judges has not yet taken place in Armenia.
As for the 2nd point, a question arises: If all judges who according to the ECtHR judgments have permitted gross violations should resign, leave or be removed from office, why does the judiciary vote in favor of a judge in whose proceedings there were at least 13 cases, which were taken before the ECtHR, and the latter made decisions against the Republic of Armenia
In addition, Article 13 of the draft law “On Making Amendments to the Constitutional Law” Judicial Code of the Republic of Armenia” stipulates that an amendment will be made to Article 112 of the mentioned law, according to which ․
“1․1. A person may not be appointed a judge of the Anti-Corruption Court and Anti-Corruption Court of Appeal:
2) who, being a judge or a former judge, has received a severe reprimand during the last five years, a ban on being included in the list during the regular replenishment of the list of candidates for promotion, for a period of one year, dismissal from the post of chairman of a court or from the position of the President of the Chamber of the Court of Cassation, termination of powers on the grounds of one of the disciplinary sanctions or an act where there is an act issued by an international court or other international instance with the participation of the Republic of Armenia recording a violation of the international obligations of the Republic of Armenia in the field of the protection of human rights.
It turns out that the government, headed by the Prime Minister, wants to see judges with different standards within the framework of reforms in the judiciary, whereas the General Assembly of Judges sees different ones.
Yervand Khundkaryan was appointed a judge of the Civil-Administrative Chamber of the RA Court of Cassation on 8 October, 2008 by the decree of the President of the Republic of Armenia, and on 17 September, 2010 he was appointed the Chairman of the Civil-Administrative Chamber of the RA Court of Cassation.
These 13 cases, which were examined with the participation of Yervand Khundkaryan, in total cost Armenia about 312 thousand euros.
We present them below:
Date of decision in the Court of Cassation Date of ECtHR judgment Name of the case (X v. Armenia) and violated right Compensation assigned by the ECHR 1. 9/09/2009: 31/03/2016: Poghosyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-161735 – Violations of the right to a fair trial and Property rights
Rights to 500 sq.m. unfinished building on 1000 sq.m. land restored և EUR2140 Other expenses reimbursed 2. 31/08/2011: 11/10/2018: Osmanyan and Amiraghyan – http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-186669
All the cases of expropriation of Teghut villagers, about 200 people, few of whom have applied to the ECHR
EUR 12,000 3. 23/09/2009: 24/01/2019: SCHOLZ AG http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-189419 – Violation of the right to a fair trial for violation of the right to go to court EUR 3,600 4. 17/06/2009: 14/02/2019: Alikhanyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-189793 – Violation of property rights (from the cases of Teghut villagers)
EUR 5,200 5. 24/06/2009: 14/02/2019: Mashinyan and Ramazyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-189795 – Violation of property rights (from the cases of Teghut villagers)
EUR 14,000 6. 17/06/2009: 14/02/2019: Vardanyan and Hakhverdyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-189794 – Violation of property rights (from the cases of Teghut villagers)
EUR 14,000 7. 28/10/2009: 14/02/2019: Parsadanyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-189792 – Violation of property rights (from the cases of Teghut villagers)
EUR 8,600 8. 18/06/2009: 14/02/2019: Levon Amirkhanyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-189790 – Violation of property rights (from the cases of Teghut villagers)
EUR 17.200 9. 24/03/2010: 14/02/2019: Ramazyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-189789 – Violation of property rights (from the cases of Teghut villagers)
EUR 10,400 10. 12/08/2009: 14/03/2019: Alikhanyan and Meliksetyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-191547 – Violation of property rights (from the cases of Teghut villagers)
EUR 10,800 11. 21/07/2010: 16/05/2019: Tadevosyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-192982 – Violation of Ownership, Main Avenue Process
EUR 138,958 12. 2/04/2010: 19/03/2019: Tamrazyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-201738 – Violations of the fair trial և property rights
EUR 5,000 13. 28/12/2009: 19/03/2020: Khachaturyan
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-201737 – Violation of property rights – illegal deprivation of property for the needs of the state and society
EUR 71,000
