Today, on 3 March, the Anti-Corruption Court, presided over by Judge Narine Avagyan, is examining the claim of confiscation of illicit property from the former Governor of Syunik Surik Khachatryan and 5 people related to him in favor of the Republic of Armenia.

His wife Loreta Barseghyan, sons Tigran and Trdat Khachatryan, their related persons Vardan Barseghyan, Manvel Malintsyan, Erik Hambardzumyan, Lusine Barseghyan and Norayr Mnatsakanyan appeared in that list. The application is for the confiscation of properties and assets of illegal origin with a value of about 19.1 billion AMD.

The judge said that Gevorg Kocharyan, the Senior Prosecutor of the Department for Confiscation of Property of Illicit Origin of the RA General Prosecutor’s Office, should submit a petition regarding the change of the subject and basis of the lawsuit. According to the prosecutor, there are technical errors in the claim, but they do not change the subject of the claim. Surik Khachatryan’s representative, lawyer Vahagn Grigoryan stated that he does not object to the errors in the basis, but the changes in the subject of the lawsuit should not be subject to examination in court, because the plaintiff can file a claim for confiscation of property, but not decide which property will be confiscated.

In the previous session, the lawsuit regarding the confiscation request presented by the Prosecutor’s Office was published, and today Surik Khachatryan’s representative, lawyer Vahagn Grigoryan, announced that they have 50 pages of objections.

Grigoryan also mentioned that he objects to any changes to point “J” in the statement of claim. It should be noted that in point “J” the Prosecutor’s Office asks the court to satisfy the monetary demand of this lawsuit both from the legal properties owned by Surik Khachatryan or parts of those properties justified by legal income, including the rights of the claim arising from the provision of loans mentioned in point “F” of the petition, as well as on from the property which is registered in the name of other persons, but according to the law belonging to Surik Khachatryan.

“This is not such a demand that the court should have accepted into the proceedings from the beginning and examined that there should be changes after that. At the previous court session, we verbally stated that point “J” is not subject to examination at all,” Grigoryan said.

The court also proposed to discuss the petition submitted by “Armbusinessbank” CJSC, by which the latter requests to be involved in the judicial process as a third party that does not present independent claims. The Prosecutor’s Office had received the motion, but Khachatryan’s representative had not. It is stated in the petition that a ban was set on one of the pledged property, as a result of which the rights of the bank as pledgee have been violated, since the latter is unable to obtain satisfaction from the pledged property.

Gevorg Kocharyan noted that they do not object to the involvement of the bank in the judicial process. Vahagn Grigoryan also did not object and added. “At some point, I myself will submit a motion to involve all those persons as a third party, regarding whom the competent body has not submitted a motion and who are not involved at this moment.”

The court decided to adjourn the hearing to make decisions on the motions. The next court hearing was scheduled for 31 March.