It must be clearly understood that during the investigation of the case, major procedural flaws occurred that distorted the very essence of justice. This was stated by Alexander Kochubayev in a conversation with Iravaban.net, referring to the case of Vahagn Vermishyan.

“If Vahagn Vermishyan had committed a crime, there was a criminal procedure code that should have been followed to resolve the issue of his guilt or innocence. This code provided for a clear, unambiguous approach with no alternative.

The case should have been investigated by the Special Investigation Service (SIS). The Criminal Procedure Code left no other option. However, the Deputy Prosecutor General instructed that the case be investigated by the National Security Service (NSS), which is a violation of the investigative jurisdiction rule.

Investigative jurisdiction is one of the general conditions of criminal procedure. Its violation leads to the illegality of all other investigative actions. In these circumstances, discussing the content of the episodes or understanding the issues of guilt or innocence is not very useful. The entire foundation of the case is violated.

The criminal procedure is based on the fruits of the poisonous tree theory. If the tree is poisonous, so is the fruit. If the investigative jurisdiction has been violated, then all evidence obtained by the improper investigator is inadmissible according to this theory.

The difference in which investigator conducted the preliminary investigation is enormous. The operational part of the investigation was uncovered by the NSS, which has been the main guarantee of its one-sidedness. The case has been investigated around one hypothesis: Vahagn Vermishyan is guilty.

If the case had been investigated by the SIS, it would have had a slightly higher standard of independence and objectivity. Although the entire system was already corrupted, the SIS was still a little more independent than the NSS.

This was done to ensure a completely predictable outcome. Interestingly, Artur Poghosyan was the head of the investigative service department. Under his leadership, the case was initiated and investigated. Then he became Deputy Prosecutor General and came to supervise this case. He initiated it, investigated it, and then supervised it. Vahagn Vermishyan’s rights were totally violated.

Regarding operational intelligence measures, Vahagn Vermishyan had nothing to do with the civil contract. He had no connection with Pashinyan. He was an invited specialist to occupy a responsible position. Naturally, Pashinyan should not have had confidence in him, and Vermishyan’s office was wiretapped from the very first day.

When presenting the videos to the court, the prosecution forgot to edit them. Frames from May appeared, although the court gave permission for wiretapping and video recording only in November. This proves that illegal interventions took place against Vermishyan from the very first day of his appointment.

These recordings are the main arguments for Vermishyan’s defense. When we discuss the episodes in substance, we will use these wiretaps and video recordings, which argue that Mr. Vermishyan has nothing to do with any of the alleged incidents,” the advocate noted.

It should be noted that the court of first instance found Vahagn Vermishyan guilty and sentenced him to a total of 8 years in prison. Vermishyan does not plead guilty to any of the charges brought against him and demands acquittal.

Details in the video.