The trial of Judge Arusyak Aleksanyan, her assistant Tamara Petrosyan, and lawyer Erik Aleksanyan continued at the Anti-Corruption Criminal Court on January 7. The hearing is presided over by Judge Vahe Dolmazyan.
On October 17, 2022, the Supreme Judicial Council approved the General Prosecutor’s Office’s motions to initiate criminal prosecution and consent to deprivation of liberty against Judge Arusyak Aleksanyan. As part of the same case, lawyer Erik Aleksanyan was also charged under Article 46-441 of the Criminal Code for aiding an official in abusing their authority or influence or exceeding their powers. Tamara Petrosyan, Arusyak Aleksanyan’s assistant, was also charged in this case.
According to the charges, the judge issued an obviously unfair judicial act and abused her official powers. She granted the motion of Erik Aleksanyan, the defense attorney of Sergey Grigoryan (known by the nickname “Faz” and considered a criminal authority), changed his preventive measure, and released him from detention on 2.5 million dram bail. Sergey Grigoryan is a friend of Arusyak Aleksanyan’s brother, Rustam Aleksanyan.
According to Iravaban.net, at the previous court session, defense attorney Yerem Sargsyan had submitted a motion to recognize the investigated factual data in the case as extra-procedural documents.
The prosecutor separately referenced the evidence, statements made by the defendants, and testimonies that supported the prosecution’s speech. It should be noted that defendants Arusyak Aleksanyan and Erik Aleksanyan did not plead guilty during the preliminary investigation and trial and refused to testify.
Defendant Tamara Petrosyan also stated that she does not plead guilty and testified that she received the motion from an office employee in her office. She actually received it at 18:01, but noted 16:01. It was properly assigned to Arusyak Aleksanyan, and no office employee requested the motion’s return.
“On September 17, among other motions, I received a written motion regarding Sergey Grigoryan from an office employee. I received the motion and recorded the time of receipt in the appropriate register as 16:01. In reality, I received the motion at 18:01, but since computers show the time as 6:01 rather than 18:01, due to workload and other factors, I made a technical error, and should have written 18:01; I saw 6:01 and wrote 16:01,” Petrosyan stated.
The prosecutor also addressed the results of operational intelligence measures (OIM): “Through internal surveillance OIM results, it was recorded that on August 25, 2022, Arusyak Aleksanyan conversed with an unknown person via an internet application and stated the following:
‘Well, I said, they say they’re not familiar yet, if possible, I’ll do everything, I said at least bail, right, they said okay, let the hearing happen first, even if they detain him, let them petition so many times that one falls to me, I’ll grant it.'”
On the same day, Judge Armen Shiroyan of “Ajapnyak 1” courthouse examined the motion to apply detention as a preventive measure against Sergey Grigoryan (Faz), which was granted by the court.
“Judge Arusyak Aleksanyan had already intended on August 25, 2022, to achieve by all means the non-application of detention against Sergey Grigoryan, using her influence conditioned by her authority for this purpose. This circumstance was confirmed by the portion of the recorded conversation content according to which she requested bail to be applied, but no positive result was recorded,” said Armen Gevorgyan.
The prosecutor also said that the following day, August 26, a phone conversation took place between Arusyak Aleksanyan and Erik Aleksanyan, during which Arusyak Aleksanyan talked about “detaining” her brother’s friend and receiving the motion during her duty days. According to the prosecutor, all this proves the friendly relations between Sergey Grigoryan and Arusyak Aleksanyan’s brother, Rustam Aleksanyan, about which there is a direct quote, and which substantiates the motive for exceeding authority and issuing an obviously unfair judicial act, guided by Arusyak Aleksanyan’s group interests.
“Evaluating this statement from the perspective of credibility, it must be stated that in the context of failing attempts to apply bail for Sergey Grigoryan, calling the court that administered justice and applied detention as a preventive measure ‘stupid,’ characterizing the application of the preventive measure as ‘detaining brother’s friend,’ and taking various measures aimed at submitting motions for alternative preventive measures and getting any of them assigned to her, it is redundant to speak about the credibility of the statement,” he said.
On August 25, 2022, Arusyak Aleksanyan spoke with her assistant Tamara Petrosyan in her office, during which the following conversation was recorded:
– “Tamar, is it definitely like that when you say written, why did someone else give it, they petitioned to us.”
– “The office girl checked with the chief, said it’s like a detention extension, looks like they’re not transferring.”
– “But we’ve had many, right?”
– “That was Shiroyan’s case, but he was on vacation, that’s why.”
– “No, that time too, there was Arshak’s case. There’s one I want to fall to us, what should I do for that?”
– “Is the judge from our group?”
– “Yes.”
– “I think they need to write a report.”
– “Hm, should I tell Shiroyan? Tamar, develop a mechanism, these new leaders are complete sheep.”
Regarding this conversation, the prosecutor noted: “The content testifies to the presence of Arusyak Aleksanyan’s criminal intent and taking steps to implement it, to carry it out in the most covert way possible.”
In his closing speech, Armen Gevorgyan addressed testimonies of several persons and steps taken by the defendants aimed at getting the motion assigned to the judge.
During the events that took place at that time, Maria Petrosyan, the acting head of the Yerevan Court of General Jurisdiction’s office, was the first witness interrogated in this case. Maria Petrosyan is the person through whom the assignment and reassignment took place.
In her testimony regarding the motion, she said: “I had informed the duty officers at ‘Ajapnyak 1’ courthouse that I would be sending a new motion, and after that, I did not discuss anything with them about that motion. I sent the second assignment immediately upon receiving it. 3-4 days later, Gagik Poghosyan asked whether the sent motion had reached the courthouse or not. It turned out that the motion regarding Sergey Grigoryan had not reached the courthouse.”
Her complete testimony is available here.
“Erik Aleksanyan submitted a motion to the court through Zhirayr Gharagozyan, which was assigned to Judge Arusyak Aleksanyan, but was shortly after reassigned to Armen Shiroyan. This factual data indicates that Arusyak Aleksanyan eventually achieved the implementation of her criminal intent, and the motion submitted by Erik Aleksanyan was assigned to her. However, before that, it is noteworthy that on September 17, Erik Aleksanyan was urged to submit another similar motion through lawyer Zhiro, the same Zhirayr Gharagozyan, to increase the probability of it being assigned to her,” said the prosecutor.
The prosecution maintains that the charges are substantiated, the defendants acted in coordination, and Arusyak Aleksanyan developed possible mechanisms for getting the motion to replace detention with bail assigned to her and obtained necessary information with her assistant.
In the closing speech, the prosecutor also addressed the permissibility of applying bail and the fact that the Criminal Procedure Code does not provide for such possibility.
According to Iravaban.net, the prosecutor motioned to:
- Find Arusyak Aleksanyan guilty under Article 441, Part 2, Points 4 and 5, and Article 482, Part 1 of the Criminal Code.
- Article 441 stipulates: Abuse of authority or influence conditioned by official position or exceeding powers by an official, when 4) committed by a group of officials by prior agreement or 5) negligently caused other grave consequences, is punishable by imprisonment for 4-8 years.
- Article 482, Part 1 stipulates: A judge issuing an obviously unfair verdict, judgment, or other judicial act based on mercenary interest, other personal interest, or group interests is punishable by deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for three to seven years, or restriction of liberty for 1-3 years, or short-term imprisonment for 1-2 months, or imprisonment for 1-4 years.
- Find Erik Aleksanyan guilty under Article 46-441, Part 2, Points 4 and 5 (complicity in alleged actions committed by Arusyak Aleksanyan).
- Find Tamara Petrosyan guilty under Article 441, Part 2, Points 4 and 5, and Article 46-482, Part 1 (complicity).
Details in the videos.
Mariam Shahnazaryan
