The first court hearing in the case of confiscation of allegedly illegally acquired property of Gagik Ghazinyan, former Dean of the YSU Faculty of Law and former member of the RA Justice Council, and persons affiliated with him, took place in the Anti-Corruption Court, presided over by Judge Rudolf Avagyan.

The plaintiff’s representative in this case is Arevik Avoyan, prosecutor of the Department for Cases of Confiscation of Illegally Acquired Property, while advocates Arsen Hovhannisyan and Gevorg Virabyan were involved as representatives of the defendants in the case. They were against video recording of the session on their part.

Advocate Arsen Hovhannisyan made a motion at the beginning of the session, which related to a short-term postponement of the case examination. The plaintiff’s representative objected, stating that the basis and subject of the claim should be presented at the session, and this does not present an obstacle for postponement. The court rejected the motion, and the session continued.

According to Iravaban.net, prosecutor Arevik Avoyan presented the basis and subject of the claim.

She noted that in 2021, the prosecutor’s office received operational data regarding the existence of grounds to start an examination of Gagik Ghazinyan’s properties, and it was revealed that the former Dean of the YSU Faculty of Law, elected as a lawyer-scientist of the Justice Council by the RA National Assembly from September 12, 2013, Gagik Ghazinyan and his family members own a large amount of immovable and movable property, and there are affiliated legal entities.

On December 1, 2021, a decision was made to start an examination of the properties belonging to Gagik Ghazinyan, setting the period from September 12, 2013, to the end of the examination as the period to be examined. Subsequently, in 2024, a decision was made to set a new examination period, including the period from January 1997 until the end of the examination.

In 2024, an application was submitted to the court regarding the application of preliminary security measures for the claim, which was satisfied. His son, David Ghazinyan, was prohibited from disposing of immovable property located in Ashtarak community of Aragatsotn region and in Yerevan. In addition, an arrest of 259 million 916 thousand 929 drams was placed on the properties of Gagik Ghazinyan and Karine Shahbazyan (wife).

“The examination revealed that the latter, as well as Gagik Ghazinyan’s sons who are in first-degree interconnectedness relations with him, his brother, have acquired a number of immovable and movable properties, participations in legal entities, which have not been justified by their legal income. Considering that these affiliated persons did not have that much income for the acquisition of property and for making expenses, Gagik Ghazinyan has been considered the real beneficiary of the properties,” said the prosecutor.

According to the presented claim, the following properties belonging to Gagik Ghazinyan in the sense of the law and having an illegal origin are subject to confiscation:

• 48.1% of the immovable property registered in the name of David Ghazinyan located at Aragatsotn region, community Ashtarak, village Artashavan, Yerevan-Aparan highway second lane 4, the market value of 100% of which amounts to from 118 million 710 thousand drams to 145 million 89 thousand drams, the average market value of the illegal part being 63 million 379 thousand drams.

According to the expert’s conclusion, from June 2008 to July 2010, the total construction work value of a 454.8 square meter residential house and a fence with a surface of 31.9 can amount to from 81 million 250 thousand to 99 million 200 thousand drams.

It was noted that on July 30, 2020, Gagik Ghazinyan donated the mentioned residential house in Aragatsotn region to his son, David Ghazinyan, and that property continues to be viewed as belonging to Gagik Ghazinyan.

• 93.01 part of the immovable property registered in the name of David Ghazinyan at Yerevan, Kanaker-Zeytun, Babayan Street, the market value of which is 745 million 740 thousand drams, the market value of the illegal part is 770 million 200 thousand 272 drams.

Presenting the pre-history of the property acquisition, it was noted that in 2002, Lyova Ghazinyan, Gagik Ghazinyan’s brother, acquired the 0.08 ha land area of the mentioned property from Narine Tevosyan for 10 million: “Considering that Lyova Ghazinyan, Gagik Ghazinyan’s brother, when concluding transactions on his behalf, was represented by Gagik Ghazinyan’s son, David Ghazinyan, by power of attorney, and the mansion at the mentioned address was subsequently transferred to Gagik Ghazinyan’s wife, then to his son, on the basis of donation, in the sense of the law, Gagik Ghazinyan has been considered the real beneficiary of this land plot and the improvements made on the land plot.

The income of Lyova Ghazinyan and his wife, Mari Tumikyan, was only sufficient to make expenses directed to their minimum consumer basket, and they did not have other monetary means, Gagik Ghazinyan also did not have legal income to acquire the 0.08 ha land area.”

According to the expert’s conclusion, the total value of construction works of the residential house amounted from 74 million 910 thousand drams to 91 million 560 thousand drams.

The competent authority has applied proportionality for each year, found that 19 million 28 thousand drams have been spent for the construction of the residential house, of which 18 million has not been justified by Ghazinyan’s legal income.

The plaintiff’s representative stated that in 2002, David Ghazinyan donated the mentioned land plot to Lyova Ghazinyan’s wife, Mari Tumikyan, the latter was given a construction permit, it was put into operation in 2005, a residential house with dimensions of 536.1 square meters was built.

In the same year, a 0.064 ha land plot located at the intersection of Babayan-Ulnetsi streets was acquired in the name of Tumikyan for 10 million drams. According to the plaintiff’s representative, the total average value of the construction of the residential house amounted to from 83 million 235 thousand drams to 76 million 39 thousand drams, of which the belonging of Gagik Ghazinyan’s legal income has not been justified, 91.4 percent of that residential house has been considered illegal.

• At the same time, 206 million 297 thousand 984 drams are demanded as a remainder of illegal monetary means, and 52 million 775 thousand 679 drams, which is not justified by the person’s legal income, has an illegal origin, it is not possible to confiscate, as it has been transferred to a bona fide acquirer during 1997-2024 or it is not possible to identify.

Summarizing her speech, the prosecutor asked to make a decision to confiscate from Gagik Ghazinyan and Karine Shahbazyan as illegally acquired property in favor of the Republic of Armenia:

1. 206 million 297 thousand 984 drams as a remainder of illegal monetary means, and 52 million 775 thousand 679 drams, which has an illegal origin, it is not possible to confiscate, as it has been transferred to a bona fide acquirer during 1997-2024 or it is not possible to identify.
2. From David Ghazinyan, property belonging to Gagik Ghazinyan in the sense of the law, to confiscate in favor of the Republic of Armenia the immovable property of Ashtarak community of Aragatsotn region, in case of impossibility to confiscate from Gagik Ghazinyan the average market value of the property: 131 million 899 thousand 500 drams, the immovable property of Babayan Street, Kanaker-Zeytun, Yerevan city, in case of impossibility to confiscate from Gagik Ghazinyan the average market value of the property: 828 million 600 thousand drams.

Advocate Arsen Hovhannisyan asked what was the basis for assuming that the data received from the NSS are operational data, the plaintiff’s representative referred to the concept of operational data available in the law, noted that as a result of checking these data, an internal conviction and suspicion were formed, on the basis of which the decision to start an examination was made.

The defendants’ representative insisted again that they do not see in the available data the possibility that the prosecutor’s office could make a reasonable assumption, noting that the examination performed by the NSS is an operational-investigative measure, the prosecutor said that the bodies implementing OIM are defined by law, and the NSS is also in that list.

To the advocate’s question whether the competent authority knows what kind of operational measures have been implemented, the prosecutor said that she cannot answer that question, as according to the law “On Confiscation of Illegally Acquired Property”, the competent authority and the prosecutor do not have the authority to find out exactly what measure has been implemented by the body performing OIM.

The other representative of the defendants, advocate Gevorg Virabyan, inquired from the plaintiff’s representative whether it is not known from the certificate given by the NSS what measures have been implemented and what has been the basis, the plaintiff’s representative again noted that the competent authority does not have an inspection function, and since the letter has been given by a state body, the presumption of legality works.

There was a question and answer session between the parties regarding the grounds for filing a lawsuit in court, conducting an examination, and other issues.

The defendants’ representatives asked the plaintiff to provide the working file of the calculations made. The next session in the case will take place on May 17.

Mariam Shahnazaryan