The diplomatic passport is a document awarded to high-ranking officials and families of diplomats by the Foreign Ministry of Armenia. Spokesman of the Foreign Ministry of Armenia, Tigran Balayan informed recently that 254 diplomatic passports had been canceled.

Most people were governmental officials or family members of governmental officials who were not lawful to have been awarded with diplomatic passports. For example, family members of Serzh Sargsyan and Robert Kocharyan had such passports. This was informed about in the Anti-Corruption Blog.

Without relinquishing the role of those who obtained a diplomatic passport illegally, yet evidently the blame falls mainly on the structure that had awarded those passports, i.e.  the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia. According to this, “Veles” human rights NGO filed a report on the crime to the Prosecutor General of Armenia, by which requesting to initiate a criminal case and to subject to criminal liability those who awarded the diplomatic passports thus abusing their official powers.

The crime report is attached.

Հաղորդում հանցագործության մասին

Continue reading at https://acblog.am/?p=2111&lang=en | AntiCorruption

In 2007 the United Nations General Assembly resolved to observe 15 September as the International Day of Democracy—with the purpose of promoting and upholding the principles of democracy—and invited all member states and organizations to commemorate the day in an appropriate manner that contributes to raising public awareness.

The preamble of the resolution affirmed that:

…while democracies share common features, there is no single model of democracy and that democracy does not belong to any country or region…

…democracy is a universal value based on the freely-expressed will of people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems, and their full participation in all aspects of life.

WARSAW, 13 September 2018 – More must be done to promote the participation of under-represented groups in political decision making if we are to ensure effective, truly democratic governance and societies, Ingibjörg Sólrún Gísladóttir, Director of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), said today, ahead of tomorrow’s International Day of Democracy.

Making sure that all members of hitherto marginalized or excluded groups have a genuine say in how they are governed is the most effective way to strengthen democracies, she said.

“Ensuring the participation of representatives from all segments of and groups in society is the surest way to strengthen both the effectiveness of and the support for democratic systems,” the ODIHR Director said. “First, the broader the nature of participation in decision-making, the greater the pool of talent and ideas available, and this benefits us all. Second, increasing the breadth of inclusion in real decision-making can only increase the level of buy-in among all members of society.”

Noting that that this year marks the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Gísladóttir highlighted that the document enshrined the principle that we all have the right to take part in the government of our countries. But the further promotion of these rights is dependent on removing barriers to participation by groups that have suffered from being sidelined in the past. The inclusion of under-represented groups should go beyond numbers, she said, and focus on creating real space and opportunities to have a genuine impact.

“Current barriers to political participation must be swept away. Meaningful access to decision-making processes must be guaranteed for Roma and Sinti, who have long suffered from discrimination and exclusion in our societies; for women, who remain under-represented in democratic decision-making bodies, to the detriment of all; for young people, who must be given the opportunity to contribute and buy in to the democratic systems they are inheriting,” the ODIHR Director said. “Ensuring the ability of all segments of society, of all groups, to participate makes our societies more truly democratic, and so can only make them stronger.”

Gísladóttir said that indicators suggest, for example, that today’s youth – the largest young generation ever by numbers – are less engaged in political processes than previous generations, and are beginning to question democratic systems at an alarming rate. Unresponsive institutions and systemic barriers to youth participation and influence are often cited as major contributors to this decline in participation.

https://www.osce.org/odihr/395264

The “Veles” non-governmental organization received a letter from the Special Investigative Committee of Armenia (SIS), which rejected an appeal from the chairwoman of the organization, Marina Poghosyan, that she was a victim of the events of March 1st.

The “Veles” NGO supported a few citizens who appealed to the head of the SIS, asking that they be recognized as having suffered from the events of March 1st. Robert Kocharyan and several others overthrew the country’s constitutional order (according to the appeal) and they limited the right of Armenian citizens to gather in peaceful protests, causing moral damage.

Leading investigator from the SIS Investigation Department of Crimes of General Character, Hrachya Musheghyan, accepted in the decision that the citizens, in their appeal, “correctly stated that the ones who uphold and keep the system of the Armenian constitution are the citizens of Armenia, therefore, regardless of how the system was violated and whether the citizens’ rights were violated or limited due to that, every citizen truly was a victim of that crime, suffering moral damage.”

The leading investigator also noted that the body to carry out proceedings does not have the ability to recognize the entire people as victims, since that is “unreasonable, impossible, and does not come from the demands of the law.”

Chairwoman of the “Veles” NGO Marina Poghosyan’s lawyer, Davit Gyurjyan, is preparing a judicial complaint against the decision made by the SIS.

Below is the video prepared by the Public Television Channel with more details about the SIS decision.

https://www.facebook.com/275684379257051/videos/2418839781692338/

http://acblog.am/?p=879&lang=en

The United Nations Convention against Corruption is one of several legally binding international anti-corruption agreements. It requires state parties to the treaty to implement several anti-corruption measures that focus on five main areas: prevention, law enforcement, international cooperation, asset recovery, and technical assistance and information exchange.

Armenia has ratified the convention in 2007.  Full text of the convention is available here.

http://acblog.am/?p=780&lang=en

The Former Deputy Chief of RA Police, Hunan Poghosyan, is well-known to the public from the events of 2016, when the patrol service regiment was captured. At that time the police remained without a permanent “mouthpiece,” as a result of hostage taking of Yerevan police chief, Valeri Osipyan. Hence, it was Hunan Poghosyan who was calling for vigilance to the people and talking to journalists on Khorenatsi street.

With this article we want to expose Hunan Poghosyan to the public from another perspective: that is how three years ago with his signature the police had invaded the RA citizen’s house and made a secret recording based on a fraud.

What happened:

A criminal case was instituted against human rights activist Marina Poghosyan in 2015 for selling the house of a Canadian-Armenian Arpi Meras. Within the framework of the case, the police organized an “Internal observation” operation, during which officers broke into the house of Marina Poghosyan, making video recording, as well as secretly recording Poghosyan in an open-air café. The “Internal observation” (Nerkin Ditum in Armenian) operation is a type of search when the citizen is not informed about secret recordings. This operation is within the law only if the citizen is recognized as accused. However, this method is not applicable to all the accused. In fact, the “Internal observation” operation is not a frequently used one; the police use this measure when facts relevant to the case should be obtained and when such facts cannot be achieved otherwise.

When police broke into Marina Poghosyan’s personal space, she was not an accused in the case, moreover she did not even give a testimony. Her house was invaded due to the following sentence written in the motion of Hunan Poghosyan: “Taking into account that Marina Poghosyan participated in the crime and conceals this information from the investigation…” Once again, we want to stress the fact that Marina Poghosyan has not been interrogated yet when this motion was written.

Argument-counterargument:

-The citizen’s right to apartment immunity was violated. In the house of a person without a “status of an accused” was implemented the “Internal observation” operation, the results of which eventually were recognized as useless for the case. The Prosecutor’s Office claims, that the police acted according to the motion that was signed by Hunan Poghosyan.

-In the café, as well as in any public space, the police cannot implement the “Internal observation” operation. According to the Law of “Operative Investigative Activity,” the “Internal observation” is carried out at the place of residence of a citizen. The Prosecutor’s Office states that the word “building” is used in the law, so it is possible to record in the café as well. As a response to this, M. Poghosyan handed a copy of the law to the Prosecutor’s Office, where it is listed what can be considered as citizen’s place of residence; café is not in the list.

-The citizen’s right of a fair trail was violated. Police documents were made retroactively. M. Poghosyan was recorded in her home and in café on 11 September 2015. According to the documents, the permission to record was issued on the same day, hours before the actual recordings. How could the police predict when and in which café M. Poghosyan would be in order to pre-petition for making recoding there?

-The presumption of innocence was violated. M. Poghosyan, who was not yet interrogated was presented as “a participant of the crime.” in the motion of H.Poghosyan.

What will happen in the end:

Marina Poghosyan filed a report against Hunan Poghosyan about the abovementioned crime. The investigate authority decided not to file a criminal case. A complaint against this decision was submitted to the court. Now this complaint is in the Court of Appeal. If the court satisfies the motion, a criminal case will be brought against H. Poghosyan on charges of false information.

If the Court of Appeal does not satisfy the petition, M. Poghosyan intends to apply to the Court of Cassation, and then if this fails to apply to the European Court; based on the right to fair trial, the presumption of innocence and the violation of the right to apartment immunity.

In order to understand the picture accurately, it should be emphasized that the citizen who was secretly recorded by police in her house is a human rights activist by profession and could have had interesting information for the law enforcement agencies. Accordingly, all the facts were adapted and falsified to satisfy the curiosity of the Prosecutor’s Office and the Police. The fraudulent criminal case against Poghosyan was proved in the Yerevan City Court of General Jurisdiction, which recognized Marina Poghosyan as innocent, “shattering” the accusation brought by the Prosecutor’s Office. Moreover, the Prosecutor’s Office of the RA has not even appealed the verdict, in essence, agreeing that the case against Poghosyan was initially false.

http://acblog.am/?p=882&lang=en

On the initiative of “Veles” NGO, four citizens, Marina Poghosyan, Zaruhi Hovhannisyan, Arman Gharibyan and Elena Adamyan applied to the Special Investigation Service to ask them to recognize them as victims in the frame of the criminal case initiated against the second president of Armenia, R. Kocharian who is charged with conspiring to overthrow the country’s constitutional order. On March 1, 2008 R. Kocharyan announced a state of emergency and army subdivisions entered Yerevan. As a result hundred thousands of citizens were deprived their right to peaceful assembly. After this initiative many citizens are sending same kind of applications to the Special Investigation Service asking to recognize them as victims.