“They held a homey sitting”: what has happened in the Court of Arabkir www.1in.am
Marine Melkonyan, Judge of Court of General Jurisdiction of First Instance of Arabkir and Kanaker-Zeytun Administrative Districts yesterday rejected the motion of Marina Poghosyan, Director of “Veles” non-governmental organisation, on finding as reasonable and retrieving the missed deadline for appealing the judicial act rendered about her.
Marina Poghosyan had a status of a witness and had not been notified about the dismissal of the criminal case, as well as about the appeal brought against the dismissal. She did not take part in the consideration of the appeal, thus neither could appeal the judicial act contradicting her interests. In her motion Poghosyan referred to the decisions of the Court of Cassation which prescribe that a person shall be provided with an opportunity to take part in the consideration of an appeal when the appeal directly concerns the rights and interests of the given person.
We would like to remind, that in July 2015 a criminal case was filed in the Yerevan City Department of the Police of the Republic of Armenia based on the report of Arpi Meras, whereby she blamed Marina Poghosyan for selling the apartment belonging to Meras under the right of ownership without any letter of authorization. On 19 October of the same year the criminal case was dismissed, as Poghosyan submitted to the preliminary investigation body three letters of authorisation certified notarially by which Arpi Meras authorised her to sell her apartment. Hrant Ananyan, advocate of Arpi Meras who was recognised as a victim, appealed the decision on dismissing the criminal case in the Court of General Jurisdiction of First Instance of Arabkir and Kanaker-Zeytun Administrative Districts. Marina Poghosyan was not notified of the consideration of the appeal, she was not a party to the case and did not have an opportunity to take part in the court sitting.
“Further, when the case entered into the court, only then I got acquainted with the materials of the case and saw, that an appeal had been considered concerning my case without my participation and I had missed the deadline for appealing it, as I was unaware of it”: says Marina Poghosyan.
The advocate draws attention to the circumstance that the appeal considered Judge Levon Avetisyan, the secretary of whose sittings has, from 2008 on, been Yelena Karapetyan, wife of Hrant Ananyan, the advocate bringing the appeal. Poghosyan states that this fully provided a ground to Avetisyan to render a decision on self-recusal as he could not consider an appeal brought by Hrant Ananyan, the husband of his secretary.
The advocate notes, that during consideration of the given appeal his wife was on maternity leave and was not the secretary of that sitting. As a response whereto Marian Poghosyan declares: “By being on maternity leave Yelena Karapetyan does not stop being Hrant Ananyan’s wife and judge Avetisyan’s secretary. That is to say, they held a homey sitting on my case without my participation.”
Marina Poghosyan had submitted to the court Levon Avetisyan’s decision on self-recusal in another case. For this decision just the marital relationships of Ananyan with the secretary of the sitting, as well as personal friendship with judge Avetisyan served as a basis.
Pursuant to Article 90 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Armenia, a judge shall be obliged to recuse himself or herself, where he or she is aware of such facts or circumstances which may give reasonable grounds to suspect his or her impartiality in the given case. The grounds for self-recusal shall include also cases, when the judge has preconceived attitude towards a person who is a party, his or her representative, defender.
It is surprising, that Levon Avetisyan refused another case by actually confessing to having preconceived attitude towards advocate Hrant Ananyan, but did not refuse Marina Poghosyan’s case and granted Hrant Ananyan’s appeal to the detriment of Poghosyan.
In conversation with “1in.am” Hrant Ananyan noted that he was in good relations with everybody, and judge Avetisyan was not an exception: “The peculiarities of that case were not the same. Maybe the judge failed to explain successfully the decision on self-recusal, I was against that decision. The secretary of the sitting is not the worker of the judge, he or she obeys the Chief of Staff and his or her possible friendship with the judge is a ground for self-recusal or recusal directly provided for by law. In the given case the fact that previously my wife was the secretary of some of L. Avetisyan’s sittings is not a ground for self-recusal provided for by law.” Ananyan thinks that Poghosyan manipulates his marital relationship with the secretary of the sittings.
Marina Poghosyan sates that judge Avetisyan had a preconceived attitude towards not only Hrant Ananyan, but also towards herself, as she had previously criticized the judge publicly by blaming him for carrying out an order and serving the authorities. Besides, “Veles” non-governmental organisation directed by Poghosyan had signed the common announcement about judge Avetisyan, which had the following content: “By his behaviour not appropriate to a judge and cynical, incorrect behaviour displayed during proceedings judge Levon Avetisyan once again destroys the reputation of the judicial system which is not inspiring confidence and the Republic of Armenia in general.”
“If I where a party to the proceedings, I would recuse myself before the judge just on that ground, as after all this he could have personal animus toward me, but they did their best to consider the appeal without me and to render an illegal decision,”: Poghosyan assures.
By the way, in January of this year Marina Poghosyan proved in the court that the criminal case instituted against her should not initially be considered in Arabkir Investigative Department and the further appeals of the decisions should not be carried out in the court of Arabkir. “Everything is clear to me. From the very beginning they illegally considered the case in Arabkir, as Hrant Ananyan had previously worked as an investigator in Arabkir, his wife was in the court of Arabkir, and this relations would help them to make all the case and decisions were rendered against me in Arabkir Investigative Department and in the court of Arabkir,”: declares Marina Poghosyan.
We would like to note, that while Poghosyan was trying to recover her right to appeal the decision rendered against her in the Court of General Jurisdiction of First Instance of Arabkir and Kanaker-Zeytun Administrative Districts, the criminal case instituted against her was being considered in the Court of General Jurisdiction of First Instance of Kentron and Nork-Marash Administrative Districts. At the next court sitting Poghosyan’s advocate is going to file a motion, and the prosecutor is going to make an accusatory speech. Let us remind, that Marina Poghosyan may face 5-8 years of imprisonment, if she is found guilty in the accusation brought against her (Point 1 of Part 3 of Article 179 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia).
Advocate Hrant Ananyan and Judge Levon Avetisyan are in the photo.
Author: Arman Gharibyan
