No criminal proceedings initiated on human rights defender Marina Poghosyan’s case: HCAV filed a complaint to the Prosecutor’s Office22:07, October 6, 2017 | News, Own news
No criminal proceedings were initiated based on HCA Vanadzor’s report on illegal investigation and search actions against human rights defender Marina Poghosyan.
We were informed of this from the RA Special Investigation Service decision of September 19, 2017.
Note that the ‘Internal watch’ investigation and search action taken against Marina Poghosyan is a type of investigation and search actions through which law enforcement representatives follow the person, control his/her activity in his/her apartment and record the findings. This can be done with and without special technical devices.
Moreover, according to the RA Law on Investigation and Search Actions, investigation and search actions may be taken only when a person is suspected of committing a grave or extremely grave crime, and it is impossible to get the necessary information through any other way.
The court made a decision on taking investigation and search actions against Marina Poghosyan on September 14, 2015 when she was involved in the criminal proceedings as a witness and had no status of a suspect.
Marina Poghosyan learnt about the action taken against her no sooner than in August, 2017, during the trial examination of the criminal case initiated against her illegally.
And in response to Marina Poghosyan’s inquiry of August 17, 2016, A. Asatryan, acting head of the General Department for Criminal Intelligence, RA Police, stated that no ‘Internal watch’ investigation and search action was taken against her.
On August 15, 2017, A. Hakobyan, Colonel of Police and Head of the Internal Security Department of the RA Police, responded to HCA Vanadzor’s crime report to the RA Prosecutor General. He considered it lawful that ‘Internal watch’ investigation and search action was taken against Marina Poghosyan who had no status of a suspect, stating that concepts of “suspect” and “suspected” were not the same.
On August 22, 2017 HCA Vanadzor applied to the RA Prosecutor General’s Office for the second time and expressed its position that the RA Police is not the institution to respond to the crime report addressed to the RA Prosecutor General’s Office and demanded to provide the decision based on the report. Then the decision of the RA Special Investigation Service of September 19, 2017 on refusing to initiate criminal proceedings was received.
In that decision, G. Margaryan, acting investigator of high-profile cases at the RA SIS, saw no elements of crime either in the police actions, or in the actions of HCA Vanadzor Chairman A. Sakunts in terms of false statement under Article 333, RA Criminal Code.
Moreover, he explained the wrong answer A. Asatryan, acting head of the General Department for Criminal Intelligence, RA Police, provided to Marina Poghosyan’s inquiry by the fact that it concerned only the units of the General Department for Criminal Intelligence of the RA Police. It turns out that to get full information, one should apply to separate units of the RA Police one by one which is beyond reasonable thinking.
On October 3, 2017 A. Sakunts, Chairman of HCA Vanadzor, filed a complaint with the RA General Prosecutor’s Office noting that the body conducting the proceedings did not conduct an effective investigation. And involving the human rights defender in criminal prosecution and starting indirect criminal prosecution against him in the absence of any criminal case on false statement aims to put pressure on him to avoid voicing the crime, especially given that the absence of any element of crime is only assumed by the body conducting the proceedings as no relevant investigation was carried out.