Freedom of Assembly and Association
On December 1, 2017 the RA Administrative Court recommenced the proceedings in protester Vahram Petrosyan’s case and appointed a day for pronouncing the decision.
In regard to the counter-claim, T. Siradeghyan insisted that the assembly was peaceful; hence, the Police had to support the assembly. And the police officers had to show up, regardless of the fact whether they were in uniforms or not.
The video submitted by the Respondent is to be examined at the upcoming hearing of the case of the Mashtots Avenue demonstrator
On November 8, 2017, the hearing of Geghetsik Tonoyan, the Mashtots Avenue demonstrator, started at the RA Administrative Court.
There is a need to examine evidence for the case of demonstrator Vahram Petrosyan. The verdict has not been pronounced
Today the Court announced the resumption of the proceedings of the case. There is a need to examine the evidence within the frameworks of the proceedings.
Questioned police officer insists that he personally demanded that protestor V. Petrosyan left the traffic section of the street
On October 6, 2017 the RA Administrative Court questioned the police officers involved as witnesses in protestor Vahram Petrosyan’s case.
On September 8, 2017 the RA Administrative Court resumed examining the case of V. Petrosyan, who took part in the protest in Mashtots Avenue in March 2016.
On May 30, 2017 Sari Tagh district protestor Hrachya Boyajyan’s defense attorney Arayik Zalyan, lawyer at HCA Vanadzor, filed with the European Court of Human Rights an application on his illegal arrest and detention.
The court found only one of Shahen Harutyunyan’s demands urgent and fined him 150.000 AMD for not notifying of other assemblies
Today, on September 6, 2017 the RA Administrative Court partially granted the RA Police claim against Shahen Harutyunyan by recording only one offence and fined Sh. Harutyunyan 150.000 AMD. Note that the RA Police demanded that he was held liable under Article 180.1(1) for holding assemblies and marches on March 17-20, 2017 without notifying the head of community in the manner … Continue reading
Mashtots Avenue protester Tonoyan’s representative motioned to partially suspend the case proceedings
Since no report on any offence under Article 180.1(11), RA Code of Administrative Offences was drafted at the police department and no such report was submitted to the court, T. Siradeghyan motioned to suspend the proceedings on that part. The Court will consider the motion later.
By its letters of June 16 and July 12, 2017, the European Court of Human Rights stated that the ECtHR received the complaints of ‘Sari Tagh’ district protesters Gagik Mikayelyan and Hovhannes Ghazaryan.
Court of Appeals also rejected ‘Electric Yerevan’ participant’s complaint: a complaint will be filed with the Cassation Court (Video)
On July 20, 2017 the RA Court of Criminal Appeals resumed examination of the complaint of ‘Electric Yerevan’ participant Mikayel Kirakosyan and his representative Tatevik Siradeghyan, lawyer at Yerevan office of HCA Vanadzor, and ruled on the case.
In response to T. Siradeghyan’s question on the evidence proving that any order was issued to V. Petrosyan, S. Melikyan mentioned that there was no such evidence, except for the explanations of the police officers.