Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor

On January 14, 2019, the first preliminary hearing took place in the RA Administrative Court on the case of Yurik Broyan, who was diagnosed with “light mental abnormality”, recognized fit for military service with limitation and conscripted.   

In the claim submitted to the Court, Y. Broyan and his representative – HCA Vanadzor lawyer S. Soghomonyan – demanded to revoke Central Medical Commission’s decision dated December 4, 2017, on recognizing Y. Broyan diagnosed with “mental deficiency” fit for military service with limitation.

Central medical commission made the decision based on the diagnosis given in “Nubarashen” mental health medical center, whereas the examinations had not been conducted completely and the matter of fitness for military service was impossible to decide.

After an administrative appeal against Central Medical Commission’s decision and its refusal, on December 26, 2018, Y. Broyan and his representative applied to the RA Administrative Court.

Later, S. Soghomonyan petitioned to fill the grounds and subject of the claim pertaining to Central Medical Commsion’s decision dated August 9, 2018, based on which Y. Broyan was conscripted to the RA armed forces on August 11, 2018.

On September 19, 2018, among other documents, S. Soghomonyan demanded from the RA Military Commissariat, Central Medical Commission’s decision that served as a basis for conscripting Y. Broyan. However, the document was not provided.

During the court session that took place on January 14, the Court discussed and upheld the petition and obliged the defendant to provide the Court and the plaintiff with both Central Medical Commission’s decision and complete materials of administrative proceedings initiated against the decision of recognizing Y. Broyan fit.

After finding out the grounds and the subject of the claim, the Court allocated the burden of proving, imposing on the defendant to prove the following conditions, what criteria was applied to determine the level of the plaintiff’s mental retardation and to prove that the plaintiff’s mental retardation is not accompanied by behavioural disorders.

The Court considered the case prepared for the trial and set it on March 21, 2019.