The criminal case initiated against “Hrazdan” penitentiary institution employees in the case pertaining to the brawl among convicts on June 25, 2017, was suspended.
D. Kh. and G.A., cellmates in “Hrazdan” penitentiary institution, always had tensed relationship, because D.Kh. kept suggesting that G.A. played cards and the latter refused.
On June 25, 2017, another such incident grew into a quarrel and A. Hayrapetyan, considered to be a crime boss, interfered and decided to “solve the problem by himself”. By the way, neither A. Hayrapetyan, nor his confederates, who also participated in “settling the dispute” were charged in the frame of the criminal case.
In compliance with the charges, D.Kh. and A.G. criminal case was separated from the criminal case on brawl and was sent to Kotayk region General Jurisdiction Court.
Ani Chatinyan, Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor lawyer, protects D.Kh.’s rights in the court. By her petition, on August 14, 2018, D.Kh. was released from detention on bail of AMD 2,000,000.
On December 4, 2018, Ani Chatinyan applied to the RA Prosecutor General’s Office with a note to find out the progress of the criminal case initiated with the purpose of giving the penitentiary institution employees’ action a criminal-legal assessment, whether there were suspects and accused involved in the case and who they were.
Getting no reply for 7 months on end, on July 17, 2019, Ani Chatinyan applied to Prosecutor General with the same matter for the second time. This time the Prosecutor General’s Office responded to the query.
V. Dolmazyan, senior prosecutor at the Department for Supervision over the Investigation of Especially Important Cases of the RA Prosecutor General's Office, informed that the criminal case had been suspended. He refused to provide other details. By the way, with the petition of the same prosecutor, court sessions of D. Kh. and A.G. criminal case are regularly postponed in Kotayk region General Jurisdiction Court.
With regard to giving an assessment to the penitentiary institution employees’ action, it should be mentioned that as noted in our previous publications on this case, in accordance with the indictment, penitentiary institution employees were the first to enter the cell after the quarrel. Nevertheless, the latter did not initiate anything and let the criminal boss A. Hayrapetyan take the quarrel participants to his cell and “deal with the problem by himself”.
Moreover, before that, the penitentiary institution management did not take into proceedings A.G.’s application to be moved to another cell and suspended the progress of the application.
It is a fact that the convict was subjected to beating with the penitentiary institution employees’ permission, which is also recorded in the indictment.
Prosecutor V. Dolmazyan did not inform on what grounds the proceedings of the criminal case initiated against the penitentiary institution employees had been suspended, as according to him, it contained preliminary investigation data not subject to publication.
Apparently, comprehensive, full and objective investigation of the case was not provided and the officials, whose inaction resulted in the incident, remained unpunished.