Activities | Legal Support | Legal Support | Rights | Project։ Stability of HCA Vanadzor in the light of democracy and human rights challenges in the Republic of Armenia 2019 | Right to life | Publications | News | Julieta Ghukasyan
Shirak region General Jurisdiction Court has still not provided representatives of J. Ghukasyan’s successor – HCA Vanadzor chairman Artur Sakunts, HCA Vanadzor lawyers Arayik Zalyan and Hayk Hakobyan – with the decision publicized a month ago.
On January 19, 2019, representatives of J. Ghukasyan’s successor appealed the RA Invstigative Committee Shirak region investigative department investigator V. Samvelyan and RA Shirak region Prosecutor V. Mirzoyan’s decisions in Shirak region General Jurisdiction Court. By these decisions, the latter refused to transfer Andrey Razgildeyev – who is accused of murdering Julieta Ghukasyan- from Russian military 102 base to the RA relevant penitentiary institution.
On March 15, 2019, Shirak region General Jurisdiction Court, presided by V. Misakyan, refused the appeal. However, the successor’s representatives have not received the decision on rejecting the appeal even a month after the decision was made.
Judiciary control over pre-judiciary proceedings is an effective remedy of human rights and freedoms and it simultaneously performs the role of reserving the bodies of criminal prosecution, which, in its turn, contributes to the provision of comprehensive, full and objective preliminary investigation of the case. It can be concluded from Article 63 of the RA Constitution and Article 290 of the RA Criminal Procedure Code that while performing judiciary control over pre-judiciary proceedings, the Court is constrained in the meaning of examining the case within reasonable time. Otherwise, the realization of the institute of human rights and freedoms effective remedy’s judiciary control over pre-judiciary proceedings is threatened.
Not having received the Court’s decision, the representatives of J. Ghukasyan’s successor are actually deprived of the possibility to restore the violated rights and freedoms of the victim’s successor by the right to judiciary protection.