On January 9, 2025, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered a judgment on the case of “Petrosyan v. Armenia,” emphasizing that the authorities of the Republic of Armenia have violated the right to life and the right to fair trial of the applicant’s son, H. Movsisyan.

The case of “Petrosyan v. Armenia” concerns the tragic death of H. Movsisyan on November 28, 2012 in the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR).

In 2012, while H. Movsisyan was in military service, he was diagnosed with an organic psychopathic-like disorder. During his military service, H. Movsisyan attempted suicide. Despite his mental health problems, he was sentenced to three years in prison on charges of self-mutilation to avoid military service. He was transferred to the Shushi isolation unit of the NKR, where he was later found hanging from a sheet. An official investigation concluded that H. Movsisyan’s death was a suicide. His mother, H. Petrosyan, claimed that the Armenian authorities failed to protect her son’s right to life and did not conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into his death.

Both in domestic courts and in the European Court of Human Rights, the interests of H. Movsisyan’s assignee, H. Petrosyan were defended by the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor, represented by the Organization’s chairman, Artur Sakunts, and the Organization’s former lawyer, Arayik Zalyan.

The ECtHR’s conclusion:

• Violation of Article 2 (Right to life).

The Court found both substantive and procedural violations of Article 2 of the ECHR. In particular, it concluded that:

The Armenian authorities have failed to provide a convincing explanation for Movsisyan’s death in a state-controlled isolation unit, failing to take into account H. Movsisyan’s vulnerability due to mental health problems and his previous suicide attempt.

The investigation into the circumstances of his death was insufficient and inadequate. Necessary efforts had not been made to elucidate the circumstances surrounding the death of her son and to identify any institutional or individual liability.

• Violation of Article 13 (Right to an effective remedy).

The Court decided that the applicant had been deprived of an effective remedy to dispute the State’s actions or inaction. The ECtHR noted:

Procedural obstacles prevented H. Petrosyan from fully participating in the investigation. We cite:

– The applicant encountered numerous obstacles in studying the case materials, participating in the investigation and seeking justice. These obstacles, combined with the lack of transparency and comprehensiveness of the investigation, led her to apply to the European Court of Human Rights in 2015.

The remedies provided for by domestic law were insufficient to establish institutional liability and compensate for the violation of her son’s right to life.

By the judgment of ECtHR, the Republic of Armenia is obliged to pay H. Petrosyan 50,000 Euros as compensation for moral damage.

The ECtHR underlines the fundamental obligation of the Republic of Armenia to protect the rights of persons in detention, especially those with mental health problems. The Court also underlines the importance of conducting effective, transparent and impartial investigations into deaths in state-controlled facilities.

Broader systemic issues, including the need for Armenia to provide affordable and effective remedies for the families of victims and to strengthen oversight mechanisms to prevent similar tragedies in the future.

The work carried out by HCAV within the framework of the case for 13 years:

• Statement of HCA Vanadzor on the demand to initiate a criminal case against the RA Military Prosecutor G. Kostanyan, the former head of the SIS A. Mirzoyan, the former judge S. Aghabekyan of the First Instance Court of General Jurisdiction of Syunik Marz, the investigator of the Ministry of Defense Investigation Service, the supervising prosecutor, and the RA Minister of Defense S. Ohanyan.

• They decided not to unravel the tangled web.

• Suicide without a trace: Mother of a serviceman who died in Shushi prison assures: “I will fight until the end”

• Press conference on the case of Hayk Movsisyan, who died in the Shushi Penitentiary of the NKR

• Artur Sakunts: “I consider Hayk Movsisyan’s case to be an organized murder, which is being covered up by state authorities.”

• Mother of Hayk Movsisyan, who died in Shushi Penitentiary of NKR, demands to be recognized as the legal successor of the victim

• The investigator contradicted himself: the investigation into the case of the young man who died in prison continues

• Mother is not recognized as the legal successor: The unresolved case of Hayk Movsisyan’s “suicide”

• The mother of soldier, who committed suicide was not recognized as the legal successor

• Was the soldier subjected to violence before his death?

• The court rejected the application of the deceased soldier’s mother. The human rights defender considers this absurd.

• The mother of the deceased serviceman Hayk Movsisyan is not recognized as the legal successor of the victim.

• The soldier was drafted, court-martialed, driven to suicide, posthumously exonerated, and then the authorities regretted their actions.

• The Court of First Instance of the Republic of Armenia will soon publish the decision on recognizing Hayk Movsisyan as a victim

• There are signs of violence on the body of Hayk Movsisyan, who was found hanged in prison. Sakunts insists that it was not a suicide.

• The court once again rejected the appeal to recognize Hayk Movsisyan as a victim.

• The mother of the posthumously exonerated serviceman has not been recognized as the legal successor of the victim.

• Hayk Movsisyan’s mother was again not recognized as the victim’s legal successor

• The RA SIS and the RA General Prosecutor’s Office are deliberately obstructing the disclosure of the true circumstances of Hayk Movsisyan’s death

• Hayk Movsisyan: A death case unresolved for 2 years.

• Hayk Movsisyan’s case is being re-examined in the RA Court of First Instance

• Lawyer sees the resolution of Hayk Movsisyan’s case in the European Court

• An objection was filed against the court’s actions in the Hayk Movsisyan case

• Mnatsakan Martirosyan’s decision was annulled, but no penalties have been imposed on him.

• The Judicial Council of Armenia does not observe any violations.

• RA SIS does not provide all materials on Hayk Movsisyan’s case to RA Criminal Court of Appeal

• The appeal filed in the case of Hayk Movsisyan, who died in the Shushi penitentiary, was again rejected

• The Republic of Armenia did not fully recognize the violation of Hayk Movsisyan’s rights