Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor

Shirak Regional Investigative Department of RA Investigative Committee once again refused the petition of representatives of J. Ghukasyan’s successor. J. Ghukasyan died after A. Razgildeyev beat him in Gyumri last year in December.

Artur Sakunts, HCA Vanadzor Chairman and lawyers A. Zalyan and H. Hakobyan, representatives of J. Ghukasyan’s successor, petitioned to conduct investigative and procedural actions on certain conditions of the case. Particularly, they pointed out once again the condition that in the protocol of A. Razgildeyev’sn arrest, “Gyumri city” is mentioned as the place of arrest, but the place of arrest is not specified. Nevertheless, the investigator decided to hand A. Razgildeyev to the Russian military base.  

They mentioned that the criminal case materials had no proof that the RA Investigative Committee representatives and Russian military base representatives had jointly found and arrested  A. Razgildeyev. Moreover, the accused was sent to the Russian military base by the RA Investigative Committee investigator. Since there are no grounds to state that not transferring A. Razgildeyev to the military base would contradict the RF legislation, as previously mentioned by the body conducting the proceedings, they again petitioned to take measures to transfer A. Razgildeyev to the RA appropriate penitentiary institution.  

Representatives of the victim’s successor also petitioned to find out whether proper medical aid had been provided to J. Ghukasyan, what was the procedure in compliance of which A. Razgildeyev had joined the service in Gyumri’s Russian military base, whether procedures and standards were adhered to. In the petition, HCA Vanadzor Chairman and lawyers found it unclear why A. Razgildeyev had not been charged under Article 140 §1 or §2 (murder) of the RA Criminal Code and mentioned that the motive of the crime was not disclosed. 

It should be mentioned that A. Razgildeyev is charged under Article 112 of the RA Criminal Code (Infliction of willful heavy damage to health which negligently caused death). 

By the decision dated July 8, 2019, V. Samvelyan, senior investigator at PIC in the RA Investigative Committee, completely refused the petition considering some actions groundless and others in process or envisaged. 

In particular, with regard to transfering A. Razgildeyev from the military base to the RA penitentiary institution, the investigator did not find it necessary to mention the exact place of arrest in the protocol of arrest and added, “in the same logic, the place should be understood as the building, its type, room, desk and so on”.

The investigator considered groundless to tuch upon the matter of transferring A. Razgildeyev to the RA penitentiary institution and mentioned that the question had been discussed in different instances and exhaustive answers had been given. 

With respect to the charge of A. Razgildeyev, investigator V. Samvelyan claimed that the obtained proofs indicated an action envisaged under Article 112 of the RA Criminal Code  and as long as the motive was not disclosed, “there could be no mention of hooligan or other motives”.

It should be mentioned that on July 19, 2019, A. Sakunts and A. Zalyan appealed Shirak region and RA Criminal Court of Appeal decisions on refusing to transfer A. Razgildeyev to an RA penitentiary institution in the Court of Cassation.