Lawyers Demand All the Documents and Materials Concerning Harsnaqar Case

Right 31 July, 2012 21:29

27.07.2012- Police issued a message on its official website (www.police.am), entitled “Necessary Clarification”. Not having the intention to be plunged into any controversy, but at the same time, realizing the importance of the right - the universal principles recognized by civilized nations and strengthened by the declaration of the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, by the Constitution and Criminal Lawsuit Code, inferring from the imperative of supreme public interest, we are obliged to reveal the actual development process and the chronology of the recent well known events, giving proper groundings, and, most importantly, to prevent the further possible misrepresentation of the facts and legal provisions.
Thus, on 10.07.2012, we- lawyers Lusine Hakobyan and Tigran Yegoryan, receiving respective authorizations from Vahe Avetyan’s father, Garnik Avetyan, and guiding in accordance to Article 80 of Criminal Lawsuit Code, on the very next day, 11.07.2012, submitted an application to the Police investigative office of Especially Important Cases of Criminal Cases Department, with a request to recognize Garnik Avetyan as the successor of Vahe Avetyan.
A corresponding application and certificates confirming our authority, signed by Garnik Avetyan, have been presented. Therefore, since the very moment, the victim’s was a close relative's desire to be recognized as a successor did exist, and nothing was preventing the authorized body to make a decision as soon as possible.
But the latter preferred another way of acting. Not receiving any response on 18.07.2012, we called the head of the investigative team- investigator Ruben Mkrtchyan, who informed that in order to recognize us as the representatives of the victim’s successor, he needs Garnik Avetyan’s request.
We informed, that whatever we have submitted is the mentioned request, and that we’ll submit the application, concerning our participation in the case, after recognizing Garnik Avetyan as the successor of the victim. Investigator R. Mkrtchyan replied, that accepts T. Yegoryan’s view, but they don’t work that way, and demanded that Garnik Avetyan himself should submit an application, to which we responded that the submitted request is the result of the task given to them by Garnik Avetyan and it must be considered as a request submitted by G. Avetyan. After long debates, we asked to reply to the application in a written form.
Not receiving any reply, on 19.07.2012 we submitted a respective complain to the Prosecution office, demanding to take control over the authorized body which conducts the case, in order to ensure in the legality and to exclude the arbitrariness of the investigative body.
On 20.07.2012, R. Mkrtchyan called us and wondered whether we are going to bring the application on becoming the successor of the victim, written by G. Avetyan, to which we responded that we are waiting for the response of the application submitted on July 11. About 5 minutes later, A. Ayvazyan, the head of the supreme department of R. Mkrtchyan, who accused us in delaying the process. In response we wondered, what does prevent them from recognizing Garnik Avetyan as the successor of the victim according to the request submitted by his authorized bodies. A. Ayvazyan replied, that in that case they know what to respond and to whom.
On 23.07.2012 investigator R. Mkrtchyan called to Garnik Avetyan and informed that is going to recognize him as the successor of the vistim on July 24, but he has not been recognized as the successor of the victim on the mentioned day.
On 25.07.2012 Investigator R. Mkrtchyan called Garnik Avetyan and informed that he can come to the General Investigative department at 17.45. Garnik Avetyan, accompanied by us, went to the Department at 18.00 and tried to contact to R. Mkrtchyan, but the latter didn’t reply for a while to our, lawyers, and Garnik Avetyan’s phone calls.
The police duty called somewhere, talked on the phone and reported that R. Mkrtchyan is not in his office, after which, I, L. Hakobyan, called investigator R. Mkrtchyan and the investigator finally replied to the phone call. I, Lusine Hakobyan, informed that we are waiting for him at the entrance. Investigator R. Mkrtchyan replied that he’ll order a pass for Garnik Avetyan, and offered us to wait outside.
We’ve informed investigator R. Mkrtchyan, that our client wants to enter the building onlyaccompanied by us, but Mkrtchyan responded: “ Let Avetyan come upstairs, we’ll discuss.” In order to to delay, we explained Garnik Avetyan that he can go upstairs and demand the presence of his lawyers.
Only 2 hours after Garnik Avetyan’s entrance to the building, we were invited to the investigator’s office, where we’ve been present in the process of Garnik Avetyan’s testifying. Note, that on the 25th of the same month we did receive the written reply of the investigator, to the request submitted on 11.07.2012, where the same claims of the investigator were composed in the written form
It was not clear, why was it necessary to compose and send that note, on the whole, when the date to response to the request has been expired long ago, and on the 23rd when the response note was send by the investigator, Garnik Avetyan has already been invited to the General Investigative Departmentm concerning becoming the successor of the victim.
Besides that, on 25.07.2012, we’ve presented an interference to get acquainted with the case materials and to receive the photocopies of respective documents.
Investigator R. Mkrtchyan, getting acquainted with the application, replied, that he’ll allocate the asked copies at 14.00 of the next day, but on the mentioned day, investigator Mkrtchyan again didn’t respond to neither our calls, not the massages, and on July 27, in response to the next call, reported that he’ll respond to the submitted interference in a written form and demanded to, since then, keep in touch with him only through letters. Till today, that documents are not being allocated against the demand of the law.
According to the demands of criminal lawsuit, grounded decision is being made, in case of complete or partial refusal to the interference, and in case of satisfying, that the body conducting the investigation allocates the copies of the allowed materials or gives the opportunity to get acquainted with those, based on which a record is made.
Now it’s not clear, what did make Investigator R. Mkrtchyan to refuse to implement the interference, which has already been satisfied by him- the official, in an oral form. What did make him to decide to give written response, delaying our acquaintance with the documents for few more days.
As to the claim, that the lawyers can’t perform an interference until the approval of the lawsuit state by the set order, than it too, brings up an uncertainty, since we haven’t submitted any interference.
Not referring to many concerning and non-concerning articles of the Criminal Lawsuit Code, referring to the appeal of making long declarations, we want to present the following simple truth in a more comprehensive language for the public.
The right to live is a right guarantied by the Constitution and international right, and with which the government, in this case the Investigative body, is obliged to provide, particularly in cases of murders, a productive investigation. As it’s already known form the content of the legal documents, as well as from the right of the case law of the of International Judicial Courts, a component for productive investigation, concerning the violence of the right to live, is also considered the legal opportunity of the victim to participate in the lawsuit in the frames of the law.
Thus, the investigator r the investigative team was obliged to involve the successor of the victim in the mentioned case, from the moment of the initiation of the case. The police not only continually avoids from this imperative, but also for a while, in order to justify their way of acting, tried to cling to the fact, citing various articles, that we didn’t submit a respective application by Garnik Avetyan.
Turns out, that the police wasn’t aware that the close relative of the dead wants to be involved in the case? In that case, what is the reason, that it didn’t immediately respond to our application? If it was submitted by individuals who don’t have the authorization to act on behalf of Garnik Avetyan, as, by mistake, claims the police, then it clearly showed the officer’s father’s will to be involved in the lawsuit actions, in the form of certificate.
Any structure demonstrating vigilance towards the investigation of the violation of the killed officer’s living right, has to immediately response to such manifestation of will, providing all the possible conditions, in advance granting Garnik Avetyan a lawsuit status, also having aims of increasing the public confidence and the productivity of the investigation.
Otherwise, it’s not possible to understand anything from the response of this important state body, except for “don’t tell us what to do”. In response to the many lawsuit articles cited by the police, it should be observed that the police generally has not perceived , that those are only to provide the requirement of the above mentioned imperative, but not to appologize like a student who has not done the homework. What does the police actually try to conceal?
• The fact, that the individual has received serious , life- incompatible bodily injuries on 17.06.2012, while his father has been recognized as the victim’s successor only on 25.07.2012
• The fact, that during all this time, the investigative body, sending the case like a ball here and there (first to the investigative subdivision of the MoD, and later from the same subdivision to the Criminal Case Department), being too busy, didn’t have several minutes to recognize Garnik Avetyan as the successor of the victim back from 29.06.2012.
• The fact, that instead of putting efforts and resources in the investigation, issues long announcements, that are full of ironic and defiant stylish locutions.
• Instead of allocating the photocopies of the materials, asked with our inference for several days in a row, organized PR shows of the Criminal Lawsuit Code knowledge, not forgetting as well to respond to the media, which has critical attitude towards their way of acting, with evaluations inappropriate to the police.
Eventually, from those responses, it’s not even clear what does the Republic Police have to do with the investigative system, if that function is not dependent on the police function.
It becomes clear from the response actions and announcements of the investigative body, that referring to many articles of the Criminal Lawsuit Code, it only wanted to conceal the continuous violations of the rights of the victim’s successor during its actions.
Such disregard towards our demand (concerning the case of a great public resonance) for providing a more productive investigation is incompatible with the high quality, repeatedly sounded assurances of the police about providing a public investigation of the case. We declare, that in any case we are not going to step back from our intention to have a public investigation of the case, and we recommend the same to the police. As a first step, we demand to immediately provide us with all the documents and materials concerning the case, with which, according to the Criminal lawsuit Code, we have the right to get acquainted.