Lawyer: Court of Cassation refuses to hear Prosecutor General`s  appeal regarding the detention of Aragatsotn Diocese clergy

ArmInfo. The Court of Cassation of Armenia has refused to accept a complaint filed by Prosecutor General Anna Vardapetyan regarding a case involving the  detention of clergy from the Aragatsotn Diocese of the Armenian  Apostolic Church (AAC), obstruction of lawyers' activities, and   concealment of the detention of the head of the diocese, Bishop  Mkrtich Proshyan.

As lawyer Ara Zohrabyan recalled on his Facebook page, the  investigator initially declined to initiate a criminal case based on  his report, and the prosecutor later confirmed this position by  rejecting his complaint. "At that time, the Criminal Court of General  Jurisdiction of First Instance of Yerevan, presided over by Judge  Tatevik Muradyan, satisfied the filed complaint and ordered the  investigative body to make a procedural decision aimed at addressing  the violations of the applicant's rights, namely, to initiate a  criminal case based on my report. The prosecutor then appealed this  court decision. The prosecutor's complaint was rejected by the  Criminal Court of Appeal, presided over by Judge Vazgen Rshtuni," the  lawyer clarified.

After this, Zohrabyan continued, Prosecutor General Anna Vardapetyan  filed an appeal to the Court of Cassation. "The Cassation Court  decided not to accept the Prosecutor General's appeal for  consideration.  On this matter, the court expressed two important  stances. First, it noted that, according to Article 491 of the  Criminal Code of Armenia, 'obstructing the exercise of a lawyer's  powers, if this manifests itself in preventing the lawyer from  entering any place of detention to meet with their client, is  unlawful.' This provision was interpreted narrowly by the preliminary  investigation body and the prosecutor's office. They assumed that  places of detention are exclusively the premises of penal  institutions or temporary detention facilities, and argued that the  clergy were present at the preliminary investigation body in the  procedural status of witnesses," the lawyer said. At the same time,  Zohrabyan highlighted that the court deemed it important that the  individual was effectively deprived of liberty, regardless of their  formal status, and noted the following: "The court concludes that the  crime report contains a description of factual data indicating that  the mentioned individuals were 'brought in' to the relevant unit of  the Investigative Committee (IC) of Armenia; that is, they were  brought in for questioning against their will. Consequently, in this  case, the relevant unit of the Armenian IC can be considered a place  of detention."

Furthermore, the lawyer noted that the court pointed out that the  applicant's crime report included the fact that lawyers Armine  Fanyan, Marine Farmanyan, and Shushanik Harutyunyan were prevented  from entering the relevant IC unit to meet with their clients.  According to the lawyer, the court stated that under such  circumstances, it remains unclear how the preliminary investigation  body concluded within such a short procedural timeframe that the  report and its attached documents contained no factual data, that the  applicant's arguments were unfounded, and that there was no need to  initiate criminal proceedings. Thus, the court established that the  crime report contained factual data indicating that the body  conducting the proceedings failed to inform the lawyers of the  detainee's location, which was only discovered with the assistance of  staff from the Human Rights Defender's office.

"The court stated that the evidence that no information regarding the  individual's whereabouts or status was provided within a reasonable  period of time, and that such information was only possible through  the intervention of the Armenian Ombudsman's Office, already contains  sufficient factual data to warrant verification. Moreover, the  verification of its accuracy in this case could only be carried out  by initiating criminal proceedings and conducting necessary  procedural and investigative actions," the lawyer concluded.

Recall, on October 15, law enforcement officers detained 13 clergy,  including Bishop Mkrtich Proshyan, head of the Aragatsotn Diocese,  and three laypersons. Criminal proceedings were initiated against the  three detainees, including the bishop. In addition to the charge of  coercing citizens to participate in gatherings, they were charged  with "misappropriation of another's property through breach of trust,  committed on a large scale and using one's official position," as  well as "obstructing the exercise of the right to vote using one's  official position." On October 16, by court decision, Mkrtich  Proshyan was arrested for two months.  Later, he was placed under  house arrest. On January 19, 2026, the court ordered the Armenian  investigative body to initiate a criminal case based on Ara  Zohrabyan's report regarding the obstruction of the work of lawyers  for the head of the Aragatsotn Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic  Church, Bishop Mkrtich Proshyan, as well as the concealment of  information regarding his whereabouts.  It is noteworthy that Mkrtich  Proshyan is the nephew of the Catholicos of All Armenians, Karekin  II.