Wednesday, July 31 2019 12:22

ArmInfo.The Special Investigation Service of Armenia has filed charges against Judge  David Grigoryan under the first part of Article 314 of the Criminal  Code of Armenia (forgery). Grigoryan himself in an interview with  journalists said that he did not accept the charges against him.

Note that on the eve of the Prosecutor General's Office made a  clarification on the case, urging <some interested pseudo-defenders>  not to resort to political manipulation, based on their own narrow  personal interests.

The statement of the Prosecutor General's Office, in particular,  states: <According to the data obtained in the criminal case, the  judge (David Grigoryan) in order to create the appearance of hearing  the case in the 10-day period set by law on September 14, 2018 at  09:30, being in the court building, with the assistance of the court  clerk, he signed and attached to the court case an untrue paper  protocol on holding the court session from 09:30 to 09:36.

It is noteworthy that a similar protocol on the same day and the same  time was drawn up in another case, chaired by Grigorian. These two  protocols were drawn up in paper form, while under the law the record  of the court session is made in paper form only in the absence of a  court recording system in court. At the same time, there is no record  of any absence in the halls of these meetings.>.

It should be noted that this case was filed against Judge David  Grigoryan back in 2018, but it was closed for lack of evidence  confirming the judge's guilt. The case was resumed immediately a few  days after the judge ordered the abolition of the arrest of Robert  Kocharyan, who was accused of overthrowing the constitutional order  of the second president of the Republic of Armenia on behalf of the  former and current President of Artsakh, the case of March 1, 2008,  and its referral.

Subsequently, searches were conducted in the judge's office. It is  noteworthy that in addition to the documents on this criminal case,  materials on the case of March 1, 2008 were also confiscated. The  judge's lawyer claims that the search was carried out in  circumvention of the law, since neither Grigoryan nor the Supreme  Judicial Council were notified of this, as required by law. There was  no corresponding court decision.

On the eve of the ARIA, it temporarily suspended the authority of  Judge Grigorian at the request of the Prosecutor General's Office.  The BCC promised to make a statement to this effect, but has not yet  fulfilled its promise. But in the country's legal circles, a movement  began in support of Grigorian. Many prominent lawyers (over 50) have  declared their readiness to defend Grigorian for free.