ArmInfo. The Armenian Ombudsman Arman Tatoyan demanded clarification from the Special Investigation Service (SIS) in connection with the arrest of the former deputy head of the National Assembly Apparatus Arsen Babayan. It became known the day before that the former deputy head of the RA National Assembly was detained for official forgery with a group of officials in the process of resigning of the powers of the former chairman of the Constitutional Court Gagik Harutyunyan.
In a statement circulated on October 22, the chief human rights activist stated that the Special Investigation Service detained Arsen Babayan on suspicion of committing a crime under subsection 1 of Article 314 of the RA Criminal Code, which is punishable by a fine of two to five times the minimum wage, or by deprivation of liberty for a period not exceeding four years with the deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a period not exceeding three years. The statement of the human rights activist also notes that paragraph 1 of paragraph 5 of Article 2 of the Amnesty Law of 2018 reads "Refuse to initiate criminal proceedings, terminate criminal proceedings, as well as terminate criminal prosecution or not prosecute cases of crimes committed before October 21, 2018 years inclusive (with the exception of cases directly leading to the death of a person for which there is an objection to the successor of the victim), in which persons can be accused or charged with committing crimes, crimes for which a punishment of imprisonment of no more than four years is prescribed".
<Paragraph 17 of Article 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure considers as criminal prosecution all procedural actions that are carried out by the criminal prosecution authorities, and in the cases provided for by this Code, the victim with the aim of identifying the person who committed an act unauthorized by the Criminal Code, guilty of the latter in committing a crime, as well as ensuring the application of other measures of punishment and coercion against such a person.
The human rights defender takes into account the regulation of part 6 of article 35 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that, on the basis of the adoption of the amnesty law, termination of proceedings and termination of criminal prosecution is not allowed if the defendant objects to this. The defender also takes into account the fact that according to part 12 of article 4 of the amnesty law, in the presence of a judicial act that has entered into legal force, the consent of the convicted person to the application of amnesty is not required.
That is, the quoted legislative provisions suggest that even if a person objects to the application of the amnesty law against him, then even if convicted, he can in no case be sentenced to imprisonment. The aforementioned also means that in all cases the exclusion of the prospect of conviction of a person in the form of imprisonment can make procedural actions interfering with his right to personal freedom in a criminal case an end in itself and, therefore, unlawful. The described further increases the procedural burden of the body conducting the production in each similar case to ensure the uniformity of its actions in terms of the legitimate aim pursued and the proportionate means of achieving it. It also means that the body conducting the production is obliged to show that the restriction of a person's right to personal freedom does not aim to punish him or to deprive him of deprivation. Considering the above, the decision of the Ombudsman has already initiated a discussion procedure in connection with the rights of Arsen Babayan on his own initiative. On behalf of the Ombudsman, his office staff paid a visit to the place of detention of the detainee in the police department to meet with Arsen Babayan. The human rights defender demanded clarification from the Special Investigation Service and, given that it is a question of detention, a one-day deadline has been set for the submission of clarifications>, the document says.