Resignation on Rejection of Petitions

During the trial Varduhie Elbakyan, lawyer of Suren Sirunyan filed a petition of resignation to the presiding judge claiming that during the trial of 19.12.2008 the judge made a statement to the defense side which says that they are going to work on 23.12.2008, 24.12.2008 and 25.12.2008, in case when the petition submitted by Hovik Arsenyan has not been discussed yet, and the court has not made any decision. In addition to this the judge applied an extremely severe sanction against the defendants, rejected any petition filed by the defense side, restricted the proper work of representatives of mass media. The above mentioned facts give grounds to consider that the presiding judge can not be impartial, as he has a clear position to reject any grounded petition filed by the defense side.

The Court decided:
To reject the petition on the basis of being groundless.
The decision can not be appealed.

26.02.2009

To Mnatsakan Martirosyan, judge of Yerevan Criminal Court (since March 1, 2009 Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts) to the criminal case No 62215908 charging Alexander Arzumanyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1 of RA Criminal Code), Myasnik Malkhasyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1, Articles 38-316, part 2 of RA Criminal Code), Sasun Mikaelyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1, Article 235, parts 1 and 2 of RA Criminal Code), Hakob Hakobyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Grigor Voskerchyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Suren Sirunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code) and Shant Harutyunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), examining the petition of 26.02.2009 submitted by Hovik Arsenyan, lawyer of Sasun Mikaelyan on filing a petition of resignation to M. Martirosyan, judge to the case.

During the trial, Hovik Arsenyan, lawyer of Alexander Arzumanyan, Myasnik Malkhasyan and Sasun Mikaelyan filed a petition of resignation to the judge claiming that the present criminal case forms a part to the other criminal cases, particularly No 62202508 and No 62202608, and criminal cases No 62215008, No 62205308. These criminal cases were filed against Mushegh Saghatelyan, Karen Tarkhanyan, Armen Sargsyan and Vardan Gasparyan. Trials of the above mentioned criminal cases were held by Mnatsakan Martirosyan, and they all were convicted. During the above mentioned trials, the judge already expressed his opinion, estimated and took into consideration the testimonies of victims to the case Arsen Arshakyan, Arsen Aperyan, Hayk Sargsyan, Anton Asryan, testimonies of witness Tigran Khachatryan and representative of Hrayr Kyureghyan, the plaintiff. The judge also took into consideration the records of examination of scene of action, the conclusions of explosion-technical and chemical examinations, and the notice of first deputy of chief of the police. The above mentioned facts give ground to consider that the judge is not impartial.

The Court decided:
To reject the motion on the basis of being groundless.
The decision can not be appealed.

27.02.2009

To Mnatsakan Martirosyan, judge of Yerevan Criminal Court (since March 1, 2009 Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts) to the criminal case No 62215908 charging Alexander Arzumanyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1 of RA Criminal Code), Myasnik Malkhasyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1, Articles 38-316, part 2 of RA Criminal Code), Sasun Mikaelyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1, Article 235, parts 1 and 2 of RA Criminal Code), Hakob Hakobyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Grigor Voskerchyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Suren Sirunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code) and Shant Harutyunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), examining the petition of 27.02.2009 submitted by Alexander Arzumanyan on filing a petition of resignation to M. Martirosyan, judge to the case.

During the trial defendant Alexander Arzumanyan filed a petition to resignation to M. Martirosyan, judge to the case claiming that the latter restricted the proper work of representatives of mass media, changed the trial coverage order of 19.12.2008, as well as their relatives were denied the right to be present at trial. The above mentioned conditions give ample grounds to consider that the judge is not impartial.

The Court decided:
To reject petition on the basis of being groundless.
The decision can not be appealed.

04.03.2009

To Mnatsakan Martirosyan, judge of Yerevan Criminal Court (since March 1, 2009 Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts) to the criminal case No 62215908 charging Alexander Arzumanyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1 of RA Criminal Code), Myasnik Malkhasyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1, Articles 38-316, part 2 of RA Criminal Code), Sasun Mikaelyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1, Article 235, parts 1 and 2 of RA Criminal Code), Hakob Hakobyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Grigor Voskerchyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Suren Sirunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code) and Shant Harutyunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), examining the petition of 04.03.2009 submitted by Liparit Simonyan, lawyer of Alexander Arzumanyan on filing a petition of resignation to M. Martirosyan, judge to the case.

During the trial Liparit Arzumanyan, lawyer of Alexander Arzumanyan filed a petition of resignation to M. Martirosyan, judge to the case claiming that while transfereing the criminal case to the Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts, the judge was also ruled by Article 301 of Criminal Procedure Code of RA. However, he should be ruled by the provisions of Article 49 of Criminal Procedure Code of RA, and the case should be transferred to the Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts. Then the case should be examined by one of the judges according to Article 291 of Criminal Procedure Code of RA and an appropriate decision should be made according to the provisions provided by Chapter 40 of Criminal Procedure Code of RA and to consider the investigation to the case invalid. However, the Court applied the Law of the Republic of Armenia adopted on February 5, 2009 on proposing amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of RA which has not yet came into effect and could be applied only after March 1, 2009.

The Court decided:
To reject the petition on the basis of being groundless.
The decision can not be appealed.

09.03.2009

To Mnatsakan Martirosyan, judge of Yerevan Criminal Court (since March 1, 2009 Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts) to the criminal case No 62215908 charging Alexander Arzumanyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1 of RA Criminal Code), Myasnik Malkhasyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1, Articles 38-316, part 2 of RA Criminal Code), Sasun Mikaelyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1, Article 235, parts 1 and 2 of RA Criminal Code), Hakob Hakobyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Grigor Voskerchyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Suren Sirunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code) and Shant Harutyunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), examining the petition of 09.03.2009 submitted by Sargis Qloyan, victim’s assignee on filing a petition of resignation to M. Martirosyan, judge to the case.

During the trial Sargis Qloyan, victim’s assignee filed a petition of resignation to the presiding judge claiming that the court deprived him from the right to receive appropriate legal assistance; to this end court’s reason is not persuasive. He finds that the continuation of legal investigation does not derive from the motives of administration of justice. Thus, he does not believ that the judge is impartial, he finds that the court holds biased position towards the case.

The Court decided:
To reject the petition on the basis of being groundless.
The decision can not be appealed.

09.03.2009

To Mnatsakan Martirosyan, judge of Yerevan Criminal Court (since March 1, 2009 Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts) to the criminal case No 62215908 charging Alexander Arzumanyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1 of RA Criminal Code), Myasnik Malkhasyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1, Articles 38-316, part 2 of RA Criminal Code), Sasun Mikaelyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1, Article 235, parts 1 and 2 of RA Criminal Code), Hakob Hakobyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Grigor Voskerchyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Suren Sirunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code) and Shant Harutyunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), examining the petition of 09.03.2009 submitted by Stepan Voskanyan, lawyer of Grigor Voskerchyan on filing a petition of resignation to M. Martirosyan, judge to the case.

During the trial Stepan Voskerchyan, lawyer of Grigor Voskerchyan filed a petition to the presiding judge M. Martirosyan claiming that the latter did not respond to the fact of abuses that G. Voskerchyan was subjected to, deliberately distorted the reality of that facts, deprived G. Voskerchyan of the right to make announcements, the right to object agaist the actions of the presiding judge, as well he was denied the right of providing legal assistant enshrined by Article 13 of the European Convention of Human Rights. According to the lawyer the above mentioned facts provide ample grounds to suppose that judge is biased.

The Court decided:
To reject on the basis of being groundless.
The decision can not be appealed.

Resignation on Rejection of Petitions.

19.12.2008

Mnatsakan Martirosyan, judge of Yerevan Criminal Court (since March 1, 2009 Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts) to the criminal case No 62215908 charging Alexander Arzumanyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1 of RA Criminal Code), Myasnik Malkhasyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1, Articles 38-316, part 2 of RA Criminal Code), Sasun Mikaelyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1, Article 235, parts 1 and 2 of RA Criminal Code), Hakob Hakobyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Grigor Voskerchyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Suren Sirunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code) and Shant Harutyunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), examining the petition of 19.12.2008 submitted by Stepan Voskanyan, lawyer of Grigor Voskerchyan on filing a petition of resignation.

During the trail Stepan Voskanyan, lawyer of Grigor Voskerchyan filed a petition of resignation to the presiding judge M. Martirosyan complaining that the judge was in haste while examining the materials of criminal case, rejected all petition filed by the defense side, he postponed the discussions on petitions to call and question the witnesses. Taking into consideration the above mentioned facts, the defense side can consider that the judge is not impartial.

The judge decided:
To reject the petition on the basis of being ungrounded.
The decision can not be appealed.

19.12.2008

Mnatsakan Martirosyan, judge of Yerevan Criminal Court (since March 1, 2009 Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts) to the criminal case No 62215908 charging Alexander Arzumanyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1 of RA Criminal Code), Myasnik Malkhasyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1, Articles 38-316, part 2 of RA Criminal Code), Sasun Mikaelyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1, Article 235, parts 1 and 2 of RA Criminal Code), Hakob Hakobyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Grigor Voskerchyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Suren Sirunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code) and Shant Harutyunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), examining the petition of 19.12.2008 submitted by Liparit Simonyan, lawyer of Alexander Arzumanyan on filing a petition of resignation.

During the trail Liparit Simonyan, lawyer of Alexander Arzumyan filed a petition of resignation to the presiding judge M. Martirosyan complaining that the judge, while preparing the criminal case to the trial, rejected the joint petition of the defense side filed on 09.12.2008 mentioning that it was also signed by lawyer A. Atabekyan, while he did not signed that petition. The above mentioned facts give ground to consider that the judge is not impartial.

TheCourt decided:
To reject the petition on the basis of being ungrounded.
The decision can not be appealed.

26.02.2009

Mnatsakan Martirosyan, judge of Yerevan Criminal Court (since March 1, 2009 Court of First Instance of Yerevan’s Kentron and Norq-Marash districts) to the criminal case No 62215908 charging Alexander Arzumanyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1 of RA Criminal Code), Myasnik Malkhasyan (Article 225, point 3, Article 300, point 1, Articles 38-316, part 2 of RA Criminal Code), Sasun Mikaelyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1, Article 235, parts 1 and 2 of RA Criminal Code), Hakob Hakobyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Grigor Voskerchyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), Suren Sirunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code) and Shant Harutyunyan (Article 225, part 3, Article 300, part 1 of RA Criminal Code), examining the petition of 26.02.2009 submitted by Melanya Arustamyan, lawyer of Hakob Hakobyan and Myasnik Malkhasyan on filing a petition of resignation.

Melanya Arustamyan, lawyer of Hakob Hakobyan and Myasnik Malkhasyan filed a petition of resignation to the presiding judge M. Martirosyan claiming that the complaints submitted to the investigative body are not present in criminal case, that the presiding judge applied sanctions and postponed trials groundlessly, the accusative approval was not signed by A. Mirzoyan, chief of special investigation agency, as well as the lawyer submitted a number of petitions which were rejected without any ample ground. The above mentioned facts give grounds to consider that the presiding judge is not impartial.

The Court decided:
To reject the petition on the basis of being ungrounded.
The decision can not be appealed.