Subjection to disciplinary lability as a result of prosecution

The Board of the Chamber of Advocates has initiated over a year 22 disciplinary proceedings against the “Helsinki Association” advocate Arayik Papikyan.

Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against not only Araik Papikyan, but also the “Sasna Tsrer”, the opposition leader Zhirayr Sefilyan and others’ defense lawyers accused of the involvement in the capture of the Patrol Service Regiment.

The advocates had long been subjected to sanctions by the presiding judges while they tried to protect their and their clients’ legitimate interests and rights. During the proceedings, the defendants were deprived of the right to a fair trial, and as a sign of protest left the courtroom; the defense lawyers acted in the same way, referring to the request of their defendants not to attend the hearings if they were not present there.

Very often the advocates were not even permitted to enter the courtroom; yet, as a result, they were subjected to sanctions and then were subjected to lability by the Chamber of Advocates.

The defense lawyers involved in high-profile cases think that the lability that was suggested by the Board of the Chamber of Advocates in politically sensitive cases were prosecutions.

The Board of the Chamber of Advocates initiated 22 disciplinary proceedings against Arayik Papikyan. Of the 6 of these proceedings Arayik Papikyan was justified, and 11 cases have currently been appealed in the court.   

Hearings have already been scheduled for most of the cases. The judge Anna Pilosyan scheduled a hearing for February 5, but Arayik Papikyan did not appear before the court, as the notification on the February 5 hearing was received by him only on February 27.

And the judge Hayarpi Zargaryan left the advocate’s complaint without examination. On Tuesday Arayik Papikyan went to the court in the Malatia-Sebastia administrative district court (where the sessions had usually been held before). “Just minutes before the session, I found out that I went to the wrong address. I called the court and asked to postpone the hearing if it is possible. They registered my call and then I found out in the “Datalex” system that the court left the application without examination,” informed Arayik Papikyan.

The advocate is going to appeal it after he has received the decision. Arayik Papikyan supposes that the court left the appeal without an examination through the formal procedure. “If they are going to implement justice in such a way, then I do not want that the judge should be paid his salaries in the expense of the taxes I pay. She should not have guarantees on my account for doing formal work,” he added. 

            Nina Karapetyants, an advocate who has been involved in high-profile cases, has been subjected to six disciplinary sanctions so far. Five appeals have already been filed in the Court of General Jurisdiction.

Advocates Mushegh Shushanyan, Yervand Varosyan, Lusine Sahakyan, Hayarpi Sargsyan, Ara Gharagyozyan, Inessa Petrosyan, Grisha Balasanyan, Harutyun Baghdasaryan, Liparit Simonyan, Tigran Hayrapetyan, Ara Zakaryan, Hrant Gevorgyan and David Gyurjyan were also subjected to disciplinary sanaction within the cases.

Besides Arayik Papikyan and Nina Karapetyants, Lusine Sahakyan, Yervand Varosyan, David Gyurjyan, Mushegh Shushanyan and Tigran Yegoryan are also appealing the decisions of the Chamber in the court.