Tweet
TACIT FIGHT BETWEEN PROCURACY AND JUSTICE
Lragir.am
28 July 06
Relations between Aghvan Hovsepyan and Davit Harutiunyan are not
good. As for their impact on the relations between the procuracy and
the courts of law, it becomes clear from Assistant Attorney General
Gagik Jhangiryan's words. In summing up the work of the prosecution in
the first half of 2006, Gagik Jhangiryan said tacit struggle between
these two organizations is underway, whose standpoint is objective,
grounded, correctly defined. `Or which body is stronger, which was the
verdict and decision of the judge, and how strong his support is. I
affirm that in some cases the arguments of the prosecution are weak
and vulnerable, evaluation of actions is not complete, definitions are
wrong, there are breaches of the order of trial in the course of
investigation, etc. In such cases we normally admit our mistakes and
agree with the justified decision of the court. The guilty are
punished. However, in a number of cases the verdict and ruling of the
court is not only beyond the law but also beyond consciousness, and
easily yields to stricture and logic. And one has to accept it because
it has already been enacted, and the appeals are postponed and
dismissed with nonsensical excuses. In such cases there is only on way
out - to withdraw the question from the accepted legal procedures and
report them to other instances.'
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Lragir.am
28 July 06
Relations between Aghvan Hovsepyan and Davit Harutiunyan are not
good. As for their impact on the relations between the procuracy and
the courts of law, it becomes clear from Assistant Attorney General
Gagik Jhangiryan's words. In summing up the work of the prosecution in
the first half of 2006, Gagik Jhangiryan said tacit struggle between
these two organizations is underway, whose standpoint is objective,
grounded, correctly defined. `Or which body is stronger, which was the
verdict and decision of the judge, and how strong his support is. I
affirm that in some cases the arguments of the prosecution are weak
and vulnerable, evaluation of actions is not complete, definitions are
wrong, there are breaches of the order of trial in the course of
investigation, etc. In such cases we normally admit our mistakes and
agree with the justified decision of the court. The guilty are
punished. However, in a number of cases the verdict and ruling of the
court is not only beyond the law but also beyond consciousness, and
easily yields to stricture and logic. And one has to accept it because
it has already been enacted, and the appeals are postponed and
dismissed with nonsensical excuses. In such cases there is only on way
out - to withdraw the question from the accepted legal procedures and
report them to other instances.'
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress