Tweet
WORDING DOES NOT DETERMINE APPLIANCE
A1+
[07:31 pm] 19 December, 2007
At the end of September, 2007, Armenian MP Zaruhi Postanjian requested
Human Rights Ombudsman Armen Harutiunian to consider compliance of
Article 301 of the RA Penal Code with Article 10 of the European
Convention on Human Rights.
Armen Harutiunian has applied to the CoE Venice Commission in this
connection. The latter considered and confirmed the proposals made
by its experts during a December 14 plenary sitting.
Below is the answer to the Ombudsman's concern:
1.Article 301 of the RA Penal Code is compliant with Article 10 of
the European Convention on Human Rights and with criteria of the
European Court.
2.The principle of legal definiteness is not violated
3.Wrong appliance and interpretation of the law is not determined by
wording of the article.
A1+
[07:31 pm] 19 December, 2007
At the end of September, 2007, Armenian MP Zaruhi Postanjian requested
Human Rights Ombudsman Armen Harutiunian to consider compliance of
Article 301 of the RA Penal Code with Article 10 of the European
Convention on Human Rights.
Armen Harutiunian has applied to the CoE Venice Commission in this
connection. The latter considered and confirmed the proposals made
by its experts during a December 14 plenary sitting.
Below is the answer to the Ombudsman's concern:
1.Article 301 of the RA Penal Code is compliant with Article 10 of
the European Convention on Human Rights and with criteria of the
European Court.
2.The principle of legal definiteness is not violated
3.Wrong appliance and interpretation of the law is not determined by
wording of the article.