Tweet
HOW THE STOLEN CRIMINAL CASE OF `KARABAKH' COMMITTEE WAS DISCOVERED
KIMA YEGHIAZARYAN
"Hayots Ashkharh"Armenian Daily
10 Nov 07
Yesterday was the opening ceremony of the repaired building of the
Prosecutor's Office of Malatia-Sebastia district. Profiting by the
occasion, the journalist addressed few questions to Prosecutor General
AGHVAN HOVSEPYAN.
`We know that the Prosecutor's office is conducting a service
investigation in connection with the disappearance of the criminal case
of `Karabakh' Committee. Is the investigation over? What have you found
out?'
`We received a request from `Iravounk' newspaper. They asked us to
provide them certain data from the case. Based on the request, I
recommended that the case be submitted to me from the archive, so as we
could decide what data to provide to `Iravounk' newspaper. The case
turned out to be missing from the archive. Naturally, I ordered a
service investigation.
As a result of the inquest it was found out that Head of the
investigative department had received the case by the recommendation of
the Prosecutor General as far back as on November 6, 1996 and submitted
it to Levon Ter-Petrosyan, the first President. Today we have sent a
note to Levon Ter-Petrsyn with a request to return the case to the
Prosecutor's Office. The note was signed by the Head of the Staff of
the Prosecutor's Office, since the archive is maintained by his staff
members.'
`Do you think Mr. Ter-Petrosyan will return the case?'
`I find it difficult to say whether he will return the case or not.
But I must say that under the law, the investigative body is not
allowed to hand over a criminal case to another body. Even the
President of the Republic is not entitled to request a criminal case in
accordance with the law and keep it under his control. In 1996 this
happened by a gross violation of law. Criminal cases cannot be
maintained in the archives of any other body. Especially in private
archives. I think Levon Ter-Petrosyan will be reasonable enough to
return the case to the Prosecutor's Office.'
In addition to our request, we also received information from the
General Prosecutor's Office that a special procedure is prescirbed for
getting acquainted with any case maintained in their archive. The shift
of all the criminal cases is recorded in the archive registry. It was
the mechanism of such clerical work that helped those conducting the
service investigation find out what shift had occurred in connection
with the criminal case of `Karabakh' committee.
However, we later managed to find out details on the specific
circumstances in which the case was brought out from the archive. Based
on the information we possess, Head of the archive was in one of the
marzes on November 6, 1996, but he was urgently called to the
Prosecutor's Office and instructed to open the archive. The case was
submitted in the evening, after the end of the working hour, so as the
employees of the Prosecutor's Office would not see the volumes of the
case brought out of the building. That time Head of the Investigative
Department of the Prosecutor's Office was Souren Goulyan, who had given
his signature for removing the case from the archive. S. Gyozalyan
handed over the case to Levon Ter-Petrosyan's 2 guards. And the volumes
of the case were moved to the Presidential palace in 2 sacks.
By the way, the case consisted of 61 volumes, and not 50, as was
mentioned recently.
The fact that L. Ter-Petrosyan decided to have the criminal case of
`Karabakh' Committee removed from the archive of the Prosecutor's
Office and keep it under his own control is no less noteworthy. It
covered the time period following the presidential elections held in
September, 1996. A month after being `re-elected' to the post of
President with the help of tanks he realized that it was necessary to
make the volumes of the case disappear, as the dangerous episodes it
contained were not probably few in number and might bring harm to his
`spotless' image.
When the material was ready for publication, it became known that
that L. Ter-Petrosyan had made the following statement:
`At my request, Artavazd Gevorkyan, Prosecutor General of the
Republic of Armenia sent the volumes of the `Karabakh Committee' case
to presidential residence in 1995 or 1995 and submitted it to the
Presidential staff with relevant formulations. This was done with the
purpose of depositing the materials in the museum that was to have
opened on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the Karabakh
movement.
After the shift of power the materials of the `Karabakh Committee'
case were moved to my personal archive, and to date they have been kept
in complete form. None of the Prosecutor Generals that followed
Artavazd Gevorkyan has applied to me with a request or demand for
returning the case. And even today I believe that the museum dedicated
to the Karabakh Movement is the most convenient place for keeping the
materials. However, if necessary, I am ready to immediately return them
to the archive of the Prosecutor's Office.'
LEVON TER-PETROSYAN
After familiarizing ourselves with LTP's statement, there naturally
emerge several questions.
First: the disappearance of the `Karabakh' Committee case has been
discussed for already a week. Why did Mr. Ter-Petrosyan decide to make
such a statement only after the service investigation allowed to find
out who was keeping the case.
Second: L. Ter-Petrosyan expresses willingness to send the case to
the Prosecutor's Office; however, we wonder whether he will return the
volumes of the case in the same form (safe and sound) as he received.
Or he has cut the sections that were unfavorable for him?
Third: What is the sense of giving an instruction 2-3 years ago for
removing the case from the archive ago for displaying them in a
non-existent museum? The opposite process is accepted in international
practice. First, the museum is built, and then necessary materials are
collected.
KIMA YEGHIAZARYAN
"Hayots Ashkharh"Armenian Daily
10 Nov 07
Yesterday was the opening ceremony of the repaired building of the
Prosecutor's Office of Malatia-Sebastia district. Profiting by the
occasion, the journalist addressed few questions to Prosecutor General
AGHVAN HOVSEPYAN.
`We know that the Prosecutor's office is conducting a service
investigation in connection with the disappearance of the criminal case
of `Karabakh' Committee. Is the investigation over? What have you found
out?'
`We received a request from `Iravounk' newspaper. They asked us to
provide them certain data from the case. Based on the request, I
recommended that the case be submitted to me from the archive, so as we
could decide what data to provide to `Iravounk' newspaper. The case
turned out to be missing from the archive. Naturally, I ordered a
service investigation.
As a result of the inquest it was found out that Head of the
investigative department had received the case by the recommendation of
the Prosecutor General as far back as on November 6, 1996 and submitted
it to Levon Ter-Petrosyan, the first President. Today we have sent a
note to Levon Ter-Petrsyn with a request to return the case to the
Prosecutor's Office. The note was signed by the Head of the Staff of
the Prosecutor's Office, since the archive is maintained by his staff
members.'
`Do you think Mr. Ter-Petrosyan will return the case?'
`I find it difficult to say whether he will return the case or not.
But I must say that under the law, the investigative body is not
allowed to hand over a criminal case to another body. Even the
President of the Republic is not entitled to request a criminal case in
accordance with the law and keep it under his control. In 1996 this
happened by a gross violation of law. Criminal cases cannot be
maintained in the archives of any other body. Especially in private
archives. I think Levon Ter-Petrosyan will be reasonable enough to
return the case to the Prosecutor's Office.'
In addition to our request, we also received information from the
General Prosecutor's Office that a special procedure is prescirbed for
getting acquainted with any case maintained in their archive. The shift
of all the criminal cases is recorded in the archive registry. It was
the mechanism of such clerical work that helped those conducting the
service investigation find out what shift had occurred in connection
with the criminal case of `Karabakh' committee.
However, we later managed to find out details on the specific
circumstances in which the case was brought out from the archive. Based
on the information we possess, Head of the archive was in one of the
marzes on November 6, 1996, but he was urgently called to the
Prosecutor's Office and instructed to open the archive. The case was
submitted in the evening, after the end of the working hour, so as the
employees of the Prosecutor's Office would not see the volumes of the
case brought out of the building. That time Head of the Investigative
Department of the Prosecutor's Office was Souren Goulyan, who had given
his signature for removing the case from the archive. S. Gyozalyan
handed over the case to Levon Ter-Petrosyan's 2 guards. And the volumes
of the case were moved to the Presidential palace in 2 sacks.
By the way, the case consisted of 61 volumes, and not 50, as was
mentioned recently.
The fact that L. Ter-Petrosyan decided to have the criminal case of
`Karabakh' Committee removed from the archive of the Prosecutor's
Office and keep it under his own control is no less noteworthy. It
covered the time period following the presidential elections held in
September, 1996. A month after being `re-elected' to the post of
President with the help of tanks he realized that it was necessary to
make the volumes of the case disappear, as the dangerous episodes it
contained were not probably few in number and might bring harm to his
`spotless' image.
When the material was ready for publication, it became known that
that L. Ter-Petrosyan had made the following statement:
`At my request, Artavazd Gevorkyan, Prosecutor General of the
Republic of Armenia sent the volumes of the `Karabakh Committee' case
to presidential residence in 1995 or 1995 and submitted it to the
Presidential staff with relevant formulations. This was done with the
purpose of depositing the materials in the museum that was to have
opened on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the Karabakh
movement.
After the shift of power the materials of the `Karabakh Committee'
case were moved to my personal archive, and to date they have been kept
in complete form. None of the Prosecutor Generals that followed
Artavazd Gevorkyan has applied to me with a request or demand for
returning the case. And even today I believe that the museum dedicated
to the Karabakh Movement is the most convenient place for keeping the
materials. However, if necessary, I am ready to immediately return them
to the archive of the Prosecutor's Office.'
LEVON TER-PETROSYAN
After familiarizing ourselves with LTP's statement, there naturally
emerge several questions.
First: the disappearance of the `Karabakh' Committee case has been
discussed for already a week. Why did Mr. Ter-Petrosyan decide to make
such a statement only after the service investigation allowed to find
out who was keeping the case.
Second: L. Ter-Petrosyan expresses willingness to send the case to
the Prosecutor's Office; however, we wonder whether he will return the
volumes of the case in the same form (safe and sound) as he received.
Or he has cut the sections that were unfavorable for him?
Third: What is the sense of giving an instruction 2-3 years ago for
removing the case from the archive ago for displaying them in a
non-existent museum? The opposite process is accepted in international
practice. First, the museum is built, and then necessary materials are
collected.