Tweet
COURT KEEPS UNCHANGED ARREST CHOSEN TO CO-OWNER OF ROYAL ARMENIA COMPANY, GAGIK HAKOBIAN
Noyan Tapan
Oct 16 2007
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 16, NOYAN TAPAN. Gagik Hakobian, the co-owner of
the Royal Armenia company, who had arrived in Armenia on October 3,
came to the October 15 sitting of the RA Criminal Appeal Court on case
against the Royal Armenia company. The court published the decision
made on October 8, according to which the case against G. Hakobian
was withdrawn from suspension and was joined with the case against
Aram Ghazarian, the company's Deputy Director. The defence party
expressed discontent that though the October 8 sitting was open,
the defence party had not been informed about the sitting. Defender
Ashot Sargsian also expressed discontent that the above mentioned
decision does not mention that G. Hakobian, who was undergoing medical
treatment in Spain, came to Armenia of his own free will.
The lawyer also mediated to change arrest, preventive
punishment to the defendant: by the August 29 decision, a
search was declared to G. Hakobian and arrest was chosen as a
preventive punishment. A. Sargsian introduced ratified documents
to the court proving that he was in Spain for the purpose of
treatment. Nevertheless, the court dismissed the petition: according
to court's decision, the defendant can hide, hamper the examination
of the case.
The court also dismissed the challenge declared by the defence party
against presiding judge Suren Ghazarian, with the motivation of its
being ungrounded. As a ground for the challenge the defence party
mentioned that the three decisions of the court of dismissing the
petition of choosing arrest as preventive punishment, convening a
court sitting without informing the defence party, and changing the
preventive punishment show that the presiding judge is directly or
indirectly interested in passing an accusatory sentence. According
to the defender, after Justice Council's decision to Pargev Ohanian,
who had passed a decision of aquittal on the case against the company,
judge S. Ghazarian can not be unbiassed for remaining on his post. It
should be mentioned that the Justice Council had introduced a mediation
to the RA President with the request to stop P. Ohanian's commissions.
The case is examined at the Criminal Appeal Court on the basis of the
appeal complaints of the prosecutors and the representative of the
aggrieved party, Federal Investment Group. They appeal against the
aquittal sentence of the first instance court of Yerevan's Kentron
and Nork-Marash communities demanding finding the defendant guilty
on all the points of the accusation, forging the bills, deliberately
avoiding tax paying, smuggling, legalizing revenues gained by the
criminal way, seizing Federal Investment Group's property by a deceit.
Noyan Tapan
Oct 16 2007
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 16, NOYAN TAPAN. Gagik Hakobian, the co-owner of
the Royal Armenia company, who had arrived in Armenia on October 3,
came to the October 15 sitting of the RA Criminal Appeal Court on case
against the Royal Armenia company. The court published the decision
made on October 8, according to which the case against G. Hakobian
was withdrawn from suspension and was joined with the case against
Aram Ghazarian, the company's Deputy Director. The defence party
expressed discontent that though the October 8 sitting was open,
the defence party had not been informed about the sitting. Defender
Ashot Sargsian also expressed discontent that the above mentioned
decision does not mention that G. Hakobian, who was undergoing medical
treatment in Spain, came to Armenia of his own free will.
The lawyer also mediated to change arrest, preventive
punishment to the defendant: by the August 29 decision, a
search was declared to G. Hakobian and arrest was chosen as a
preventive punishment. A. Sargsian introduced ratified documents
to the court proving that he was in Spain for the purpose of
treatment. Nevertheless, the court dismissed the petition: according
to court's decision, the defendant can hide, hamper the examination
of the case.
The court also dismissed the challenge declared by the defence party
against presiding judge Suren Ghazarian, with the motivation of its
being ungrounded. As a ground for the challenge the defence party
mentioned that the three decisions of the court of dismissing the
petition of choosing arrest as preventive punishment, convening a
court sitting without informing the defence party, and changing the
preventive punishment show that the presiding judge is directly or
indirectly interested in passing an accusatory sentence. According
to the defender, after Justice Council's decision to Pargev Ohanian,
who had passed a decision of aquittal on the case against the company,
judge S. Ghazarian can not be unbiassed for remaining on his post. It
should be mentioned that the Justice Council had introduced a mediation
to the RA President with the request to stop P. Ohanian's commissions.
The case is examined at the Criminal Appeal Court on the basis of the
appeal complaints of the prosecutors and the representative of the
aggrieved party, Federal Investment Group. They appeal against the
aquittal sentence of the first instance court of Yerevan's Kentron
and Nork-Marash communities demanding finding the defendant guilty
on all the points of the accusation, forging the bills, deliberately
avoiding tax paying, smuggling, legalizing revenues gained by the
criminal way, seizing Federal Investment Group's property by a deceit.