The First Instance Court adopted an unlawful and groundless judicial act, releasing Robert Kocharyan from custody on an individual’s recommendation, Prosecutor General Artur Davtyan stated during the hearing of the appeal on the case of Kocharyan and others in the Court of Appeal.
“We think that such a measure of prevention is subject to overturning and in the existing situation the only available proportional measure of prevention is remanding in custody as envisaged by our legislation,” Artur Davtyan said.
He asked whether there is a risk that the accused will hinder the trial. If yes, is there any measure of prevention provided by our legislation which will eliminate this risk? It is reasonable to think that there is risk that he will hinder, the prosecutor general said.
“I’ll bring a simple argument. The indictment presents a complicated, organized, clearly distributed criminal scheme the actors of which were at that time in direct official dependence on the accused. A significant part of the government was directly involved in the criminal act. The accused are then the minister of defense, the chief of general staff, the chief of the garrison, the chief of staff of the president. There are criminal charges for the criminal acts of the law enforcement agencies on those days. Those responsible for these acts are waiting for their charges. Ten people were killed during the ascribed events, and a consecutive revelation of circumstances, the revelations of those guilty is in process.”
“The conclusion is that in such a complicated scheme, on the other hand, given the active process of the investigation, isn’t the motivation of people involved in it to contact one another, to create obstacles to an objective investigation obvious?” the Prosecutor General said.
According to him, evidence to this is efforts aimed at covering up the crime., active denial of the fact of involvement of the army in the acts ascribed to the accused.
“Now that the details of the criminal acts, as well as the mechanisms of their coverup are being revealed, is it logical to set obstacles to this process? There is a high grounded probability of the risk to set obstacles to the objective examination of the case by the accused,” Artur Davtyan said.
According to him, no other measure of prevention envisaged by our legislation can obviously rule out the aforementioned contacts, agreements.