Tweet
ALVINA GYULUMYAN. "THE NUMBER OF UNFOUNDED APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED BY ARMENIA TO THE EUROPEAN COURT IS REDUCED."
February 25 2014
"It was just a figment that the European Court decisions are part
of RA legislation", - so responded human rights defender Avetik
Ishkhanyan to the question of Aravot.am of whether the application
of the European case law is exercised in Armenia at a proper level.
Referring to the fact that the decisions of the European Court of
Human Rights (ECHR) are a component part of the RA legislation as
precedent law, and in any case, the ECHR precedent can be cited, Mr.
Ishkhanyan expressed the following concern, "The courts, as a rule,
are rejecting the petitions commenting that the factual circumstances
do not match. De jure, the precedential decisions are part of the RA
legislation, however, de facto, they do not have any absolute value,
as the judicial acts are determined not by law, but by discretion." As
an example, Mr. Ishkhanyan brought the verdict by the case of "A1+",
when the decision was made, in addition to compensation, the violation
should also be removed, which was not done. Basically, also due to the
fact that the cases against Armenia in ECHR constitute a big number.
This year, number of applications at the European Court against
Armenia is more than a thousand. In the conversation with Aravot.am,
the judge Alvina Gyulumyan, representing Armenia at ECHR, commented
on the fact as follows, "Most of them are submitted by Azeris, who
are deprived from the occupied territories and the issue of their
property is raised." We asked Ms. Gyulumyan whether the fact that there
are numerous applications against Armenia does not indicate at the
ECHR that there are numerous problems associated with the European
case law in Armenia. He responded as follows, "These problems are
available in any country. It's another question of what actions are
implemented in a country to prevent it." Ms. Gyulumyan also informed
that out of 46 verdicts of the European Court against Armenia 20
refer to violation personal immunity right, from which, in 16 cases,
the right to fair trial was violated. She expressed the hope that upon
serious consideration of these verdicts, the RA judicial system has
made appropriate conclusion. The fact that the number of applications
to the ECHR against Armenia is reduced, Ms. Gyulumyan is commenting as
follows, "Often our citizens are not informed to the best about such
possibility. Unfortunately, I am far from thinking that everything
is well in our country, therefore, the number of applications to the
ECHR against Armenia is reduced. On the other hand, we can say that
our attorneys work well. According to statistics, the European Court
considers 80 percent of the applications submitted by Armenia subject
for discussion, which shows that the number of unfounded applications
submitted by Armenia to the European Court seems to be reduces, whereas
a few years ago the situation was different." Ms. Gyulumyan referred
to two sonorous cases at the ECHR: "Khachatryan and others against
Armenia" and "Melikyan against Armenia". The first one was about the
criminal prosecution against a person who avoided the alternative
military service, in the case when criminal responsibility was not
designed at the time. The second one refers to the fact that no
legislature was found by domestic legislation towards the citizen
who wanted to appeal the government decision, where he could defend
his civil right in any way. Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2014/02/25/163967/
From: Baghdasarian
February 25 2014
"It was just a figment that the European Court decisions are part
of RA legislation", - so responded human rights defender Avetik
Ishkhanyan to the question of Aravot.am of whether the application
of the European case law is exercised in Armenia at a proper level.
Referring to the fact that the decisions of the European Court of
Human Rights (ECHR) are a component part of the RA legislation as
precedent law, and in any case, the ECHR precedent can be cited, Mr.
Ishkhanyan expressed the following concern, "The courts, as a rule,
are rejecting the petitions commenting that the factual circumstances
do not match. De jure, the precedential decisions are part of the RA
legislation, however, de facto, they do not have any absolute value,
as the judicial acts are determined not by law, but by discretion." As
an example, Mr. Ishkhanyan brought the verdict by the case of "A1+",
when the decision was made, in addition to compensation, the violation
should also be removed, which was not done. Basically, also due to the
fact that the cases against Armenia in ECHR constitute a big number.
This year, number of applications at the European Court against
Armenia is more than a thousand. In the conversation with Aravot.am,
the judge Alvina Gyulumyan, representing Armenia at ECHR, commented
on the fact as follows, "Most of them are submitted by Azeris, who
are deprived from the occupied territories and the issue of their
property is raised." We asked Ms. Gyulumyan whether the fact that there
are numerous applications against Armenia does not indicate at the
ECHR that there are numerous problems associated with the European
case law in Armenia. He responded as follows, "These problems are
available in any country. It's another question of what actions are
implemented in a country to prevent it." Ms. Gyulumyan also informed
that out of 46 verdicts of the European Court against Armenia 20
refer to violation personal immunity right, from which, in 16 cases,
the right to fair trial was violated. She expressed the hope that upon
serious consideration of these verdicts, the RA judicial system has
made appropriate conclusion. The fact that the number of applications
to the ECHR against Armenia is reduced, Ms. Gyulumyan is commenting as
follows, "Often our citizens are not informed to the best about such
possibility. Unfortunately, I am far from thinking that everything
is well in our country, therefore, the number of applications to the
ECHR against Armenia is reduced. On the other hand, we can say that
our attorneys work well. According to statistics, the European Court
considers 80 percent of the applications submitted by Armenia subject
for discussion, which shows that the number of unfounded applications
submitted by Armenia to the European Court seems to be reduces, whereas
a few years ago the situation was different." Ms. Gyulumyan referred
to two sonorous cases at the ECHR: "Khachatryan and others against
Armenia" and "Melikyan against Armenia". The first one was about the
criminal prosecution against a person who avoided the alternative
military service, in the case when criminal responsibility was not
designed at the time. The second one refers to the fact that no
legislature was found by domestic legislation towards the citizen
who wanted to appeal the government decision, where he could defend
his civil right in any way. Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2014/02/25/163967/
From: Baghdasarian