Arsen Babayan, lawyer for Martun Grigoryan, a parliamentary candidate on the Prosperous Armenia party list and former National Assembly member, said on his Facebook page that his client’s criminal prosecution, arrest and detention were unlawful, including because the mandatory procedure for overcoming parliamentary immunity under the Constitution and Criminal Procedure Code had been bypassed.
“Here is why. As the European Court of Human Rights established in the Eckle case, a criminal charge, or prosecution, is an autonomous concept and does not require a formal written decision. It begins when a person’s situation is ‘substantially affected’ as a result of actions by law enforcement authorities.
- The May 11 wiretaps and covert surveillance.
Although these measures were secret and the person may not have known about them, they clearly indicate that the state had targeted him as a person suspected of committing a crime.
On May 24, the investigative body made the wiretap public, thereby also identifying lawmaker Martun Grigoryan.
- The May 22 searches.
This is the turning point. When searches were conducted on May 22 at the lawmaker’s home, office and vehicle, his situation was clearly and substantially affected. He effectively acquired the status of a suspect because that suspicion was explicitly recorded in the decision authorizing the search. Under the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, a search is a classic example of a substantial impact on a person’s situation. Therefore, within the meaning of the Convention, effective criminal prosecution of the lawmaker began on May 22.
Article 96 of the Armenian Constitution guarantees that criminal prosecution of a lawmaker may be initiated only with the consent of the National Assembly, except when the person is caught while committing a crime or immediately afterward.
- The fact that the authority conducting the proceedings did not formally issue a ‘decision to initiate public criminal prosecution’ until August 2, when the powers of the eighth convocation of the National Assembly expired, is a legal fiction.
- The state, fully aware of the person’s status as a lawmaker and the constitutional requirement to obtain National Assembly consent to overcome his immunity, used a procedural maneuver: it effectively carried out all intensive measures aimed at criminal prosecution, including wiretapping and searches, but artificially delayed granting him formal status while waiting for his immunity to expire on August 2.
- Parliamentary immunity provided for by the Constitution is intended to protect a lawmaker not merely from the word ‘accused’ written on paper, but from the actual machinery of state coercion. Since the effective prosecution began on May 22, the prosecutor general was required to apply to the National Assembly for authorization to initiate criminal prosecution against the lawmaker. The failure to do so rendered the entire process unlawful,” the post said.
Former National Assembly member Martun Grigoryan has been remanded in custody for two months. Grigoryan was arrested early on August 13 as part of criminal proceedings initiated over an alleged electoral offense. The Anti-Corruption Court reported the detention.
