Armenian News Network - Groong: Week In Review Podcast

Spotlight on Silence: InJustice in Armenia | Ep 497, Dec 18, 2025

• Armenian News Network / Groong • Episode 497

Share episode

Spotlight on Silence - December 18, 2025

This episode examines a growing pattern of political pressure in Armenia, where journalists, lawyers, activists, and clergy are targeted through criminal prosecutions, selective justice, and coordinated propaganda. Drawing on recent cases and legal analysis, the discussion focuses on how laws such as Article 236 are used to constrain speech, protest, and independent institutions.

Topics:

  • Criminalization of Speech and Dissent in Armenia
  • Legal Pressure on Lawyers, Journalists, and Clergy
  • Selective Justice and Coordinated Propaganda
  • Article 236 and the Policing of Protest

Armenian Center for Political Rights (ACPR) Reports:

Guest: Rafael Ishkhanyan

Hosts:

Episode 497 | Recorded: December 13, 2025

SHOW NOTES: https://podcasts.groong.org/497

VIDEO: https://youtu.be/-aRS_GqoCjE

#SpotlightOnSilence #ArmeniaJustice #PoliticalPrisoners #FreedomOfSpeech #RuleOfLaw #HumanRights #Groong


Subscribe and follow us everywhere you are: linktr.ee/groong

Asbed (00:00:06):

Hello, everyone, and welcome to a Groong Spotlight on Silence episode.

Asbed (00:00:10):

The Armenian Center for Political Rights, the ACPR, has released a number of important reports.

Asbed (00:00:20):

There was one in November.

Asbed (00:00:22):

And just recently,

Asbed (00:00:23):

again, a week ago,

Asbed (00:00:25):

maybe a couple of weeks ago,

Asbed (00:00:26):

they highlight a lot of systematic egregious violations of citizens' legal and

Asbed (00:00:30):

constitutional rights,

Asbed (00:00:32):

not to mention the absolute trashing of religious freedom in the country by

Asbed (00:00:36):

Pashinyan's government.

Asbed (00:00:38):

These reports are our topic today,

Asbed (00:00:40):

as we have with us Rafael Ishkhanyan,

Asbed (00:00:43):

a lawyer specializing in human rights and freedom of expression in Armenia.

Asbed (00:00:49):

The links to the reports and the ACPR page on Facebook,

Asbed (00:00:53):

as well as referenced article,

Asbed (00:00:55):

will all be in our show notes at podcasts.groong.org/episode-number.

Asbed (00:01:00):

It's important that you check them out.

Asbed (00:01:03):

And please join, like, and follow the ACPR Facebook page.

Asbed (00:01:07):

Browse the reports that they've posted.

Asbed (00:01:09):

And it's important to let them know how critical we think that their work is for

Asbed (00:01:13):

democracy and human rights in Armenia.

Asbed (00:01:16):

Kovig, we do these spotlights just a little too infrequently.

Asbed (00:01:21):

The last one we did was June 2025,

Asbed (00:01:25):

while these issues on human rights violations and the trampling of democratic norms

Asbed (00:01:30):

in Armenia have just become kind of a daily feature in Armenia now.

Hovik (00:01:36):

Yeah, I think unfortunately this is a combination of factors,

Hovik (00:01:39):

including us being stretched too thin,

Hovik (00:01:42):

ACPR experts being stretched too thin,

Hovik (00:01:46):

and just being too many fires to address at the same time.

Hovik (00:01:51):

But I think that one way that our viewers and listeners can find ways to ramp up

Hovik (00:01:58):

our voices and help us increase our scale and reach is to go to podcasts.groong.org/donate

Hovik (00:02:06):

and help us financially.

Hovik (00:02:08):

Also,

Hovik (00:02:09):

you should always like,

Hovik (00:02:10):

comment,

Hovik (00:02:11):

and share this content and make sure you're subscribed,

Hovik (00:02:15):

especially if you find the content interesting and if you're listening to us now.

Hovik (00:02:20):

All right, on with the show.

Asbed (00:02:22):

Welcome back to The Groong Podcast, Rafael.

Rafael (00:02:26):

Hello Hovik, Hello Asbed, nice seeing you again.

Hovik (00:02:29):

We have a number of topics to talk about,

Hovik (00:02:31):

but we want to start with the case of the Imnemnini podcasters from AntiFake,

Hovik (00:02:36):

because to me it captures the mechanics of repression in today's Armenia better

Hovik (00:02:42):

than almost anything else.

Hovik (00:02:44):

The two podcasters were arrested not once,

Hovik (00:02:47):

but twice for words spoken out on a political show people chose to watch.

Hovik (00:02:54):

Insult, which is no longer a crime in Armenia,

Hovik (00:02:57):

was repackaged as online hooliganism.

Hovik (00:03:01):

Their equipment was seized, their newsroom was crippled, and the message was simple.

Hovik (00:03:06):

Keep talking, and this is what happens.

Hovik (00:03:09):

So as we mentioned,

Hovik (00:03:10):

these two same podcasters,

Hovik (00:03:12):

Narek Samsonian and Vazgen Saghathelyan,

Hovik (00:03:14):

were detained in March 2024.

Hovik (00:03:17):

Chargers were filed against them,

Hovik (00:03:20):

and after serving pretrial detention for months,

Hovik (00:03:24):

they were eventually released,

Hovik (00:03:27):

and in May 2025, they were acquitted.

Hovik (00:03:30):

But that didn't stop the authorities from bringing the same exact charge and,

Hovik (00:03:37):

again, imposing pretrial detention as a preventive measure.

Hovik (00:03:42):

So,

Hovik (00:03:43):

Rafael,

Hovik (00:03:44):

your organization,

Hovik (00:03:45):

ACPR,

Hovik (00:03:46):

Armenian Center for Political Rights,

Hovik (00:03:47):

has published a statement,

Hovik (00:03:50):

and we will link it in our show notes,

Hovik (00:03:52):

about this incident.

Hovik (00:03:54):

Can you tell us more, from your perspective, what happened?

Rafael (00:03:58):

Yeah, you're right. Now we are dealing with,

Rafael (00:04:00):

let's say,

Rafael (00:04:01):

a rare case of recurring persecution,

Rafael (00:04:05):

let's say,

Rafael (00:04:06):

because,

Rafael (00:04:07):

as you mentioned,

Rafael (00:04:09):

the article involved is so-called hooliganism.

Rafael (00:04:12):

We call it the circumvention of the decriminalization of insults.

Rafael (00:04:17):

And by the way, this is not the only way that the authorities are doing.

Rafael (00:04:21):

They also use some other techniques in other situations.

Rafael (00:04:24):

We'll see when we discuss the lawyer's case.

Rafael (00:04:28):

In contrast to the last year's same circumstances that were there,

Rafael (00:04:34):

we saw one,

Rafael (00:04:36):

let's say, one more level of the,

Rafael (00:04:39):

let's say,

Rafael (00:04:40):

one more shade to the persecution is that in the current situation,

Rafael (00:04:45):

situation,

Rafael (00:04:46):

the person from the ruling party that was,

Rafael (00:04:48):

let's say,

Rafael (00:04:50):

the one who benefited this was Alain Simonian,

Rafael (00:04:52):

basically the Speaker of the Parliament.

Rafael (00:04:55):

Let's say the second or not the first one in charge.

Rafael (00:04:58):

It was not the very top.

Rafael (00:05:02):

But now we have other people in power who may also benefit from this circumvention

Rafael (00:05:10):

of the legal system and basically using the

Rafael (00:05:14):

The charges that absolutely have nothing to do with insults directly targeted

Rafael (00:05:20):

towards a person,

Rafael (00:05:21):

which, by the way,

Rafael (00:05:22):

was an answer to the similar insult which was provoked by Allen,

Rafael (00:05:28):

I think,

Rafael (00:05:29):

the same day or the day before.

Rafael (00:05:31):

So this is one of the differences.

Rafael (00:05:33):

The second one,

Rafael (00:05:34):

let's say for some of the people would expect that,

Rafael (00:05:38):

okay, let's say once it happened,

Rafael (00:05:40):

maybe the first judge who gave the pretrial detention,

Rafael (00:05:44):

the first case was wrong.

Rafael (00:05:47):

Maybe it was too much pressure.

Rafael (00:05:49):

But as you said, we have their case closed.

Rafael (00:05:52):

They were acquitted.

Rafael (00:05:54):

And now as some other judge sees the same exact same charge brought against same people,

Rafael (00:06:00):

So we would think that it should be,

Rafael (00:06:02):

you know,

Rafael (00:06:05):

in a negative scale,

Rafael (00:06:06):

so much,

Rafael (00:06:08):

you know,

Rafael (00:06:09):

needed for the other judge to go to the same path.

Rafael (00:06:13):

Of course,

Rafael (00:06:14):

as a professional judge,

Rafael (00:06:15):

knowing that this charge would be dropped eventually,

Rafael (00:06:17):

it would be quitted eventually,

Rafael (00:06:19):

but it just becomes so easy just with a mark of a pen to deny freedom for

Rafael (00:06:26):

journalists, for podcasters,

Rafael (00:06:27):

without even thinking about this.

Rafael (00:06:31):

So this is very alarming, of course.

Rafael (00:06:35):

One thing that...

Rafael (00:06:38):

we ask people to pay attention to once and for all cause this topic of hooliganism,

Rafael (00:06:45):

so-called think,

Rafael (00:06:47):

is that

Rafael (00:06:49):

This is a very old, this is, let's say, outdated type of charge.

Rafael (00:06:53):

For many people, when we try to explain what it is, people don't even understand.

Rafael (00:06:57):

Say, okay, what it is?

Rafael (00:06:58):

It says, you know, the overtly disrespectful attitude towards society.

Rafael (00:07:04):

What is that even?

Rafael (00:07:05):

If you go to this path, maybe someone would argue that any type of punk music

Rafael (00:07:11):

is an act of hooliganism itself.

Rafael (00:07:13):

So those people will be,

Rafael (00:07:14):

you know,

Rafael (00:07:15):

charged if they even live in Armenia,

Rafael (00:07:18):

let's say,

Rafael (00:07:19):

if they,

Rafael (00:07:20):

I don't know, play their music in one of the concerts,

Rafael (00:07:22):

because in some punk music,

Rafael (00:07:24):

there's some disrespectful attitudes towards the society,

Rafael (00:07:28):

whatever that would mean.

Asbed (00:07:30):

Absolutely. I'm thinking the equivalent in the United States of, let's say, rap music.

Rafael (00:07:35):

Sure, absolutely.

Rafael (00:07:37):

Because the only act that was labeled as such was use,

Rafael (00:07:42):

and sometimes it's just use of a single insulting word,

Rafael (00:07:45):

single use of profanity.

Rafael (00:07:48):

which I think it's abundant in some songs.

Rafael (00:07:51):

Maybe if,

Rafael (00:07:52):

let's say,

Rafael (00:07:53):

if you look into this way of operation of this law,

Rafael (00:07:56):

if you put some rap music,

Rafael (00:07:58):

let's say, or punk music,

Rafael (00:07:59):

which has F-word in it,

Rafael (00:08:02):

if it becomes available to the third person with this logic,

Rafael (00:08:05):

you can say they committed act of hooliganism.

Rafael (00:08:11):

And if you bring them to the judge for the pretrial detention,

Rafael (00:08:14):

If we take into account the example we have,

Rafael (00:08:17):

they may be put in prison for that,

Rafael (00:08:18):

which is absurd,

Rafael (00:08:19):

of course.

Rafael (00:08:20):

For the hooliganism to be the case,

Rafael (00:08:24):

this should be the motive,

Rafael (00:08:25):

this should be the goal,

Rafael (00:08:26):

the aim of a person,

Rafael (00:08:28):

that their aim was not use of the insults or profanity,

Rafael (00:08:32):

but the goal was to show their disrespect.

Rafael (00:08:36):

So...

Rafael (00:08:37):

If you look closely to how it's written,

Rafael (00:08:40):

how the Cassation court interpreted this,

Rafael (00:08:44):

you know,

Rafael (00:08:45):

obscure,

Rafael (00:08:46):

let's say,

Rafael (00:08:47):

charge,

Rafael (00:08:48):

is that, again,

Rafael (00:08:49):

this disrespect,

Rafael (00:08:51):

the show of disrespect should be the aim of the,

Rafael (00:08:53):

let's say, hooligan.

Rafael (00:08:55):

not the use of profanity.

Rafael (00:08:56):

So just back to our case.

Rafael (00:08:59):

We stressed that the last time last year,

Rafael (00:09:00):

and now that Narek and Vazgen included in their podcast from the beginning,

Rafael (00:09:07):

they have a disclaimer.

Rafael (00:09:08):

It clearly says, and I counted, it goes for more than half a minute.

Rafael (00:09:12):

It clearly shows that

Rafael (00:09:14):

In this podcast, we may use some very extreme wording.

Rafael (00:09:18):

Sometimes some people may find it disturbing.

Rafael (00:09:20):

There may be some use of profanity if the case is such.

Rafael (00:09:24):

So if anyone doesn't want to hear that because,

Rafael (00:09:28):

you know, they will be,

Rafael (00:09:29):

you know,

Rafael (00:09:30):

feel with disrespect.

Rafael (00:09:32):

yeah of course you can just switch off that's your choice you've been warned i mean

Rafael (00:09:36):

there was no surprise to that same was the case last year they didn't put the

Rafael (00:09:40):

disclaimer in the beginning but they put a disclaimer in the chapter and also they

Rafael (00:09:45):

said that now it's 18 plus that means you know mature content so anyone who is you

Rafael (00:09:50):

know who may be offended please turn off your screen sorry or the stream

Rafael (00:09:54):

And then went on saying what they did say and what eventually were acquitted of.

Rafael (00:09:59):

Now we have the same situation, a clearer case.

Rafael (00:10:02):

So it's not even a debate about the persecution,

Rafael (00:10:06):

what was the motives of the,

Rafael (00:10:08):

let's see how the trial goes.

Rafael (00:10:09):

No, it's just a very easy textbook example.

Rafael (00:10:13):

You can give it to the first grade law students.

Rafael (00:10:17):

Is there a violation of law here, like from the side of the state?

Rafael (00:10:23):

I don't think that even, you know, the worst students would go and say no.

Rafael (00:10:27):

It's just so plain.

Hovik (00:10:28):

I'm in shock because,

Hovik (00:10:29):

of course, I know about this,

Hovik (00:10:30):

but when I think about hooliganism,

Hovik (00:10:32):

I think about a bunch of people on the street fighting and beating each other up.

Hovik (00:10:36):

We're talking about online hooliganism.

Hovik (00:10:39):

What would be the components that the government would have to prove for this to...

Hovik (00:10:44):

Go forward. I mean,

Hovik (00:10:45):

I believe the law says that you have to,

Hovik (00:10:47):

you know,

Hovik (00:10:48):

it was hooliganism and it was done with the use of insults,

Hovik (00:10:51):

which is apparently in the law explicitly makes it more aggravated.

Hovik (00:10:55):

I'm not sure.

Hovik (00:10:57):

And I can't even believe we're talking about disclaimers that just to exercise free

Hovik (00:11:01):

speech,

Hovik (00:11:02):

they have to use disclaimers.

Hovik (00:11:04):

I don't think even that should be necessary.

Hovik (00:11:06):

You know, should we use disclaimers for our show?

Hovik (00:11:09):

if I want to call Alen like uh you know I don't know some not very nice words

Hovik (00:11:14):

I'm not sure what what uh you know so I saw your report I saw you mentioned

Hovik (00:11:18):

disclaimer I think that it's good to mention it but I think that when that is

Hovik (00:11:23):

people's default to that as a main argument I don't think that we should rely on

Hovik (00:11:28):

just a disclaimer offering protection

Rafael (00:11:32):

Yes, you're right.

Rafael (00:11:34):

And somehow we feel ashamed that we have to record to that.

Rafael (00:11:38):

The idea is that the prosecution should prove the guilt of a person,

Rafael (00:11:46):

but we're in a situation where actively proving the innocence.

Rafael (00:11:50):

But we have what we have.

Rafael (00:11:52):

So that's why we put so much information

Rafael (00:11:56):

we underline this, this, this thing that they put to disclaimer.

Rafael (00:11:58):

So just rule out any hooliganism.

Rafael (00:12:00):

We don't even go further because if we go further, what does it, yeah, you're right.

Rafael (00:12:04):

What does it mean online hooliganism?

Rafael (00:12:06):

Well,

Rafael (00:12:07):

if you go into the criminal code of Armenia,

Rafael (00:12:10):

you will see some remnants from the old times.

Rafael (00:12:12):

And for some people, especially in US where the

Rafael (00:12:16):

free speech is of a different quality, let's say, I'm not a big fan of all the legal

Rafael (00:12:21):

system but what comes to free speech I think the U.S. has one of the greatest

Rafael (00:12:24):

standards but at least on paper uh and it will be very difficult to even explain

Rafael (00:12:31):

why we have this kind of issue here this can be you're right the hooliganism

Rafael (00:12:38):

initially it was the act you know when some people when the you know during the

Rafael (00:12:42):

tsardom or Soviet Union

Rafael (00:12:45):

you know, some sort of antisocial elements would engage in streets,

Rafael (00:12:49):

you know,

Rafael (00:12:50):

being drunk or being very antisocial,

Rafael (00:12:52):

they will use profanity,

Rafael (00:12:53):

they will,

Rafael (00:12:54):

you know, be quite a stress for the passersby.

Rafael (00:12:57):

And this was basically what the hooliganism was.

Rafael (00:13:00):

They include the aggravated circumstance if it's done through the use of telecommunications.

Rafael (00:13:06):

Well, the only scenario where we're thinking about this in ACPR and what we can come up

Rafael (00:13:10):

with is,

Rafael (00:13:11):

let's imagine some reporter for the,

Rafael (00:13:13):

you know,

Rafael (00:13:14):

news reporter is reporting from someplace,

Rafael (00:13:17):

I don't know, a venue,

Rafael (00:13:19):

which is, let's say there's a protest going on.

Rafael (00:13:21):

So they have the live camera pointed at protesters, the journalists talk in their microphone.

Rafael (00:13:26):

And so one guy comes and makes this sort of a video bomb and starts to use extreme,

Rafael (00:13:31):

you know, profanity against everyone,

Rafael (00:13:33):

asking the operator,

Rafael (00:13:34):

they point at me and I'm going to say this and that and that,

Rafael (00:13:37):

you know, very profane and obscene wording.

Rafael (00:13:40):

This might be, let's say, something to discuss as a hooliganism using telecommunications.

Rafael (00:13:47):

Because if we are going into the targeted use of insults,

Rafael (00:13:53):

which are part of the political discourse,

Rafael (00:13:56):

of course,

Rafael (00:13:57):

and I want to stress one more time,

Rafael (00:14:00):

in both cases,

Rafael (00:14:01):

these guys were answering to the insults which were voiced earlier,

Rafael (00:14:08):

first time by Nikol,

Rafael (00:14:09):

second time by Alan Simonyan.

Rafael (00:14:12):

So if we think that this is,

Rafael (00:14:16):

you know, if you label it as hooliganism and any of such cases of any stream,

Rafael (00:14:22):

of any blog,

Rafael (00:14:23):

any podcast whatsoever,

Rafael (00:14:25):

if they use an insult,

Rafael (00:14:28):

we should charge them.

Rafael (00:14:30):

I think the Armenian Investigation Service should spend the next couple of millennia

Rafael (00:14:36):

Just, you know,

Rafael (00:14:37):

investigating the cases of Vardan Ghukasyan,

Rafael (00:14:39):

you know,

Rafael (00:14:40):

the guy from the dog party.

Rafael (00:14:44):

Because in every video there was at least several cases of online hooliganism.

Rafael (00:14:48):

Saying in quotes, of course, because this is absurd.

Hovik (00:14:51):

Yeah.

Hovik (00:14:52):

Rafael,

Hovik (00:14:54):

if this is not political retaliation or suppression of free speech,

Hovik (00:14:58):

then why seize microphones,

Hovik (00:15:00):

cameras,

Hovik (00:15:01):

and even a tripod?

Hovik (00:15:03):

I believe that all of the,

Hovik (00:15:05):

essentially,

Hovik (00:15:06):

anything that could be confused for equipment was taken by the National Security

Hovik (00:15:13):

Services.

Rafael (00:15:14):

Yeah, there's no other answer.

Rafael (00:15:17):

It was just a pretext.

Rafael (00:15:19):

So we're thinking that...

Rafael (00:15:22):

For one,

Rafael (00:15:23):

anti-fake is one of the core,

Rafael (00:15:26):

let's say,

Rafael (00:15:28):

opposition-oriented medias here,

Rafael (00:15:31):

which made its name by itself.

Rafael (00:15:33):

And of course, if we even think, let's say, just imagine for one moment that

Rafael (00:15:39):

Whatever they did was a crime and they should be persecuted.

Rafael (00:15:43):

All the materials of the case are the video stream and that's it.

Rafael (00:15:47):

There's nothing else because we're discussing what they said during the stream.

Rafael (00:15:51):

So the investigation doesn't need absolutely anything besides having access to

Rafael (00:15:55):

YouTube on their computer in their office and they can do the investigation.

Rafael (00:16:00):

And seizing, yeah, even the tripod.

Rafael (00:16:02):

So that means, you know, you can't find anything on a tripod.

Rafael (00:16:06):

But fingerprints of whom?

Rafael (00:16:09):

So absolutely, this is just overt persecution against media.

Rafael (00:16:14):

This is an overt pressure on free speech.

Rafael (00:16:18):

And the only reason that can come up with any sane person is this was done to

Rafael (00:16:23):

obstruct the activity of this media,

Rafael (00:16:26):

of anti-fake TV.

Hovik (00:16:27):

Well, next time I have a tripod with me, I'm going to be very careful.

Hovik (00:16:33):

So the so-called Velvet Revolution,

Hovik (00:16:36):

Rafael,

Hovik (00:16:37):

in reality, in our opinion,

Hovik (00:16:39):

a seizure of power or a coup,

Hovik (00:16:41):

came as a result of built-up hate against the formers by the people who claimed to

Hovik (00:16:48):

be liberal and democratic and essentially came in their place.

Hovik (00:16:53):

the same hated formers who decriminalize insults to begin with.

Hovik (00:16:58):

Do you remember a time before 2018 when this same tactic,

Hovik (00:17:03):

which is abhorrent in my opinion,

Hovik (00:17:06):

the packaging of free speech as hooliganism in order to jail someone,

Hovik (00:17:10):

was used by the regime?

Hovik (00:17:12):

I mean, at least, you know, leading up to 2018.

Hovik (00:17:16):

Maybe sometime in the 1990s this happened, I'm not sure.

Hovik (00:17:19):

But is it just that we have selective memory?

Hovik (00:17:24):

What can you say about that?

Rafael (00:17:27):

The short answer, I'd say no.

Rafael (00:17:29):

And before the decriminalization,

Rafael (00:17:32):

actually, Nikol Pashinyan was one of the people who went through it,

Rafael (00:17:35):

who was also criminally charged when it was in the criminal code in early 2000s.

Rafael (00:17:40):

And at that time,

Rafael (00:17:42):

it mostly would,

Rafael (00:17:43):

I think it would be concerned to the printed media because,

Rafael (00:17:47):

you know, the lack of the internet was not available at the moment.

Rafael (00:17:52):

And for the opposition, the accessible media was the printed media.

Rafael (00:17:56):

There were cases before the decriminalization that,

Rafael (00:17:58):

yeah,

Rafael (00:17:59):

people were charged with insults in a criminal sense.

Rafael (00:18:03):

I think it was, I don't remember the date, but it was in early 2000s when it was decriminalized.

Rafael (00:18:09):

And in my memory,

Rafael (00:18:10):

I don't have any case similar to this one that is just for the sake of insults,

Rafael (00:18:16):

a person being dragged in front of the cameras in this shameful way by the masked

Rafael (00:18:21):

policeman, whatever,

Rafael (00:18:22):

put in a pretrial detention for the woods.

Rafael (00:18:25):

There were different things,

Rafael (00:18:26):

of course, which still exist today,

Rafael (00:18:29):

but this is,

Rafael (00:18:30):

I say, an innovation which this current government brought with them.

Rafael (00:18:33):

They tried to circumvent the decriminalization with any possible way.

Rafael (00:18:38):

This is not the only one, actually.

Rafael (00:18:41):

They do the same when they use the charge against one of the lawyers was detained last month.

Rafael (00:18:49):

They use the same when they are trying to interpret the hate speech laws because

Rafael (00:18:53):

they put aside the protected characteristic part,

Rafael (00:18:56):

which is the most important part of what we call hate speech or hate crime laws.

Rafael (00:19:02):

And they only live with the insults directed towards one of the ruling party members.

Rafael (00:19:08):

And they're saying, well,

Rafael (00:19:09):

this was a call for,

Rafael (00:19:10):

I don't know,

Rafael (00:19:11):

a public call for violence or incitement of intolerance whatsoever,

Rafael (00:19:18):

which in reality was just an insult targeted towards a specific person,

Rafael (00:19:23):

which has legal remedy for that.

Rafael (00:19:26):

They should go to the civil court, file a case,

Rafael (00:19:29):

And demand for, you know, the so-called non-material, non-pecuniary damage.

Rafael (00:19:35):

And that's it. No one should go to jail for that.

Rafael (00:19:37):

This is what's written in the law.

Rafael (00:19:38):

But as we discussed, they tried to circumvent it in many ways.

Rafael (00:19:43):

And online hooliganism is one aspect where this is used at the moment for the

Rafael (00:19:49):

Wasgen and Narek's cases are not the only one,

Rafael (00:19:53):

but they are the most prominent ones at the moment.

Asbed (00:19:56):

Rafael, let's take a look at the cases of the two lawyers arrested in November,

Asbed (00:19:59):

which you mentioned,

Asbed (00:20:00):

which showed that even the legal profession is no longer protected if it's

Asbed (00:20:04):

defending people that the government is targeting.

Asbed (00:20:07):

One of them, the first one, was lawyer Alexander Kochubayev, I believe.

Asbed (00:20:11):

He wrote a harsh Facebook post criticizing judges and prosecutors over church-related cases.

Asbed (00:20:17):

And for that, he was violently detained and jailed under a criminal article that has nothing to

Asbed (00:20:22):

do with insults.

Asbed (00:20:23):

And then another lawyer,

Asbed (00:20:25):

Ruben Mkhitaryan,

Asbed (00:20:26):

was arrested for being present as a lawyer at a protest outside Gyumri City Hall,

Asbed (00:20:32):

where he was negotiating with the police and raising his hands.

Asbed (00:20:36):

Yet he was falsely charged,

Asbed (00:20:39):

as the ACPR report states,

Asbed (00:20:41):

with mass disorder and interference with justice,

Asbed (00:20:44):

despite the video evidence showing that he committed any kind of unknown violence.

Asbed (00:20:50):

For our listeners, I just want to remind that we are going to put all these ACPR statement links into

Asbed (00:20:55):

our show notes at podcasts.groong.org/episode-number.

Asbed (00:20:59):

So please go and check them out.

Asbed (00:21:00):

It's important that you check out these documents.

Asbed (00:21:04):

Rafael, what legal standards were used to justify criminal charges against these two lawyers?

Rafael (00:21:13):

Just one more remark before we get to the lawyers' cases is that I think you saw

Rafael (00:21:19):

that the platform to promote the protection of journalists and I think safety of

Rafael (00:21:24):

journalists, this is the Council of Europe platform.

Rafael (00:21:27):

So they issued a statement and they included Narek's and Vazgen's Imnemnimi

Rafael (00:21:31):

case in their statement where they basically raised some concerns

Rafael (00:21:38):

you know,

Rafael (00:21:39):

the issue before the Armenian government with the same,

Rafael (00:21:44):

you know,

Rafael (00:21:45):

we mentioned in our discussion,

Rafael (00:21:46):

the seizure of the equipment,

Rafael (00:21:49):

the lack of legal basis whatsoever.

Rafael (00:21:52):

one thing i think should uh which is a uh for some which is a quite you know a

Rafael (00:21:57):

shocking let's say it would be a shocking uh discovery if people go to the website

Rafael (00:22:04):

this platform's website so they have listed uh the number of detained journalists

Rafael (00:22:09):

in the in the European area and if you look into the council of Europe states at

Rafael (00:22:16):

this moment armenia is the in the third place

Rafael (00:22:20):

the number of detained journalists.

Rafael (00:22:23):

So the higher numbers are only in Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Rafael (00:22:28):

This is just one thing.

Rafael (00:22:29):

I mean, now we got in top charts in one criteria,

Rafael (00:22:36):

which is quite disturbing,

Rafael (00:22:39):

the number of journalists detained.

Rafael (00:22:43):

It's higher than in Georgia.

Rafael (00:22:44):

It's higher than in any other Council of Europe state.

Rafael (00:22:46):

You can see that, you know, there's Russia, Belarus, but they are not part of this organization.

Rafael (00:22:51):

And the cases of Ukraine are basically those who were detained in the part where

Rafael (00:22:58):

there is Russian forces currently.

Rafael (00:23:00):

So,

Hovik (00:23:01):

So I think that, yeah, this is an interesting report.

Hovik (00:23:06):

And the source of the threat, like they have the categorization of threats.

Hovik (00:23:10):

This is level one threat, which is the most serious they have categorized.

Hovik (00:23:14):

But the language I found, even that I found a little bit too diplomatic.

Hovik (00:23:18):

They say, we request for you to re-evaluate the case and things like that.

Hovik (00:23:23):

Whereas, for instance, if this was in Russia, I would...

Hovik (00:23:27):

I think I would see stronger language,

Hovik (00:23:29):

like we strongly reject,

Hovik (00:23:31):

this is a brutal violation of human rights.

Hovik (00:23:34):

So I think even in terms of EU bodies responding, there is a little bit of a

Hovik (00:23:40):

soft pillow you know that is used when uh approaching this and in any case I'm glad

Hovik (00:23:47):

that you brought this up we will also include the link to this uh COE council of

Hovik (00:23:52):

Europe platform I think it's platform for protection of journalism I believe

Hovik (00:23:58):

yeah right uh yeah so that report will also include that report in the show notes

Rafael (00:24:05):

Yeah, the lawyers.

Rafael (00:24:06):

So during the ACPR's annual event,

Rafael (00:24:10):

we put the name for this session as who would protect those who protect us.

Rafael (00:24:16):

So we'll defend the defense because this kind of charges against lawyers and

Rafael (00:24:23):

happening in a very short period,

Rafael (00:24:25):

one after another.

Rafael (00:24:26):

For us,

Rafael (00:24:27):

it was another,

Rafael (00:24:28):

let's say,

Rafael (00:24:29):

cold shower in terms that,

Rafael (00:24:32):

again, those charges are not,

Rafael (00:24:34):

you know,

Rafael (00:24:35):

the type that you can debate,

Rafael (00:24:36):

you can have the,

Rafael (00:24:37):

you know,

Rafael (00:24:38):

this struggle of opinions because,

Rafael (00:24:41):

well, maybe,

Rafael (00:24:42):

you know, there's something,

Rafael (00:24:43):

it depends how to interpret the situation,

Rafael (00:24:45):

because there's absolutely no interpretation.

Rafael (00:24:47):

As you mentioned, in Ruben Mkhitaryan's case,

Rafael (00:24:52):

there was just absolutely nothing this is the very you know classical way of build up case just

Rafael (00:25:00):

I don't even know where to start.

Rafael (00:25:02):

We just went through all the type of recordings of different angles,

Rafael (00:25:06):

starting from the moment when he was far from the protest place,

Rafael (00:25:10):

showing that there's something happening there,

Rafael (00:25:12):

a scuffle,

Rafael (00:25:13):

whatever, and trying to approach there.

Rafael (00:25:15):

And we have his every move shot on cameras, different cameras from different angles.

Rafael (00:25:19):

We're trying to, again, as I said, trying to prove his innocence.

Rafael (00:25:23):

His lawyers, you know, us and the others,

Rafael (00:25:27):

This is the absurd that we got, this absurd situation that we are dealing with.

Asbed (00:25:34):

But so how do the prosecutors explain the gap between what they are charging with

Asbed (00:25:40):

and then the publicly available evidence?

Asbed (00:25:43):

It just doesn't make any sense.

Rafael (00:25:46):

Absolutely.

Rafael (00:25:48):

I don't know. I don't know.

Rafael (00:25:49):

I mean,

Rafael (00:25:50):

I know that during the hearing for the pretrial detention,

Rafael (00:25:54):

the lawyer said they were just doing absurd things in the sense that there was

Rafael (00:25:58):

nothing.

Rafael (00:25:59):

There was just no evidence.

Rafael (00:26:00):

No, you know, nothing incriminating against him.

Rafael (00:26:03):

They were saying he was obstructing the...

Rafael (00:26:08):

Yeah, the powers of the police officer,

Rafael (00:26:10):

whoever was there,

Rafael (00:26:11):

and he was participating in mass riots.

Rafael (00:26:15):

There were no mass riots absolutely there.

Rafael (00:26:17):

There were dozens of people currently arrested, and I think some of them are in detention.

Rafael (00:26:22):

And there was a scuffle,

Rafael (00:26:24):

because if you look into the videos,

Rafael (00:26:26):

yeah,

Rafael (00:26:27):

there was a scuffle between police and the protesters,

Rafael (00:26:29):

some through the plastic bottles or other things.

Rafael (00:26:32):

We know that this is not something that should be incriminating.

Rafael (00:26:34):

We have a European Court of Human Rights case saying that if you throw,

Rafael (00:26:39):

you know,

Rafael (00:26:40):

this sort of innocent objects,

Rafael (00:26:44):

which does not cause any danger,

Rafael (00:26:45):

you cannot,

Rafael (00:26:46):

you know,

Rafael (00:26:47):

qualify it as a grave crime or whatever.

Rafael (00:26:49):

This is not a pretext for the interventions.

Rafael (00:26:55):

Robin was standing there.

Rafael (00:26:56):

Again, several cameras are showing how we are just standing there.

Rafael (00:27:01):

doing nothing else but standing there with his hands high.

Rafael (00:27:06):

Probably was trying to communicate with the police because,

Rafael (00:27:09):

yeah, sorry,

Rafael (00:27:10):

with a different angle when he was already being brought

Rafael (00:27:13):

He's telling the other camera was pointing at him, look, they are beating someone there.

Rafael (00:27:19):

And he's pointing at a case where policemen were beating a person,

Rafael (00:27:24):

a protester,

Rafael (00:27:25):

and he's showing that there's a violation going on.

Rafael (00:27:27):

So basically he was doing what human rights defender would do,

Rafael (00:27:31):

even though he himself was being at the moment arrested.

Asbed (00:27:34):

What kind of impact do such activities on the part of the police against lawyers

Asbed (00:27:39):

have on all these lawyers,

Asbed (00:27:42):

the legal profession,

Asbed (00:27:43):

in trying to carry out their duties,

Asbed (00:27:45):

their professional duties?

Rafael (00:27:47):

I think if this case stays without,

Rafael (00:27:52):

let's say,

Rafael (00:27:54):

due evaluation,

Rafael (00:27:55):

let's say,

Rafael (00:27:57):

if the state does not issue a statement saying that we were wrong,

Rafael (00:28:02):

This is something that we're looking to, you know, that would not occur anymore.

Rafael (00:28:07):

Maybe somehow we'll be more eased, but, you know, the chief of investigative committee

Rafael (00:28:14):

brought false evidence,

Rafael (00:28:16):

false statements, saying that,

Rafael (00:28:17):

well, Ruben was doing some,

Rafael (00:28:19):

you know,

Rafael (00:28:20):

movements with his hands,

Rafael (00:28:21):

which was because, no,

Rafael (00:28:22):

absolutely he was not doing anything.

Rafael (00:28:23):

There are four objective, you know, evidence pieces, recordings.

Rafael (00:28:28):

You cannot manipulate all of those.

Rafael (00:28:29):

And please, go and try to fight others because...

Rafael (00:28:32):

I think there were more than four.

Rafael (00:28:33):

We just went into this because we thought it's more than enough to show that he was

Rafael (00:28:37):

doing absolutely nothing there.

Rafael (00:28:39):

So what would be the effect, the chilling effect?

Rafael (00:28:41):

Of course, we were thinking at the moment where the protests were happening.

Rafael (00:28:44):

I myself,

Rafael (00:28:45):

when I was being an observer,

Rafael (00:28:47):

many times I was standing in a line where there is this contact line between

Rafael (00:28:52):

protesters and police.

Rafael (00:28:53):

Why? Because if something happens, this is the place.

Rafael (00:28:56):

And if I have to document what is happening there,

Rafael (00:28:58):

this is the place where I should look,

Rafael (00:29:00):

where I should take photos,

Rafael (00:29:01):

videos, or whatever.

Rafael (00:29:02):

Now, let's say,

Rafael (00:29:03):

I will think twice doing that because maybe I will be brought,

Rafael (00:29:07):

maybe I will be charged because I don't need to do absolutely anything,

Rafael (00:29:11):

even more something illegal.

Rafael (00:29:15):

I don't have to do absolutely anything to be charged with such absurd cases as Rubens was.

Rafael (00:29:23):

And of course, in the end,

Rafael (00:29:24):

I will be acquitted,

Rafael (00:29:25):

but I will spend the next couple of weeks or a month in jail for what?

Hovik (00:29:31):

And, in fact, it's not just the lawyers.

Hovik (00:29:33):

I mean, just two days ago,

Hovik (00:29:34):

in the case of Samvel Karapetyan,

Hovik (00:29:36):

and we will talk more about that later,

Hovik (00:29:38):

the expert witness who testified in the case,

Hovik (00:29:43):

and he testified that,

Hovik (00:29:44):

you know,

Hovik (00:29:45):

the use of the words,

Hovik (00:29:46):

we will get involved in our own way,

Hovik (00:29:48):

does not constitute a seizure of state power.

Hovik (00:29:52):

As soon as he did that, the investigators raided his home and searched his home.

Hovik (00:29:56):

There's a lot of intimidation of...

Hovik (00:29:59):

professionals, whether it's legal lawyers or even expert witnesses,

Hovik (00:30:04):

to not dare to defend the targets of government's political persecution.

Hovik (00:30:10):

But I think this is a good segue to talk about the next topic on our show,

Hovik (00:30:18):

which is actually a big topic.

Hovik (00:30:22):

It is a report that your organization, the ACPR, issued earlier in November.

Hovik (00:30:27):

It's called Mass Political Persecutions of 2025, May to September.

Hovik (00:30:33):

It's more than 50 pages long,

Hovik (00:30:35):

so I think that you're right to label it Part A because I'm sure there will be a

Hovik (00:30:39):

lot of material for Part B as these injustices are continuing to take place.

Hovik (00:30:46):

So the report goes into the details of major cases from that period, from May to September.

Hovik (00:30:54):

Before turning to individual cases,

Hovik (00:30:58):

though,

Hovik (00:30:59):

we need to explain what this report is and why it exists.

Hovik (00:31:02):

The ACPR did not write this report in a vacuum.

Hovik (00:31:06):

And it emerged from a growing number of similar cases unfolding at the same time

Hovik (00:31:13):

under the same logic.

Hovik (00:31:15):

And the report basically asks a basic question.

Hovik (00:31:19):

Why now?

Hovik (00:31:21):

And

Hovik (00:31:23):

The repressions by the Pashinyan regime, as you highlight, have only escalated.

Hovik (00:31:29):

It's not like they were completely angelic before,

Hovik (00:31:33):

but it seems like with every year,

Hovik (00:31:36):

especially now,

Hovik (00:31:39):

the repressions escalated.

Hovik (00:31:42):

So we ask you, why now, Rafael?

Hovik (00:31:45):

Why in 2025?

Rafael (00:31:47):

Yeah, so we provided this as the way we think the explanation in two parts.

Rafael (00:31:53):

So we think there are some domestic reasons for that and some international reasons for that.

Rafael (00:31:59):

The domestic reasons is the upcoming elections,

Rafael (00:32:02):

of course, because now if you think about that,

Rafael (00:32:06):

in many countries,

Rafael (00:32:07):

like similar to Armenia,

Rafael (00:32:08):

there's one sort of political rule when you have some autocrats sitting on top,

Rafael (00:32:15):

And this is the gatekeeper of the inner political arena.

Rafael (00:32:20):

If you want to get inside,

Rafael (00:32:21):

you have to ask this gatekeeper,

Rafael (00:32:22):

because otherwise you'll be isolated,

Rafael (00:32:24):

you'll be persecuted,

Rafael (00:32:25):

or you'll not be letting,

Rafael (00:32:26):

they will not let you to get involved in this,

Rafael (00:32:29):

which is something that Samvel Karapetyan was trying to do.

Rafael (00:32:32):

And he has finances, which is

Rafael (00:32:34):

completely different issue by itself for the autocrat.

Rafael (00:32:38):

Why? Because,

Rafael (00:32:39):

you know, they can now challenge the huge apparatus that the state has,

Rafael (00:32:43):

which is being used for the political gains of the ruling elite.

Rafael (00:32:48):

This is one thing.

Rafael (00:32:49):

And now, when we were writing about that, we brought...

Rafael (00:32:57):

you know,

Rafael (00:32:58):

explanation,

Rafael (00:32:59):

the need for the next elections,

Rafael (00:33:02):

you know, consolidation of power as the primary one,

Rafael (00:33:05):

because after the last elections,

Rafael (00:33:07):

we saw that the support was being decreasing,

Rafael (00:33:09):

decreasing in other communities,

Rafael (00:33:12):

including the Yerevan,

Rafael (00:33:14):

and civil contract is now having difficult time to,

Rafael (00:33:17):

you know,

Rafael (00:33:20):

gain the sole,

Rafael (00:33:22):

you know,

Rafael (00:33:23):

majority of,

Rafael (00:33:24):

In the other communities.

Rafael (00:33:26):

And they are doing recourse to some other means of that,

Rafael (00:33:30):

you know, arresting the opposition mayors,

Rafael (00:33:33):

you know,

Rafael (00:33:34):

forcing them to go to the snap elections,

Rafael (00:33:37):

so many tactics they have for that.

Rafael (00:33:41):

But the actual reason,

Rafael (00:33:44):

I think, not the reason,

Rafael (00:33:45):

but the actual mechanism is that from 2018,

Rafael (00:33:49):

Nikol Pashinyan was building up his infrastructure of persecution.

Rafael (00:33:54):

That's our new word,

Rafael (00:33:56):

you know,

Rafael (00:33:57):

infrastructure for persecution,

Rafael (00:33:58):

what we call it,

Rafael (00:34:00):

which includes the mechanism in the judicial system

Rafael (00:34:03):

which would you know be the there would be judges there would be mechanisms how you

Rafael (00:34:07):

can refer these cases to them which would you know deliver uh opinions or decisions

Rafael (00:34:13):

uh more uh favorable for the ruling party uh you should have the law enforcement uh

Rafael (00:34:18):

working in the harmony with this kind you know these these persecutions and we know

Rafael (00:34:23):

who are the the chief executives of this enforcement

Rafael (00:34:27):

agencies,

Rafael (00:34:28):

the prosecutor general is former attache of Nicole Pashinyan when she was in the

Rafael (00:34:35):

executive and just in a leap in a day,

Rafael (00:34:39):

now she's the prosecutor general.

Rafael (00:34:42):

The chief of the investigative committee was her attache,

Rafael (00:34:45):

I think,

Rafael (00:34:46):

or how it's called,

Rafael (00:34:47):

the assistant.

Rafael (00:34:49):

And we don't need to talk about the others because the others are just basically

Rafael (00:34:54):

dependent on the prime minister,

Rafael (00:34:56):

even by law,

Rafael (00:34:57):

because these first two and three ones,

Rafael (00:35:00):

they should be independent of us.

Rafael (00:35:02):

Of course, there's nothing to talk about that now because, you know, they are trying to

Rafael (00:35:07):

cover-up for absolutely every misdeed he was doing.

Rafael (00:35:10):

The other important part of this infrastructure is how you train everyone involved

Rafael (00:35:16):

there to respond when you need them,

Rafael (00:35:18):

when you need someone to be prosecuted.

Rafael (00:35:20):

And we heard many colleagues were saying that before,

Rafael (00:35:26):

in former times,

Rafael (00:35:27):

there were calls from the presidential palace and the judge would then act

Rafael (00:35:32):

accordingly.

Rafael (00:35:33):

Now we don't need any calls.

Rafael (00:35:36):

We need,

Rafael (00:35:37):

but they need the judge to have a Facebook account and just to check what the prime

Rafael (00:35:42):

minister is writing there every other day.

Rafael (00:35:45):

And that's it. They would know what to do.

Rafael (00:35:46):

Because with all the instances of this persecution we described in this report,

Rafael (00:35:53):

the prime minister was...

Rafael (00:35:55):

Simultaneously, in real time, he was writing basically what should be done.

Rafael (00:35:59):

He was writing and coordinating,

Rafael (00:36:04):

I would say,

Rafael (00:36:05):

the actions of the law enforcement and judicial system when Sandot Karapetian was

Rafael (00:36:10):

being, you know,

Rafael (00:36:11):

this house was being searched,

Rafael (00:36:12):

it was being under investigative actions,

Rafael (00:36:15):

when the

Rafael (00:36:16):

when Mikayel Ajapahyan was being prosecuted,

Rafael (00:36:18):

when people went to the national security,

Rafael (00:36:21):

went and sacked the HMS in Cathedral,

Rafael (00:36:25):

and so on.

Rafael (00:36:26):

So this is the infrastructure, and it's up and running now.

Rafael (00:36:31):

I think it was the last test to see how far they can push this machine,

Rafael (00:36:37):

and I think they got,

Rafael (00:36:38):

let's say,

Rafael (00:36:39):

pretty far.

Rafael (00:36:41):

this is for what the domestic issues are.

Rafael (00:36:43):

And of course, there is also the international ones.

Rafael (00:36:46):

The international ones is,

Rafael (00:36:48):

of course, the agenda of the so-called peace agenda that the coalition is pursuing.

Rafael (00:36:52):

And in that regard, we're getting into politics a bit.

Rafael (00:36:57):

For me, this is, I mean, I would say for him, the paramount is to, you know, to show

Rafael (00:37:04):

so-called partners international partners you know this is the only me who can you

Rafael (00:37:09):

know get this deal done in the end so and uh those people you know from the

Rafael (00:37:15):

opposition if there's any chance they can you know topple me or they can you know

Rafael (00:37:20):

have a you know impact on your plans so I'm doing in my way isolating them and the

Rafael (00:37:25):

reason is because you need me to get this deal done or something like that let's

Rafael (00:37:29):

say

Rafael (00:37:31):

This is why now.

Rafael (00:37:32):

This is what we think, why now.

Hovik (00:37:34):

Rafael, in the recommendation section of the report, and I just have to...

Hovik (00:37:41):

say again,

Hovik (00:37:43):

this is an exquisite and very good job both in terms of the professionalism and the

Hovik (00:37:51):

depth that you go into documenting these incidents,

Hovik (00:37:54):

including the blow-by-blow response to evidence in the Bagrat Srbazan case,

Hovik (00:38:01):

which we'll talk about

Hovik (00:38:03):

a little bit more but in the report you state in the recommendation section you

Hovik (00:38:08):

state that months have already passed and i'm quoting you months have already

Hovik (00:38:12):

passed since the incidents described and the first sentence has been issued no

Hovik (00:38:19):

appropriate assessment of these persecutions has been made by international bodies

Rafael (00:38:24):

end quote why yes yeah you're right i mean uh

Rafael (00:38:29):

Why now?

Rafael (00:38:30):

This is because they got this open window for that.

Rafael (00:38:34):

I think it depends on several factors.

Rafael (00:38:36):

And the factors may be different depending on whose persecution we discuss.

Rafael (00:38:42):

I think Samvel Karapetyan's case is the easiest one.

Rafael (00:38:46):

he is a businessman from Russia we could have stopped here because for the current

Rafael (00:38:51):

western international community this is a big red flag and that's it if you are

Rafael (00:38:55):

from Russia you know you are not uh you know overtly from the you know

Rafael (00:39:01):

oppositionist you have some issues if you have money you have more issues with that

Rafael (00:39:05):

and if they get persecuted there are very few people would like to you know get

Rafael (00:39:09):

involved in this because again for

Rafael (00:39:12):

For those bodies issuing the statement,

Rafael (00:39:14):

assessing the situation,

Rafael (00:39:15):

it already takes some,

Rafael (00:39:17):

you know, political resource to do that because they will be perceived,

Rafael (00:39:20):

you know,

Rafael (00:39:21):

as an intervention into domestic affairs,

Rafael (00:39:23):

whatever.

Rafael (00:39:24):

So you have very,

Rafael (00:39:25):

you know, firm ground for that to assess and,

Rafael (00:39:29):

but that should be on paper and assess and,

Rafael (00:39:31):

you know, say that there's,

Rafael (00:39:32):

we see some problems here with this trial,

Rafael (00:39:35):

with these charges,

Rafael (00:39:36):

or we are keeping it at attention.

Rafael (00:39:38):

We are disturbed.

Rafael (00:39:39):

We are, you know, concerned whatsoever.

Rafael (00:39:42):

This is very difficult to do for them,

Rafael (00:39:45):

let's say,

Rafael (00:39:46):

if there are people which at least,

Rafael (00:39:48):

of course, they understand,

Rafael (00:39:49):

but they look into the case,

Rafael (00:39:51):

they get this clear absurdity of it.

Rafael (00:39:54):

But he is a Russian businessman, so it should be perceived if we are protecting him.

Rafael (00:40:02):

from this guy.

Rafael (00:40:04):

This is one thing.

Rafael (00:40:07):

For the others, the Bagrat Srbazan's whole struggle movement,

Rafael (00:40:11):

I think there's this one thing that they tried to accomplish is why they brought

Rafael (00:40:16):

the charges of terrorism

Rafael (00:40:18):

against the group.

Rafael (00:40:19):

And when we were discussing this,

Rafael (00:40:21):

one of our colleagues said,

Rafael (00:40:22):

well, if you look into the resolution 1900,

Rafael (00:40:25):

which states what the Council of Europe considers to be political prisoner,

Rafael (00:40:31):

there is a part which says those who were tried and sentenced for terrorist acts.

Rafael (00:40:38):

Of course,

Rafael (00:40:39):

according to the legislation and ECHR case law and so on during due process,

Rafael (00:40:45):

they cannot be considered as political prisoners.

Rafael (00:40:48):

Why? Because, yeah, you can be a political prisoner still if you do something bad.

Rafael (00:40:52):

If there is some criminal case, you get some criminal liability.

Rafael (00:40:58):

But if you were tried,

Rafael (00:40:59):

you know,

Rafael (00:41:00):

harsher than the others,

Rafael (00:41:01):

it was a discrimination,

Rafael (00:41:02):

you can still be considered as political prisoner,

Rafael (00:41:05):

except if the charges were for terrorism.

Rafael (00:41:08):

So this is the other, you know, the other factor.

Rafael (00:41:12):

Why for many there would be more difficulty,

Rafael (00:41:17):

you know, assessing this case is because the charges they brought,

Rafael (00:41:20):

they say it involves terrorism.

Hovik (00:41:22):

never mind that all of these charges i feel are they're going to be closed because

Hovik (00:41:27):

you know i mean just looking at your report you you document how absurd that those

Hovik (00:41:32):

charges are yes just the fact that they say terrorism is you you're saying that it

Hovik (00:41:39):

it uh raises the bar for even international organizations in responding to this

Hovik (00:41:45):

incident

Rafael (00:41:48):

I'm thinking this is an effort they tried to raise the bar.

Rafael (00:41:53):

And maybe some of them will be happy with this high bar because now they're not,

Rafael (00:41:57):

you know, forced to respond.

Rafael (00:41:59):

But to me, to us, it's not an excuse.

Rafael (00:42:03):

You have the,

Rafael (00:42:04):

well, in the report we stated that,

Rafael (00:42:06):

you know, this was done on publicly available evidence.

Rafael (00:42:09):

Anyone who has some free time,

Rafael (00:42:11):

you know, internet can go and check absolutely every single word and comma in the report.

Rafael (00:42:16):

And please do that and come to the other conclusion.

Rafael (00:42:19):

Please go and check the recordings,

Rafael (00:42:21):

the wiretaps,

Rafael (00:42:22):

and please tell me in which part you think this group was planning to use firearms.

Rafael (00:42:29):

There is none, absolutely.

Rafael (00:42:32):

Over in the whole case of several thousand pages,

Rafael (00:42:36):

there is no single evidence that this group was planning to use firearms,

Rafael (00:42:42):

which is,

Rafael (00:42:43):

for terrorism,

Rafael (00:42:44):

I mean, this is a necessary thing.

Hovik (00:42:46):

So we'll go into the details of the Holy Struggle case a little bit more,

Hovik (00:42:51):

but I want to dive,

Hovik (00:42:53):

but I want to sort of sequence things.

Hovik (00:42:56):

Let's first talk about the case of Samvel Karapetyan.

Hovik (00:43:00):

That's one of the cases that is highlighted in the report.

Hovik (00:43:04):

It involves Sanvet Karapetyan and people associated with him.

Hovik (00:43:08):

What stands out? There is not the charges, to me at least, but the collective nature of the response.

Hovik (00:43:13):

Supporters were targeted along with the individual through arrests, pressure, and legal action.

Hovik (00:43:21):

And let's also remind our listeners that this also involved the seizure of the

Hovik (00:43:28):

company that he owned,

Hovik (00:43:31):

Electric Networks of Armenia,

Hovik (00:43:33):

including forcing him to continue paying,

Hovik (00:43:36):

investing into the company.

Hovik (00:43:39):

firing every single sort of,

Hovik (00:43:41):

you know,

Hovik (00:43:42):

non-compliant manager,

Hovik (00:43:44):

you know, once they appointed their own manager,

Hovik (00:43:46):

and eventually appropriating the company from him.

Hovik (00:43:50):

But going back to the case,

Hovik (00:43:52):

the criminal case,

Hovik (00:43:53):

Samvel Karapetyan was arrested for saying,

Hovik (00:43:56):

quote,

Hovik (00:43:57):

if politicians and Nazis do not succeed,

Hovik (00:44:00):

we will take part in our own way.

Hovik (00:44:03):

And the government interprets this as a call to seize power.

Hovik (00:44:09):

I mean, am I missing anything?

Hovik (00:44:11):

How do other authorities justify treating Karapetian and his statement as a call to

Hovik (00:44:16):

seize power rather than just political rhetoric?

Rafael (00:44:20):

Again, I mean, this is inconceivable.

Rafael (00:44:22):

We're thinking about that.

Rafael (00:44:24):

Yeah, a guy who has wealth,

Rafael (00:44:26):

well, basically stated that he's going to,

Rafael (00:44:29):

you know,

Rafael (00:44:30):

participate in domestic politics of the Republic of Armenia.

Rafael (00:44:34):

That's it. I mean, that was what this was about.

Rafael (00:44:38):

Whatever else,

Rafael (00:44:39):

this doesn't do anything with law and legality,

Rafael (00:44:43):

because the same way you can label any word from any opposition member as a call to

Rafael (00:44:51):

seize power.

Rafael (00:44:52):

When the opposition says,

Rafael (00:44:53):

we should no longer tolerate this power,

Rafael (00:44:55):

which they said many occasions,

Rafael (00:44:57):

what are they doing?

Rafael (00:44:58):

They're doing what the opposition is doing.

Rafael (00:45:00):

What's the goal of opposition?

Rafael (00:45:01):

To get to the top, to get to the power.

Rafael (00:45:03):

That's what the opposition is.

Rafael (00:45:05):

And everyone is doing that,

Rafael (00:45:06):

let's say,

Rafael (00:45:07):

quote, in their own way,

Rafael (00:45:09):

of course, in whose way they should be doing that.

Rafael (00:45:11):

I don't even think that is worth discussing because we're trying to get more credibility.

Rafael (00:45:18):

This is just a very plain case of isolating the political opponent.

Rafael (00:45:23):

And for Nikol Pashinyan,

Rafael (00:45:25):

it was very favorable because he was a Russian-based businessman and is very easy

Rafael (00:45:31):

in current state of affairs to persecute him.

Rafael (00:45:34):

And I think we can close the case just with that.

Rafael (00:45:37):

But yeah, you're right.

Rafael (00:45:38):

This was more into that because we see the whole palette of the persecutions.

Rafael (00:45:45):

against him personally,

Rafael (00:45:47):

against the supporters,

Rafael (00:45:48):

economic persecutions,

Rafael (00:45:50):

where the first day,

Rafael (00:45:51):

I think, first days when he was,

Rafael (00:45:53):

when Samvel Karapetyan was detained,

Rafael (00:45:55):

there were visits from the,

Rafael (00:45:56):

from the,

Rafael (00:45:57):

this body,

Rafael (00:45:58):

which is, you know,

Rafael (00:45:59):

checking the,

Rafael (00:46:00):

sort of like the FDA kind of body,

Rafael (00:46:02):

which was doing,

Rafael (00:46:03):

you know, checks in the...

Hovik (00:46:04):

Infections,

Hovik (00:46:05):

yeah.

Hovik (00:46:06):

Yeah.

Rafael (00:46:06):

Yeah.

Rafael (00:46:09):

yes and turned out that you know after somehow after the arrest of Samvel

Rafael (00:46:13):

Karapetyan the food chain that was you know belongs to him started to produce you

Rafael (00:46:19):

know bad quality food or something they closed the yeah they suspended the

Rafael (00:46:24):

operation of several of the restaurants of this chain 14 i believe if i'm not

Hovik (00:46:28):

mistaken yeah yeah 14 chains were closed down okay uh before we move on to the uh

Hovik (00:46:36):

holy struggle movement

Hovik (00:46:38):

I also, I just want to reiterate,

Hovik (00:46:40):

just two days ago,

Hovik (00:46:41):

I watched an interview of the lawyers of Samvel Karapetyan.

Hovik (00:46:48):

And essentially,

Hovik (00:46:49):

they,

Hovik (00:46:50):

this is just shocking that they have to talk about new ways that the government

Hovik (00:46:57):

sort of crosses every red line.

Hovik (00:47:00):

So they had brought in an expert witness who gave the conclusion that Karapetyan's

Hovik (00:47:05):

speech was not

Hovik (00:47:07):

a call to seize power.

Hovik (00:47:10):

And as soon as he did that, the investigators searched his own home.

Hovik (00:47:15):

What message does it send to legal experts or anyone who may think of doing

Hovik (00:47:24):

their professional duty versus being subservient to the regime.

Rafael (00:47:30):

There's one big underlying systemic issue,

Rafael (00:47:32):

I think maybe some people want to be familiar with it,

Rafael (00:47:35):

is when we're discussing with our colleagues,

Rafael (00:47:36):

lawyer colleagues.

Rafael (00:47:38):

So there's the new criminal procedural code in Armenia for a few years already it's in force.

Rafael (00:47:45):

And the new one,

Rafael (00:47:47):

basically,

Rafael (00:47:48):

it makes easier for the defense,

Rafael (00:47:51):

on paper, of course,

Rafael (00:47:52):

makes easier for the defense,

Rafael (00:47:53):

you know, to produce their own pieces of evidence by asking some experts or specialists in

Rafael (00:47:58):

different fields.

Rafael (00:47:59):

Because before that,

Rafael (00:48:00):

and in reality,

Rafael (00:48:02):

even now, this was perceived as the,

Rafael (00:48:04):

you know, sole,

Rafael (00:48:05):

let's say,

Rafael (00:48:07):

uh right of the of the prosecution or of the judge uh this was done on their own

Rafael (00:48:13):

motion so if they need some expertise if we wanted to be credible what was what was

Rafael (00:48:19):

the the way the the defense would file a motion with the prosecution or the judge

Rafael (00:48:27):

for them to ask some expert to deliver an opinion on certain questions now on paper

Rafael (00:48:36):

the defense lawyers can do them by themselves.

Rafael (00:48:39):

But as they tell,

Rafael (00:48:41):

as we discuss with them,

Rafael (00:48:42):

they're saying this is very difficult because,

Rafael (00:48:45):

one,

Rafael (00:48:46):

the experts don't want to,

Rafael (00:48:47):

you know, are very hesitant to,

Rafael (00:48:50):

you know, deliver anything to us because it's not sanctioned by the court.

Rafael (00:48:53):

So this is the perception that,

Rafael (00:48:55):

you know,

Rafael (00:48:56):

maybe we're getting into something that we don't want to.

Rafael (00:48:59):

There's several expertises which can be done in only one centre,

Rafael (00:49:02):

and they do not like when the lawyers are approaching them,

Rafael (00:49:06):

asking for specific expertise for themselves,

Rafael (00:49:09):

not for the judge,

Rafael (00:49:10):

but for the proper motion of the defense lawyers.

Rafael (00:49:14):

Now,

Rafael (00:49:15):

when we have this case,

Rafael (00:49:16):

when the linguist's house was searched,

Rafael (00:49:19):

and we don't know what was the outcome,

Rafael (00:49:21):

but this itself is an intimidating action.

Rafael (00:49:24):

I think that it would be even more chilling effect on others.

Rafael (00:49:28):

Not me.

Rafael (00:49:29):

I mean, we, everyone thinks about that and the defense lawyers altogether.

Rafael (00:49:34):

that after this incident,

Rafael (00:49:36):

there will be very few that will even,

Rafael (00:49:38):

you know, agree to provide some expertise on motion of defense,

Rafael (00:49:43):

which they absolutely have the right to do.

Rafael (00:49:46):

But we'll get, you know, this sort of this institute, this reform will not be working at all.

Rafael (00:49:53):

So from the perspective of the,

Rafael (00:49:55):

you know,

Rafael (00:49:56):

fair trial,

Rafael (00:49:57):

due process,

Rafael (00:49:58):

principles,

Rafael (00:49:59):

standards,

Rafael (00:50:00):

yeah, this is a clear,

Rafael (00:50:01):

you know,

Rafael (00:50:02):

that the equality of arms is being,

Rafael (00:50:05):

you know, shifted to one point.

Rafael (00:50:06):

Because if the defense doesn't have the right,

Rafael (00:50:10):

if the defense doesn't have the ability to produce their own evidence,

Rafael (00:50:14):

we're getting back to the,

Rafael (00:50:15):

you know,

Rafael (00:50:16):

the full circle and you'll be dependent on the,

Rafael (00:50:20):

readiness of the prosecution of the judge,

Rafael (00:50:22):

which sometimes,

Rafael (00:50:23):

especially in these kind of cases,

Rafael (00:50:25):

of course, would not be friendly,

Rafael (00:50:27):

would not be towards the safeguard of human rights.

Rafael (00:50:31):

They would produce their own evidence, asking their own experts, which may be the

Rafael (00:50:40):

the conflicting opinions with some things that is as easy as just to get into the dictionary.

Rafael (00:50:46):

But it's even funny that we need a linguist expert for someone to understand what

Rafael (00:50:51):

means will take part in our own way.

Hovik (00:50:53):

That's what it is.

Hovik (00:50:54):

Yeah, this expert witness was an expert in linguistics and he was asked whether in our

Hovik (00:50:58):

own way means a call to seize power.

Hovik (00:51:02):

That's the absurdity that we find ourselves in nowadays.

Asbed (00:51:07):

Yeah.

Asbed (00:51:08):

Rafael,

Asbed (00:51:10):

when it comes to the Srbazan Baykar,

Asbed (00:51:12):

the Holy Struggle movement in 2024 that was led by Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan,

Asbed (00:51:18):

you explained the case of the terrorism charges,

Asbed (00:51:22):

which were ridiculous really well.

Asbed (00:51:24):

But this was a case where religious motivation and civic activism also intersected,

Asbed (00:51:30):

and something appears to have triggered a very forceful reaction on the part of the

Asbed (00:51:35):

authorities.

Asbed (00:51:36):

What activities or statements by the members of the Holy Struggle movement drew the

Asbed (00:51:41):

attention of law enforcement like that?

Rafael (00:51:44):

In the wiretaps, they are planning to start civic disobedience movement.

Rafael (00:51:51):

Basically, it's now declassified and people can read it if they get their hands on.

Rafael (00:51:58):

It says basically they were planning how to restart their street protests and not

Rafael (00:52:05):

go through the,

Rafael (00:52:07):

as they label it,

Rafael (00:52:08):

through the errors they did last year.

Rafael (00:52:10):

that is to have higher level of organization to you know have groups which would be

Rafael (00:52:15):

acting in coordination with each other uh let's say this one would block that part

Rafael (00:52:20):

of the city the with the traffic to have the pressure this part would do this kind

Rafael (00:52:24):

of activism and so forth they decide this is basically discussions for that as far

Rafael (00:52:29):

as i understand they didn't get to the level of consolidation they wanted to before

Rafael (00:52:34):

everything started i mean when they got arrested

Rafael (00:52:37):

But there were some discussions they were trying to protest when Nikola Prashen was

Rafael (00:52:40):

leaving for the discussions,

Rafael (00:52:43):

which later became this trip thing.

Rafael (00:52:46):

And they were planning to protest near the airport or somewhere, but it never happened.

Rafael (00:52:54):

For the timing, this may be many opinions, and I think there are many reasons when it happened.

Rafael (00:53:00):

But I think the Samvel Karapetyan's case just was the start,

Rafael (00:53:05):

and they couldn't go back after that,

Rafael (00:53:06):

because if you're starting to with this kind of absurd and...

Rafael (00:53:11):

blatant persecution, you have to go till the end.

Rafael (00:53:14):

You have to, you know, erase the arena so no one would take, you know, from where they left.

Rafael (00:53:20):

And it came in a row with a sequence of several weeks and you got everyone

Rafael (00:53:27):

in prison before they even would,

Rafael (00:53:28):

you know,

Rafael (00:53:29):

try to consolidate their,

Rafael (00:53:31):

let's say, opposition efforts.

Rafael (00:53:32):

So I think this is for the timing.

Rafael (00:53:34):

I think if Samvel Karapetyan's case was not there,

Rafael (00:53:37):

maybe they would still,

Rafael (00:53:39):

you know, continue to wiretap them.

Rafael (00:53:40):

If Bagrat Galstanyan's movement wouldn't start their actions, maybe they would just...

Rafael (00:53:45):

continue as it was,

Rafael (00:53:47):

you know, wiretapping what they call and maybe trying to come up with even more because with

Rafael (00:53:52):

even more, let's say,

Rafael (00:53:53):

pieces that can they later describe as evidence

Rafael (00:53:58):

Because when they needed the recourse for falsifying this evidence,

Rafael (00:54:03):

it shows that they didn't have it.

Rafael (00:54:04):

They did it in a hurry because there was probably already the order from above.

Rafael (00:54:10):

Now is the time. Take them.

Rafael (00:54:11):

Get them.

Rafael (00:54:12):

Arrest them.

Rafael (00:54:13):

But we don't have the evidence yet.

Rafael (00:54:15):

Make it.

Rafael (00:54:16):

Yes, sir.

Hovik (00:54:17):

Rafael, what I really like about your report is you actually print out the transcript of

Hovik (00:54:22):

the discussion.

Hovik (00:54:23):

You highlight where segments of that discussion were omitted to change the context

Hovik (00:54:29):

or even completely mean something else,

Hovik (00:54:34):

change the meaning of the words.

Hovik (00:54:36):

And it is for this reason that I urge people to go and just see how absurd the

Hovik (00:54:44):

evidence brought against Bagrat Srbazan and his friends is.

Hovik (00:54:48):

But all the Pashinyan supporters,

Hovik (00:54:51):

his top lieutenants,

Hovik (00:54:53):

are on TV every day saying that Bagrat Srbazan is a terrorist,

Hovik (00:54:57):

that those who support him are terrorists.

Hovik (00:55:01):

In your opinion,

Hovik (00:55:02):

is there any publicly available evidence that you have examined,

Hovik (00:55:07):

that you have access to,

Hovik (00:55:08):

that supports this accusation?

Rafael (00:55:10):

Absolutely not.

Rafael (00:55:12):

And even more,

Rafael (00:55:14):

there's a lot of evidence that the Holy Struggle members were clearly denying some

Rafael (00:55:22):

tactics

Rafael (00:55:24):

which they thought would be deemed to be violent or maybe dangerous or maybe criminal.

Rafael (00:55:31):

And these are basically tactics which in other countries,

Rafael (00:55:35):

other protesters,

Rafael (00:55:37):

didn't feel any issues with implementing.

Rafael (00:55:42):

For instance, the use of fireworks.

Rafael (00:55:45):

There were several...

Rafael (00:55:47):

fireworks like this, commercial fireworks that were seized during the searches.

Rafael (00:55:53):

So we remember the protests in Tbilisi from last year when basically some of the

Rafael (00:55:59):

protesters were using the fireworks as a weapon directly towards policemen.

Rafael (00:56:06):

This is one.

Rafael (00:56:08):

In the discussions in the wiretaps of Holy Struggle Movement,

Rafael (00:56:11):

we see that one of them which is suggesting such a thing

Rafael (00:56:14):

The others are saying,

Rafael (00:56:15):

no, we should not aim it at police officers,

Rafael (00:56:18):

rather to the,

Rafael (00:56:19):

you know, some glass or some walls or whatever,

Rafael (00:56:22):

which is so not to cause harm.

Rafael (00:56:24):

So we already have difference.

Rafael (00:56:25):

I mean,

Rafael (00:56:26):

if it's a terrorist tactic,

Rafael (00:56:29):

well, in Georgia,

Rafael (00:56:30):

in Serbia,

Rafael (00:56:31):

in Los Angeles, everywhere,

Rafael (00:56:32):

there were terrorist tactics implemented.

Rafael (00:56:33):

Yeah, no, no one says that, no one argues that.

Rafael (00:56:37):

There are many pieces of this kind of evidence that,

Rafael (00:56:40):

yeah, they are clearly denouncing any use of tactics which can be either from the police

Rafael (00:56:46):

be interpreted as violence or can make this kind of impression.

Rafael (00:56:51):

Just one more quote for them.

Rafael (00:56:53):

They're discussing that one of them found this firecracker which resembles a frag grenade.

Rafael (00:57:02):

Well, it's basically it's a children's toy.

Rafael (00:57:05):

And they denounced using it because they think this may be interpreted as an actual weapon.

Rafael (00:57:10):

So we won't use it.

Rafael (00:57:11):

We use this commercially available,

Rafael (00:57:13):

you know,

Rafael (00:57:14):

very famous types of the fight because everyone knows what it is.

Rafael (00:57:18):

and so on.

Rafael (00:57:20):

No, there's no such evidence of terrorism,

Rafael (00:57:24):

not in the case file,

Rafael (00:57:25):

not in any publicly available material.

Rafael (00:57:27):

And this is why we say that when the law enforcement,

Rafael (00:57:31):

the investigative committee published the photos of legally owned firearms as

Rafael (00:57:38):

evidence,

Rafael (00:57:39):

basically this means that

Rafael (00:57:41):

If anyone commits or,

Rafael (00:57:43):

you know,

Rafael (00:57:44):

plans or is being suspected in any offense,

Rafael (00:57:47):

if they have illegal,

Rafael (00:57:48):

you know,

Rafael (00:57:49):

arms in their house,

Rafael (00:57:50):

some weapons which the police knows where they are because it's registered.

Rafael (00:57:56):

So you can use it as a, you know, supportive evidence for that.

Rafael (00:58:00):

What's the logic?

Rafael (00:58:01):

They have kitchen knives.

Rafael (00:58:02):

Maybe try to also use them, try to put them as a part of the evidence.

Rafael (00:58:08):

There's absolutely no single thing in all the case files that indicates that they,

Rafael (00:58:14):

at some moment,

Rafael (00:58:15):

would plan to use it.

Rafael (00:58:16):

Again, you remember this part, this shoot to people under the wall sort of thing.

Rafael (00:58:21):

Well, this is where we...

Rafael (00:58:23):

did a big stop and we get into too much because we needed to get into the details

Rafael (00:58:29):

for people to once and for all,

Rafael (00:58:31):

you know,

Rafael (00:58:32):

know and maybe assess by themselves what it's about.

Rafael (00:58:37):

And that's why we included the huge part of the transcript.

Rafael (00:58:40):

We have the

Rafael (00:58:41):

full recording linked to the report.

Rafael (00:58:44):

We even did de-noise for some people to be even easier to listen.

Rafael (00:58:49):

I really urge people to go there to listen to what this discussion was about and

Rafael (00:58:54):

see what was the context of shooting two people.

Rafael (00:58:57):

This had nothing to do with the protests.

Rafael (00:58:59):

What we concluded with that is this kind of private conversation

Rafael (00:59:05):

which Bagrat Archbishop and Hovanes Avetisyan had regarding the capital punishment thing.

Rafael (00:59:13):

Just the simple fact of publishing this private conversation is a violation of law

Rafael (00:59:18):

from the law enforcement part.

Rafael (00:59:21):

This is the Blacken violation of privacy.

Rafael (00:59:25):

No one should know what I'm discussing in my kitchen with my friend.

Rafael (00:59:29):

This is none of the business of anyone.

Asbed (00:59:31):

Well, so I wanted to ask you a question about this, Rafael.

Asbed (00:59:34):

You mentioned wiretapping a little bit ago.

Asbed (00:59:36):

Is it legal for the government to do such pervasive surveillance on everybody's phone?

Asbed (00:59:43):

And how are they doing this?

Rafael (00:59:44):

Well,

Rafael (00:59:45):

the exact means are,

Rafael (00:59:47):

of course, they are classified,

Rafael (00:59:49):

but basically they are using several tactics.

Rafael (00:59:51):

And this may be wiretapping from the, let's say, spyware.

Rafael (00:59:55):

This can be done by bugging something, bugging the premises, the vehicles.

Rafael (01:00:02):

They need the court order for any of each of these cases.

Rafael (01:00:08):

But, you know, this becomes so widespread.

Asbed (01:00:10):

Have you seen any of these court orders?

Rafael (01:00:14):

Yeah, it's a standard piece of paper.

Rafael (01:00:17):

There's a handwritten time because sometimes,

Rafael (01:00:19):

in some cases,

Rafael (01:00:20):

you see, you know,

Rafael (01:00:21):

there was a wiretap.

Rafael (01:00:23):

let's say, half past six in some place.

Rafael (01:00:26):

And you see a court order just 10 or 20 minutes before that, issued before that.

Rafael (01:00:30):

And one of our colleagues,

Rafael (01:00:32):

Tadevik,

Rafael (01:00:33):

mentioned that, you know,

Rafael (01:00:34):

sometimes when you look into these court orders,

Rafael (01:00:37):

you see the motion from the investigator and the court order,

Rafael (01:00:42):

they have the same handwriting.

Rafael (01:00:44):

So either the court filled the time necessary for when the order will be

Rafael (01:00:53):

the investigator signed the court order.

Rafael (01:00:57):

Let's see which one is... Basically, it's a rubber stamp.

Hovik (01:01:00):

The courts are like rubber stamping...

Asbed (01:01:01):

I wonder if they're even written out later with all the right dates and everything.

Asbed (01:01:07):

I mean, it just doesn't make any sense to turn these things around within 20 minutes of the

Asbed (01:01:11):

actual wiretapping itself.

Asbed (01:01:13):

It just doesn't make any sense.

Rafael (01:01:15):

Yeah. So this may be...

Rafael (01:01:16):

They are already wiretapping and when they think,

Rafael (01:01:19):

okay, we found something,

Rafael (01:01:20):

we may use it,

Rafael (01:01:21):

but we didn't have a court order.

Rafael (01:01:22):

So, yeah.

Asbed (01:01:24):

So is it legal for the government to do this?

Rafael (01:01:27):

Absolutely not.

Rafael (01:01:28):

I mean, this is nothing to talk about legality.

Rafael (01:01:31):

If this is the case,

Rafael (01:01:32):

again,

Rafael (01:01:33):

we have this suspicion because we have supportive evidence that this might be

Rafael (01:01:37):

happening and we are sure this is happening.

Rafael (01:01:40):

We need to try to, you know, get, let's say,

Rafael (01:01:45):

Robber stamp justification for that.

Rafael (01:01:48):

Uh, but if this is happening, this is just, uh, you know, the, the next level polystate.

Rafael (01:01:52):

When if you combine all the surveillance techniques that they have and all the

Rafael (01:01:56):

resources they have,

Rafael (01:01:57):

you know,

Rafael (01:01:58):

recently the biometric remote surveillance came into effect and now it's up and

Rafael (01:02:02):

running,

Rafael (01:02:03):

uh, at least in the,

Rafael (01:02:04):

in the legal level.

Rafael (01:02:06):

If you combine all this,

Rafael (01:02:07):

maybe, I don't know,

Rafael (01:02:08):

it would be a great sequel for these dystopian novels.

Asbed (01:02:11):

Well, I also am interested in knowing if it's the Armenian government that's doing the

Asbed (01:02:16):

wiretapping or if it's somebody else doing it and turning it over to the Armenian

Asbed (01:02:20):

government.

Rafael (01:02:21):

I talked to a cyber expert.

Rafael (01:02:23):

Yeah, they say they have the capability.

Rafael (01:02:25):

The Iranian government, they already have the capability.

Hovik (01:02:27):

I mean, the technology required even for physical wiretapping is not that much.

Hovik (01:02:36):

I mean, and that is the cheapest resource,

Hovik (01:02:38):

unfortunately, for Armenian law enforcement is the physical people.

Hovik (01:02:41):

So you could go inside even someone's home, trespass, and bug the home.

Hovik (01:02:47):

I think that...

Hovik (01:02:48):

We should not exclude these low-tech solutions being employed and the technology

Hovik (01:02:55):

needed for that is very cheap nowadays.

Asbed (01:02:59):

You mean the little bug in the flower pot?

Hovik (01:03:01):

Yeah, you're thinking about Predator where every compromise costs about $20,000.

Hovik (01:03:05):

Yes, I am.

Asbed (01:03:06):

I am thinking that everybody's cell phone is hacked and they're being listened to.

Hovik (01:03:09):

I mean, they don't need to go through that.

Hovik (01:03:11):

It's much cheaper for them to assign a human to tail you and to...

Hovik (01:03:17):

plant your car, you know, with bugs.

Hovik (01:03:20):

So, and I honestly believe that this, you know, yes, I mean, they have those options.

Asbed (01:03:26):

You are saying that, Hovik, because you yourself have enjoyed that kind of being spied on.

Hovik (01:03:31):

Well,

Hovik (01:03:32):

I don't want to say I enjoyed being spied on because I don't know whether it was

Hovik (01:03:36):

the government or not.

Hovik (01:03:37):

But yes, I've actually documented over the last few weeks.

Hovik (01:03:40):

I've documented people following and taking my pictures and I've taken their pictures in return.

Hovik (01:03:49):

For the record, that was being facetious.

Hovik (01:03:50):

It's a fun game.

Hovik (01:03:51):

Yeah, it's a fun game.

Hovik (01:03:53):

Anyway, let's move on to the issue of Archbishop Mikayel Ajapahyan.

Hovik (01:03:59):

This is the only case where it has reached the stage of a verdict.

Hovik (01:04:05):

So the case of Mikayel Ajapahyan brings the issue into the sphere of the Armenian

Hovik (01:04:12):

Apostolic Church.

Hovik (01:04:13):

We know that currently the Armenian government,

Hovik (01:04:16):

the Pashinyan regime,

Hovik (01:04:17):

is in a relentless campaign against the church.

Hovik (01:04:21):

And I believe that Ajapahyan is the first real case where the issue of church and

Hovik (01:04:28):

state are more primary,

Hovik (01:04:33):

more in the foreground.

Hovik (01:04:35):

And it illustrates that even senior clergy,

Hovik (01:04:39):

well-respected,

Hovik (01:04:40):

charismatic clergy are not immune when their actions or words clash with state

Hovik (01:04:46):

policy.

Hovik (01:04:47):

The report suggests that legal pressure in this case served not to address a crime,

Hovik (01:04:52):

but to draw boundaries around acceptable religious and public speech.

Hovik (01:04:58):

You will go into detail to explain this,

Hovik (01:05:00):

but I do want to say that the same thing that Mikhail Ajabahyan was accused and

Hovik (01:05:07):

convicted of

Hovik (01:05:09):

In 2024, he said the same thing on public TV.

Hovik (01:05:13):

And when a complaint was filed about that incident,

Hovik (01:05:19):

the investigative body said there is no crime here.

Hovik (01:05:23):

So something changed.

Hovik (01:05:24):

And for the same thing that he said in 2025, he was tried and convicted to two years in prison.

Hovik (01:05:31):

What actions or statements by Mikayel Ajapahyan were so offensive and so terrible

Hovik (01:05:40):

that they had to lead to a criminal conviction against him?

Hovik (01:05:47):

Yes, you're right.

Rafael (01:05:47):

Well, if you think about that, he did the same statements before.

Rafael (01:05:53):

Well, basically the statements where it comes from,

Rafael (01:05:56):

I believe, from his philosophy,

Rafael (01:05:59):

let's say,

Rafael (01:06:00):

because he was very specific of what he was talking,

Rafael (01:06:04):

that there is a need for the military coup in Armenia.

Rafael (01:06:08):

That was the main idea that Ajapahyan is voicing.

Rafael (01:06:12):

And he's explaining in many of the interviews why he thinks that and why this is important.

Rafael (01:06:18):

So, okay, back to that.

Rafael (01:06:20):

This is a statement, which is for some people, of course, it sounds extreme.

Rafael (01:06:25):

Yeah.

Rafael (01:06:26):

But we're getting sidetracked.

Rafael (01:06:29):

We're discussing,

Rafael (01:06:30):

is this something that someone voicing about this should be even charged or even

Rafael (01:06:37):

imprisoned for that?

Rafael (01:06:39):

For American listeners, I think there would be quite, again, some surprise because the

Rafael (01:06:46):

But the speech protection in the US doesn't get into the content of what the person is saying.

Rafael (01:06:53):

It is rather what the secondary effects would be if there's an imminent threat of a

Rafael (01:06:58):

breach of prison or something.

Rafael (01:07:00):

Because in Ajapahyan's case, there's absolutely nothing about that in the case.

Rafael (01:07:04):

He was voicing that several years before being arrested.

Rafael (01:07:10):

The same thing.

Rafael (01:07:11):

What happened?

Rafael (01:07:12):

Did we see any attempt to do that?

Rafael (01:07:14):

Any attempt of military coup?

Rafael (01:07:16):

Is there any suspects from the armed forces or national security?

Rafael (01:07:21):

Maybe, you know, some reservists which may reply to that.

Rafael (01:07:25):

There's no one in the case.

Rafael (01:07:26):

There's no one in this criminal case that was,

Rafael (01:07:29):

you know, suspected of,

Rafael (01:07:30):

you know, maybe they will follow the orders and maybe there was the imminent risk of even

Rafael (01:07:34):

trying to, you know,

Rafael (01:07:35):

conduct this kind of thing.

Rafael (01:07:37):

This is one.

Rafael (01:07:38):

The second issue is that,

Rafael (01:07:41):

again, if he was voicing the same ideas years before,

Rafael (01:07:46):

this is like, you know,

Rafael (01:07:47):

you're committing some act and you see that people see that what you did.

Rafael (01:07:51):

No one says anything.

Rafael (01:07:53):

So then you do the same the next year and then the next year and then the police

Rafael (01:07:56):

goes, oh, no, no,

Rafael (01:07:57):

you did it for the third time.

Rafael (01:07:59):

Now we're going to arrest you because it was a crime initially.

Rafael (01:08:02):

So why you didn't stop me?

Rafael (01:08:04):

Because if you didn't stop me,

Rafael (01:08:05):

for me,

Rafael (01:08:06):

there should be the legal certainty principle says I should be,

Rafael (01:08:12):

you know, I should anticipate.

Rafael (01:08:14):

what my actions would bring in the legal sense.

Rafael (01:08:18):

So I was clearly anticipating that nothing would happen.

Rafael (01:08:21):

Because you saw that.

Rafael (01:08:22):

Everyone saw that.

Rafael (01:08:25):

How come it became crime now?

Rafael (01:08:28):

Again, there's no other suspects there.

Rafael (01:08:31):

It's just that, you know,

Rafael (01:08:34):

Just the assessment of his speech absolutely out of any context that is being sentenced for.

Rafael (01:08:40):

And I think this is not only the issue of the free speech standards being violated.

Rafael (01:08:48):

This is just absolute violation of the legal certainty principle and many others.

Asbed (01:08:53):

What effect does this kind of messaging have on public trust in human rights

Asbed (01:08:58):

institutions,

Asbed (01:08:59):

or maybe actually all institutions?

Asbed (01:09:01):

Does it degrade public trust in all institutions in the country?

Rafael (01:09:05):

Yes, I think you're right.

Rafael (01:09:06):

I think this is the main aim behind what we do.

Rafael (01:09:12):

I think this is a very popular modus operandi for the populistic governments.

Rafael (01:09:19):

You try to label everyone in the same pot, that there's me and there's all the others.

Rafael (01:09:29):

There's no shades in the opposition.

Rafael (01:09:32):

Everyone is somehow in the same pot, and this is how they want people to perceive them.

Rafael (01:09:38):

There's a new candidate walking into the political arena.

Rafael (01:09:41):

Well, you see,

Rafael (01:09:42):

once he had hands with someone who you already know,

Rafael (01:09:44):

you know,

Rafael (01:09:45):

he's from the ex-president's supporter.

Rafael (01:09:48):

So he's not, you know, he's not good.

Rafael (01:09:50):

He's not clear. How do they use this word?

Rafael (01:09:53):

Hybrid, yeah, hybrid warfare.

Rafael (01:09:55):

Hybrid warfare.

Rafael (01:09:56):

Yeah, he's a Russian agent.

Rafael (01:09:57):

He's the fifth column.

Rafael (01:09:58):

He's the Talan chief.

Rafael (01:10:00):

Yeah, he's the, you know, corruptionist.

Rafael (01:10:03):

Everything. You can label everyone.

Rafael (01:10:05):

If you are using this populistic rhetoric,

Rafael (01:10:08):

putting everyone on the same label in the same port,

Rafael (01:10:11):

what's the reason?

Rafael (01:10:13):

I think the reason is in polls of election polls,

Rafael (01:10:16):

we think that most of the people don't go there because most people don't trust the

Rafael (01:10:19):

elections or maybe they don't trust anyone in the political arena.

Rafael (01:10:24):

So this is the most important demographic.

Rafael (01:10:26):

This is what the opposition is playing on, trying to get new people from there.

Rafael (01:10:31):

And this is what the ruling power is doing,

Rafael (01:10:33):

trying to get everyone even further from the politics,

Rafael (01:10:36):

for everyone to be disgusted with the word politics.

Rafael (01:10:42):

As fewer people go to the polling stations during the next election,

Rafael (01:10:48):

the more would be the quota of his supporters,

Rafael (01:10:51):

Nikol Pashinyan's supporters,

Rafael (01:10:53):

which they believe is the core,

Rafael (01:10:55):

let's say,

Rafael (01:10:57):

and trying to show everyone who is somehow criticizing the government as the part

Rafael (01:11:05):

of this big fifth column KGB agent circle will be

Rafael (01:11:11):

I think on their calculations,

Rafael (01:11:13):

will be alienating these people,

Rafael (01:11:18):

the 60%,

Rafael (01:11:19):

even further,

Rafael (01:11:20):

and depriving the opposition of gaining new supporters.

Rafael (01:11:25):

And by saying opposition, I mean anyone who will

Rafael (01:11:28):

who made a statement or is planning to make a statement,

Rafael (01:11:33):

someone who is new in politics,

Rafael (01:11:35):

who is a newcomer,

Rafael (01:11:36):

or one of the old politicians,

Rafael (01:11:42):

the reason is to try to deprive them of any new votes,

Rafael (01:11:48):

any new demographics.

Asbed (01:11:49):

But isn't he going to need to completely flip the story?

Asbed (01:11:54):

If he ever has a constitutional referendum,

Asbed (01:11:57):

he's going to need a lot of people to go to the polls so that he can get some kind

Asbed (01:12:01):

of a quorum to change the constitution.

Asbed (01:12:03):

But by that time,

Asbed (01:12:04):

he has degraded the trust and the electoral system and institutions that people

Asbed (01:12:12):

will simply not care to even vote.

Rafael (01:12:14):

Yeah, I don't remember the number required, but it's not very high.

Rafael (01:12:18):

I think he's able to do that if he has it on his mind, the constitution reform.

Rafael (01:12:23):

But as far as I understand, this is being planned to do after the election.

Rafael (01:12:28):

So maybe it would be simultaneously.

Rafael (01:12:30):

We don't know yet. We don't know.

Rafael (01:12:31):

It's not showing all the cards.

Rafael (01:12:32):

Yeah, we don't know it.

Rafael (01:12:34):

What I think,

Rafael (01:12:35):

I mean, my perception is that he will use it as a pretext to tell people,

Rafael (01:12:41):

you know, you have to vote for me.

Rafael (01:12:44):

for me to be able to conduct this referendum,

Rafael (01:12:48):

for then have the peace agreement,

Rafael (01:12:49):

because otherwise war.

Hovik (01:12:51):

Rafael Can,

Hovik (01:12:52):

this was a very interesting report from the ACPR,

Hovik (01:12:55):

and I urge our viewers and listeners to go to the links.

Hovik (01:13:01):

We'll include the link to the show notes under the YouTube description,

Hovik (01:13:05):

and you can go and read it for yourself.

Hovik (01:13:08):

It is pretty good reading.

Hovik (01:13:12):

And before we let you go,

Hovik (01:13:13):

I think that we haven't had you on so regularly or as regularly as we wanted to,

Hovik (01:13:21):

so a lot of material has accumulated.

Hovik (01:13:24):

But I do want to ask one question about Article 236,

Hovik (01:13:29):

because there recently,

Hovik (01:13:33):

I believe in November,

Hovik (01:13:34):

there was a decision by the Venice Commission on Article 236 of Armenia's criminal

Hovik (01:13:40):

code.

Hovik (01:13:41):

This is the article that criminalizes interference with assemblies,

Hovik (01:13:44):

or so-called material incentivizing people to participate in or to stay away from

Hovik (01:13:50):

protests.

Hovik (01:13:52):

In practice, it has been used far beyond violence or coercion,

Hovik (01:13:56):

sweeping up organizers,

Hovik (01:13:57):

supporters,

Hovik (01:13:58):

and activists.

Hovik (01:13:59):

And the Venice Commission just basically warned that the article is too vague and

Hovik (01:14:03):

gives authorities excessive discretion,

Hovik (01:14:06):

making it incompatible with basic standards of legal certainty and freedom of

Hovik (01:14:10):

assembly.

Hovik (01:14:11):

The problem is that many opposition members have

Hovik (01:14:14):

either been arrested,

Hovik (01:14:15):

detained,

Hovik (01:14:16):

or even convicted under this article,

Hovik (01:14:18):

including Avedik Chalabyan,

Hovik (01:14:20):

who was detained for four months and he eventually was convicted,

Hovik (01:14:26):

although that is being appealed right now.

Hovik (01:14:29):

We also know the case of Gerasim Vartanyan, who was detained for six months.

Hovik (01:14:34):

I believe it was related to giving fuel for protesters to go to a march.

Hovik (01:14:44):

Anyway, I forget about the details about that case.

Hovik (01:14:47):

What is the impact of the Venice Commission's decision, and where do we go next?

Rafael (01:14:52):

The commission issued their opinion on the motion of the Armenian Constitutional Court.

Rafael (01:14:58):

On their part,

Rafael (01:14:59):

they received the request from the parliamentary minority,

Rafael (01:15:02):

from the opposition and peace,

Rafael (01:15:04):

to look into the issue.

Rafael (01:15:06):

Does this confer with a legal certainty principle or any others?

Rafael (01:15:12):

So now it's in the process of the Constitutional Court.

Rafael (01:15:16):

They suspended the discussion until the Venice Commission would issue their

Rafael (01:15:22):

opinion, and now the Commission issued.

Rafael (01:15:24):

And now the Constitutional Court should deliver its opinion,

Rafael (01:15:28):

which should be the most important piece.

Rafael (01:15:31):

They should decide whether it's

Rafael (01:15:34):

corresponds to the constitution or not in a way it should be decriminalized or not

Rafael (01:15:39):

or in what part so uh last time i checked they didn't deliver the opinion yet and

Rafael (01:15:45):

they have i think they have some grace periods to do that there's several months uh

Rafael (01:15:49):

i don't know i i hope they would be you know it would be delivered sooner than

Rafael (01:15:53):

later uh and uh basically there are several scenarios possible one if the if the

Rafael (01:16:01):

constitutional court says well yeah

Rafael (01:16:04):

based on the opinion of the commission.

Rafael (01:16:06):

I find this to be contradicting the constitution in a way that is not certain.

Rafael (01:16:14):

in the way that is very vague and so and so.

Rafael (01:16:17):

Do they have techniques how to write it down?

Rafael (01:16:19):

The other way,

Rafael (01:16:20):

which is,

Rafael (01:16:21):

I don't think it will be the case,

Rafael (01:16:23):

but basically the constitutional court can say,

Rafael (01:16:26):

yeah, okay, I heard the Welles Commission what they're saying,

Rafael (01:16:28):

but I think that it's still okay for us to have something like that because they're

Rafael (01:16:33):

reviewing it against the constitutional court.

Rafael (01:16:36):

Again, this is very unlikely.

Rafael (01:16:38):

But what is likely is if the opinion will be delivered as late for as possible.

Rafael (01:16:45):

So basically,

Rafael (01:16:46):

you know, they go to pass the pre-election campaign or,

Rafael (01:16:51):

you know, even the elections maybe somehow.

Rafael (01:16:54):

And say maybe we need more time for that.

Rafael (01:16:55):

I don't know.

Rafael (01:16:56):

We don't know.

Rafael (01:16:58):

Anyway, I think it would be very difficult to circumvent the need for the criminalization

Rafael (01:17:03):

of this paid protestant law,

Rafael (01:17:07):

what we call it.

Hovik (01:17:09):

okay again that Venice Commission report is also linked from our show notes and

Hovik (01:17:15):

with this i want to thank you Rafael for joining us please come back more

Hovik (01:17:21):

frequently than you have in the past and let's discuss issues related to human

Hovik (01:17:27):

rights in armenia because it seems like sometimes we're the only ones talking about

Hovik (01:17:32):

it even

Hovik (01:17:33):

so-called human rights activists are busy filing requests for Pashinyan and to arrest people.

Hovik (01:17:40):

So I want to thank you and ACPR for doing the work that you do.

Hovik (01:17:44):

And I want to thank our viewers and listeners for staying with us so long.

Asbed (01:17:50):

Thank you, Rafael.

Rafael (01:17:51):

Thank you, too.

Rafael (01:17:52):

Thank you. Nice to see you.

Asbed (01:17:56):

That's our show today.

Asbed (01:17:57):

The episode was recorded on December 14, 2025.

Asbed (01:18:01):

We've been talking with Rafael Ishkhanyan,

Asbed (01:18:04):

who is a lawyer specializing in human rights,

Asbed (01:18:06):

particularly freedom of assembly and expression.

Asbed (01:18:09):

He coordinates the monitoring of peaceful assemblies at the Helsinki Committee of Armenia.

Asbed (01:18:15):

And he's also a member of the ODIR panel of experts on freedom of assembly and association.

Asbed (01:18:21):

In 2023,

Asbed (01:18:22):

together with colleagues,

Asbed (01:18:23):

he co-founded the Armenian Center for Political Rights,

Asbed (01:18:26):

the ACPR,

Asbed (01:18:28):

a watchdog organization focusing on detecting,

Asbed (01:18:31):

responding,

Asbed (01:18:32):

and preventing political persecution and safeguarding political rights.

Hovik (01:18:37):

Friends, these Spotlight on Silent episodes may not win popularity contests,

Hovik (01:18:42):

but they are super important.

Hovik (01:18:45):

There is a lot you can do to help,

Hovik (01:18:46):

including sharing these with legal experts in the international arena that you

Hovik (01:18:51):

think would be interested in.

Hovik (01:18:55):

In this report that we talked about, in the material that we discussed, and so on.

Hovik (01:19:01):

um and the least of the what you can do to support us is to join like follow

Hovik (01:19:08):

the ACPR page on Facebook.

Hovik (01:19:11):

Browse the reports that they've posted and let them know what you think about how

Hovik (01:19:16):

important their work is for democracy in Armenia and human rights in Armenia.

Hovik (01:19:21):

Again, the ACPR,

Hovik (01:19:22):

in my opinion,

Hovik (01:19:23):

is one of the few organizations today that is fighting for those rights on a,

Hovik (01:19:29):

you know...

Hovik (01:19:31):

on a basis of just principle and not for money and we have seen that many of these

Hovik (01:19:37):

organizations in the past who have pretended to be human rights organizations have

Hovik (01:19:42):

just been in it for the money they've been getting from all these three-letter

Hovik (01:19:47):

agencies if you want to find their web page that web you know you can go to our

Hovik (01:19:52):

show notes podcasts.groong.org/episode-number

Hovik (01:19:57):

And we will link the Facebook page for ACPR.

Hovik (01:20:02):

And while you're there, you can also consider supporting us financially.

Hovik (01:20:08):

And the link for that is podcasts.groong.org/donate.

Hovik (01:20:12):

But always,

Hovik (01:20:13):

please, at least the minimum,

Hovik (01:20:15):

like, comment,

Hovik (01:20:16):

share, and make sure you're subscribed to our channels so that we can get out of

Hovik (01:20:20):

algorithmic jail.

Hovik (01:20:22):

I'm Hovik Manucharyan in Yerevan.

Hovik (01:20:24):

I'm Asbed Bedrossian in Los Angeles.

Asbed (01:20:26):

I'll talk to you soon.

Asbed (01:20:28):

Have a great day.

Head Shot

Asbed Bedrossian

Co-host
Head Shot

Hovik Manucharyan

Co-host
Head Shot

Rafael Ishkhanyan

Guest

Podcasts we love

Check out these other fine podcasts recommended by us, not an algorithm.