DOCSLIB.ORG

End-Line Assessment on Human Rights and Access to Justice in Armenia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
End-Line Assessment on Human Rights and Access to Justice in Armenia End-line Assessment on Human Rights and Access to Justice in Armenia October 2019 Disclaimer This assessment is made possible by the support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development. The contents of this assessment are the sole responsibility of the Human Rights Support Mechanism Progress Consortium and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... iii List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................... iv Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ v Exposure to and Perceptions of Human Rights ....................................................................................................v Pathways to Justice ......................................................................................................................................................... vi The Human Rights Defender’s Office and the Judiciary .................................................................................. vi 1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................................8 2. Methodological Note ..................................................................................................................................8 3. Findings ..........................................................................................................................................................9 3.1 Human Rights Knowledge ................................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 Perceptions of Human Rights ............................................................................................................................ 13 3.3 Perceptions and Trust of Human Rights Organizations ......................................................................... 17 3.4 Pathways to Justice ................................................................................................................................................ 24 3.4.1 Key Human Rights Problems ............................................................................................................................. 24 3.4.2 Advice and Representation ................................................................................................................................. 28 3.4.3 Access to Dispute Resolution Mechanisms .................................................................................................. 29 3.4.4 Fair Procedure and Enforceable Remedy .................................................................................................... 37 3.5 Barriers and Challenges Facing Vulnerable Populations ....................................................................... 41 3.5.1 Persons with Disabilities ..................................................................................................................................... 41 3.5.2 Victims of Domestic Violence: Protection and Access to Justice........................................................ 43 3.5.3 Military Conscripts’ Rights ................................................................................................................................. 44 3.6 The HRDO ................................................................................................................................................................... 47 3.7 Judiciary ...................................................................................................................................................................... 48 3.8 Political and Economic Foundations of Realization of the HRDO Core Mandate ......................... 49 3.8.1 Foundational Factors: Post-Revolutionary Prospects ........................................................................... 49 3.8.2 Rules of the Game: Operations and Developments .................................................................................. 51 3.8.3 The Here and Now: Revolution and Post-Revolution ............................................................................. 53 3.8.4 Dynamics: Promotion of Human Rights and Access to Justice........................................................... 56 4. Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................ 59 5. Recommendations ................................................................................................................................... 60 6. Baseline Assessment in Relation to Cross-Cutting Outcomes and Results ......................... 62 Annexes ............................................................................................................................................................ 63 Annex 1: Bibliography .................................................................................................................................................. 63 ii | P a g e Acknowledgements This report is the product of a partnership between the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative, the Caucasus Resource Research Center-Armenia, and Pact. The Caucasus Resource Research Center-Armenia undertook the majority of the research in this report, using a research plan based on the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative’s Access to Justice Assessment Tool and Pact’s Applied Political Economy Analysis framework. The Caucasus Resource Research Center- Armenia also analyzed the data collected and provided a draft of that research to the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative, which, together with Pact, provided additional conceptual guidance and editorial work. The final report was reviewed by the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Human Rights Defender’s Office in Armenia, and after a final edit, it was produced in English. While the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative is immensely grateful to Caucasus Resource Research Center-Armenia for their assistance in drafting the report, its contents are exclusively the responsibility of the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative. The American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative is grateful to the team of highly knowledgeable and dedicated colleagues in Armenia and Washington, D.C., including Ms. Hasmik Hakobyan (Country Director for Armenia), Ms. Anna Melkonyan, Ms. April Hewko (Program Manager), and Mr. Mason Ingram (Global Director of Governance at Pact). The American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative would like to thank the Caucasus Resource Research Center-Armenia, particularly Ms. Sona Balasanyan (Research Director), Ms. Ella Karagulyan (Program Manager for Data Initiative), Ms. Arpi Grigoryan (Research Associate), Ms. Mariam Arakelyan (Research Associate) Mr. Armen Grigoryan (Political Economy Analyst, expert), Mr. Mark Dovich (Research Fellow), as well as qualitative researchers Ms. Seda Ananyan and Ms. Syuzanna Siradeghyan. The American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative also sincerely thanks the many Armenian civil society organizations and the Human Rights Defender’s Office for providing insights on the assessment and, more generally, for their commitment to strengthening the protection and promotion of human rights in Armenia. iii | P a g e List of Abbreviations ABA ROLI American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative AJAT Access to Justice Assessment Tool APEA Applied Political Economy Analysis CEPA Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement ECA Europe and Central Asia EU European Union GIZ German Organization for Technical Cooperation HRC Human Rights Council HRDO Human Rights Defender’s Office HRO Human Rights Organization HRSM Human Rights Support Mechanism MICE Media for Informed Civic Engagement NGO Non-governmental Organization OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe PSA Public Service Announcement UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Program UPR Universal Periodic Review USAID United States Agency for International Development iv | P a g e Executive Summary While recent political and economic developments in Armenia appear to be creating an opening for reform in access to justice and human rights protection in the country, the situation remains highly dynamic, and there is a range of political, economic, social, and cultural factors that will continue to challenge both Armenians seeking remedy for human rights abuses and the Armenian government in delivering on its duties and responsibilities in the field of human rights. This report, which is the product of the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative, the Caucasus Resource Research Center-Armenia, and Pact, considers the current status of many aspects of access to justice and human rights in post-revolutionary Armenia and provides insights into specific areas where efforts for improvement can be directed. To do so, the report combines quantitative and qualitative methods, including a nationally-representative perceptions survey, as well as semi-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Armenia Page 1 of 13
    Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Armenia Page 1 of 13 Armenia Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 6, 2007 Armenia, with a population of approximately 3.2 million, is a republic. The constitution provides for a popularly elected president (Robert Kocharian) and a unicameral legislature (National Assembly). A constitutional referendum in 2005 and presidential and National Assembly elections in 2003 were seriously flawed and did not meet international standards. The country has a multiparty political system. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective control of the security forces; members of the security forces committed a number of human rights abuses. The government's human rights record remained poor, and serious problems remained. Citizens were not able freely to change their government; authorities beat pretrial detainees; the national security service and the national police force acted with impunity; authorities engaged in arbitrary arrest and detention; prison conditions were cramped and unhealthy, although slowly improving; authorities imposed restrictions on citizens' privacy, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly. Journalists practiced self-censorship, and the government and laws restricted religious freedom. Violence against women and spousal abuse were problems, as were trafficking in persons, discrimination against persons with disabilities, and societal harassment of homosexuals. There were reports of forced labor. There were some improvements during the year. The implementation of constitutional reforms ratified in 2005 led to some increase in judicial independence and for the first time gave citizens direct access to the Constitutional Court. Penalties for trafficking were toughened and a court for the first time imposed financial, as well as criminal, penalties on traffickers.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenia: a Human Rights Perspective for Peace and Democracy
    6OJWFSTJU´U1PUTEBN "OKB.JIS]"SUVS.LSUJDIZBO]$MBVEJB.BIMFS]3FFUUB5PJWBOFO &ET "SNFOJB")VNBO3JHIUT1FSTQFDUJWF GPS1FBDFBOE%FNPDSBDZ )VNBO3JHIUT )VNBO3JHIUT&EVDBUJPOBOE.JOPSJUJFT Armenia: A Human Rights Perspective for Peace and Democracy Human Rights, Human Rights Education and Minorities Edited by Anja Mihr Artur Mkrtichyan Claudia Mahler Reetta Toivanen Universitätsverlag Potsdam 2005 Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.ddb.de abrufbar. © Universität Potsdam, 2005 Herausgeber: MenschenRechtsZentrum der Universität Potsdam Vertrieb: Universitätsverlag Potsdam Postfach 60 15 53, 14415 Potsdam Fon +49 (0) 331 977 4517 / Fax 4625 e-mail: [email protected] http://info.ub.uni-potsdam.de/verlag.htm Druck: Audiovisuelles Zentrum der Universität Potsdam und sd:k Satz Druck GmbH Teltow ISBN 3-937786-66-X Dieses Manuskript ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Es darf ohne vorherige Genehmigung der Herausgeber nicht vervielfältigt werden. This book is published with the financial support of the Volkswagen Stiftung -Tandem Project Berlin/ Potsdam, Germany. The publication can be downloaded as PDF-file under: www.humanrightsresearch.de An Armenian version of the publication which includes papers of the con- ference and carries the title “Armenia from the perspective of Human Rights” was published by the Yerevan State University in Armenia in Au- gust 2005 and made possible through
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights House Yerevan Members
    UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA 35th Working Group Session (Report submitted in July, 2019) “The Status of Human Rights Defenders in Republic of Armenia” Joint submission by: Human Rights House Yerevan members: “Socioscope” Societal Research and Consultancy Center NGO “Pink” Human Rights Defender NGO “Women’s Resource Center” NGO “Real World, Real People” NGO With the support of the Human Rights House Foundation (HRHF) NGO in General Consultative Status with ECOSOC 1 Contact Information for the report: Human Rights House Yerevan (HRHY) 119/2 HovsepEmin, 0012 Yerevan, Armenia [email protected] https://humanrightshouse.org/human-rights-houses/yerevan/ Ms. NvardMargaryan Email: [email protected] Human Rights House Foundation (HRHF) Rue de Varembé 1, PO Box 35, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland www.humanrightshouse.org Mr. Matthew Jones Email: [email protected] 2 ARMENIA Joint submission by a Group of Civil Society Organizations* to the UN Human Rights Council 35th Session of the Universal Periodic Review (20 – 31 January 2020) Yerevan, Armenia July 2019 I. Preface 1. This is a joint submission by a coalition of civil society actors with extensive experience in monitoring, documenting and reporting human rights violations of human rights defenders in Armenia. The report covers the following areas: the situation of human rights defenders in Armenia, freedom of assembly and association, of media; and protection of human rights defenders at particular risk. The report is prepared following the data based on the first-hand data collected and documented during their monitoring and right protection work by the member organizations of Human Rights House Yerevan. Preparation of the report was supported and coordinated by the Human Rights House Yerevan in Cooperation with the Human Rights House Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Materials of Conference Devoted to 80 Anniversary
    YEREVAN STATE UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF LAW MATERIALS OF CONFERENCE DEVOTED TO 80TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FACULTY OF LAW OF THE YEREVAN STATE UNIVERSITY Yerevan YSU Press 2014 UDC 340(479.25) Editorial board Gagik Ghazinyan Editor in Chief, Dean of the Faculty of Law, Yerevan State University, Corresponding member of the RA National Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor Armen Haykyants Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor of the Chair of Civil Law of the Yerevan State University Yeghishe Kirakosyan Candidate of Legal Sciences, Docent of the Chair of European and International Law of the Yerevan State University, Adviser to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia The present publication includes reports presented during the Conference devoted to the 80th Anniversary of the Law Department of Yerevan State University. Articles relate to different fields of jurisprudence and represent the main line of legal thought in Armenia. Authors of the articles are the members of the faculty of the Law Department of Yerevan State University. The present volume can be useful for legal scholars, legal professionals, Ph.D. students, as well as others, who are interested in different legal issues relating to the legal system of Armenia. ISBN 978-5-8084-1903-2 © YSU Press, 2014 2 Contents Artur Vagharshyan ISSUES OF LEGAL REGULATION OF FILLING THE GAPS OF POSITIVE LAW IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA ....................... 9 Taron Simonyan NASH EQUILIBRIUM AS A MEAN FOR DETERMINATION OF RULES OF LAW (FOR SOVEREIGN ACTORS) ............................ 17 Alvard Aleksanyan YEZNIK KOGHBATSI’S LEGAL VIEWS ...................................... 25 Sergey Kocharyan PRINCIPLE OF LEGAL LEGITIMACY IN THE PHASE SYSTEM OF LEGAL REGULATION MECHANISM ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 UPR-ARMENIA in MIDTERM REVIEW January 2015– March
    UPR-ARMENIA IN MIDTERM REVIEW January 2015– March 2018 Mid-Term Report by a Group of Civil Society Organizations (based on conclusions and/or recommendations of the Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review –A/HRC/29/11, 13 April 2015) Preface Following the second cycle of UPR, a number of long-awaited reforms were announced by the Armenian government. Despite some modest progress, the overall reform process has been delayed due to the government’s lack of commitment, transparency, and determination to consider civil society recommendations. The government has not taken sufficient steps towards implementing the recommendations received during the second UPR review of Armenia. Approval of the National Strategy for Protection of Human Rights and its Action Plan were a positive step forward but the documents were adopted without consideration of the vast majority of civil society recommendations, including UPR recommendations. The government did not perceive the UPR process as an opportunity for structural changes, but rather approached it solely from a technocratic law-changing perspective. As a result, no real and practical changes have been registered with regards to human rights and freedoms. In 2017, stipulated by constitutional amendments, a number of laws regulating the state institutions and the governance system were adopted. These defined the scope of authorities and accountability of each branch of power and regulated separation of powers. The premise of the 2015 constitutional reform was to ensure more accountable and less centralized governance by increasing the role of the National Assembly (parliament), enhancing and clarifying the tools and mechanisms of parliamentary oversight over the executive, regulating the accountability of the state institutions before the parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenia Covering the Period of January to December 2018 Armenia Bias-Motivated Speech a 15-Year-Old Was Stabbed in Yerevan on 1 April
    Annual Review of the Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Intersex People in Armenia covering the period of January to December 2018 Armenia Bias-motivated speech A 15-year-old was stabbed in Yerevan on 1 April. The perpetrator Former social affairs minister and current member of the told the police that he had assumed the victim was gay. The parliamentary human rights committee Gevorg Petrosyan parents dropped the charges, to prevent further bullying against (Tsarukyan Faction) said in March, that treating people differently their son. on SOGI grounds is not discrimination. MP Vardan Bostanjyan (“Prosperous Armenia” Party) compared LGBT people to viruses Following a series of LGBTI-phobic attacks in the first few months and suggested that the ‘virus’ should be isolated to avoid making of the year, LGBTI activists and allies protested in front of the other people sick. Government Prosecutor’s Office on 5 April, calling for immediate and thorough investigations. In July, the justice minister Artak Zeynalyan (Yelk Faction, Hanrapetutyun party) publicly reacted to a homophobic A member of Right Side NGO’s staff was threatened and insulted Facebook post featuring a photo of him, saying he “wants to by military service workers during a visit to the Arabkir military legalise “faggots”. It also called on supporters to “join our fight”. commissariat station on 11 April. Zeynalyan’s ignored the offensive language and instead denied that he was working on any legislative initiatives related to the On 15 April, a trans woman living in Yerevan was attacked. Her Criminal Code. throat was cut and she required hospitalisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Trafficking of Women. Promoting International Human
    TRAFFICKING OF WOMEN. PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS NORMS THROUGH PREVENTION, PROTECTION, AND PROSECUTION (THREE “P’s”) IN ARMENIA A thesis presented to the faculty of the Center for International Studies of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Marina Solakhyan June 2007 This thesis titled TRAFFICKING OF WOMEN. PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS NORMS THROUGH PREVENTION, PROTECTION, AND PROSECUTION (THREE “P’s”) IN ARMENIA by MARINA SOLAKHYAN has been approved for the Center for International Studies by Elizabeth F. Collins Associate Professor of Classics and World Religions Drew McDaniel Interim Director, Center for International Studies Abstract SOLAKHYAN, MARINA, M.A., June 2007, International Development Studies TRAFFICKING OF WOMEN. PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS NORMS THROUGH PREVENTION, PROTECTION, AND PROSECUTION (THREE “P’s”) IN ARMENIA (77 pp.) Director of Thesis: Elizabeth Collins This thesis analyses the incidence and nature of the trafficking in people in Armenia. The phenomenon of trafficking is considered to be one of the most pressing and complex issues in the contemporary world. The thesis adopts a human rights approach, contending the promotion of international human rights norms through a Three “P’s” policy that highlights the three most important aspects of any anti-trafficking program: Preventing exploitation from occurring in the first place; Protecting those identified as victims; and Prosecuting those who trafficked and exploited them. Alongside the analysis of the universal and regional instruments and mechanisms available to address the problem of trafficking in the human rights context, this thesis provides an overview of the emergence of Armenia’s NGO sector and its development and describes the NGO sector role and activity against trafficking in women for sexual exploitation.
    [Show full text]
  • Mission in Armenia 29 March to 3 April 2008
    Mission in Armenia 29 March to 3 April 2008 June 2008 - N°499/2 Mission in Armenia, 29 March to 3 April 2008 FOREWORD Alerted by both the "Democracy in Armenia" group and the Civil Society Institute (an FIDH affiliate) to the violent repression that followed the presidential elections in this country in February 2008, the undersigned lawyers and jurist were mandated by the President of the Paris Bar Association (M. le Bâtonnier de l’Ordre des Avocats de Paris) and the International Union of Lawyers (l’Union Internationale des Avocats) on one hand and, on the other hand, the FIDH (International Federation of Human Rights). The mission visited Yerevan from 29 March to 3 April to report on the situation of the right to defend oneself and the right to freedoms in the Republic of ARMENIA following the events that took place in February and March 2008. INTRODUCTION Before considering the legal and juridical context of the mission's work, it is appropriate to recall some chronological milestones to put into perspective the current situation in Armenia and its evolution, seventeen years after the independence of the Republic of Armenia was proclaimed in the Southern Caucasus. - 21 September, 1991: the Republic of Armenia becomes independent following a referendum. - October 1991: Election by universal suffrage of Mr. Levon TER-PETROSIAN, who becomes the first President of the Republic of Armenia. - 1992-1994: Fighting in the autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabakh between the opposing Armenian self- defence forces and the Azerbaijan armed forces. A cease-fire comes into force on 14 May 1994.
    [Show full text]
  • Transnational Armenian Terrorism and Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict of 1988-1994) End
    Karabakh Oleg KUZNETSOV, PhD in History, MCL (Moscow, Russia) First Terrorist War: A Look from Russia (Transnational Armenian Terrorism and Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict of 1988-1994) End. For the beginning, see İRS-Heritage 2 (21), 3 (22) 2015 n addition to numerous acts of terrorism and wide- spread terrorist crimes related to the organization by Iforeign nationals of illegal armed groups in the terri- tory of Armenia and their participation in the activities of such groups, representatives of the Armenian side to the conflict committed other crimes of a similar nature during the Karabakh war, facts that were recorded on the Azerbaijani side. First of all, we are talking about a Car in which journalist S. Asgarova, Lt-Col Larionov, Maj Ivanov and Sgt Goyek were shot dead by Armenian terrorists on 9 January 1991 58 www.irs-az.com 4(23), WINTER 2015 very specific terrorist crime like an armed insurgency, criminal liability for which is stipulated by Article 279 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The main qualifying feature of this criminal act is the motiva- tion and goal-setting of participation in the crime: those guilty of committing it take action to change the constitutional system or the territorial integrity of the country. Actions of this kind were committed by soldiers of Armenian origin under the commander of the 2nd Battalion of the 336th Motorized Rifle Regiment of the 23rd Motorized Infantry Division of the 4th Army of the CIS Joint Armed Forces under the command of Major Seyran Ohanyan, who not only seized fighting equipment - infantry fighting vehicles (BMP-2) - without a military order, but also used them against Azerbaijani territorial defense units in the battle of 25 February 1992 for the town of Khojali, which subsequently led to mass deaths of civilians in this town.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Post-Revolution State - Building in Ukraine and Armenia
    CES Working Papers – Volume XII, Issue 1 Change or continuity? Exploring post-revolution state - building in Ukraine and Armenia Aram TERZYAN* Abstract The paper focuses on the post-Maidan and post-Velvet Revolution state-building in Ukraine and Armenia. Examining the cases of Ukraine and Armenia, the qualitative, comparative analysis presented in this paper uncovers some of the similarities and differences between the two post-Soviet revolutions in terms of their political and economic implications. The study suggests that, while the revolutions have given a strong impetus to political and economic reforms in oligarchy-driven and corruption-stricken Ukrainian and Armenian societies, the path to ultimate success involves overcoming the authoritarian legacy and developing democratic institutions. The analysis of the relationship between domestic change and foreign policy shows that in contrast to Ukraine, where the “choice for Europe” was the core rationale behind the Euromaidan, the domestic change in Armenia has not led to foreign policy shifts. Nevertheless, this study avoids reductionist explanations of external drivers of change. Rather, it treats the domestic actors as the key agents to transform the economic and political landscapes of the two post-Soviet countries. Keywords: Ukraine, Armenia, “Velvet Revolution”, Maidan Revolution, state-building, democracy consolidation Introduction The 2014 Maidan Revolution in Ukraine and the 2018 “Velvet Revolution” in Armenia have considerably renewed scientific interest in post-soviet revolution studies, including in post-revolution state-building trajectories. This paper represents an attempt to uncover some of the similarities and differences between the two post-Soviet revolutions in terms of their domestic and foreign policy implications.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cost of Memorializing: Analyzing Armenian Genocide Memorials and Commemorations in the Republic of Armenia and in the Diaspora
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR HISTORY, CULTURE AND MODERNITY www.history-culture-modernity.org Published by: Uopen Journals Copyright: © The Author(s). Content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence eISSN: 2213-0624 The Cost of Memorializing: Analyzing Armenian Genocide Memorials and Commemorations in the Republic of Armenia and in the Diaspora Sabrina Papazian HCM 7: 55–86 DOI: 10.18352/hcm.534 Abstract In April of 1965 thousands of Armenians gathered in Yerevan and Los Angeles, demanding global recognition of and remembrance for the Armenian Genocide after fifty years of silence. Since then, over 200 memorials have been built around the world commemorating the vic- tims of the Genocide and have been the centre of hundreds of marches, vigils and commemorative events. This article analyzes the visual forms and semiotic natures of three Armenian Genocide memorials in Armenia, France and the United States and the commemoration prac- tices that surround them to compare and contrast how the Genocide is being memorialized in different Armenian communities. In doing so, this article questions the long-term effects commemorations have on an overall transnational Armenian community. Ultimately, it appears that calls for Armenian Genocide recognition unwittingly categorize the global Armenian community as eternal victims, impeding the develop- ment of both the Republic of Armenia and the Armenian diaspora. Keywords: Armenian Genocide, commemoration, cultural heritage, diaspora, identity, memorials HCM 2019, VOL. 7 Downloaded from Brill.com10/05/202155 12:33:22PM via free access PAPAZIAN Introduction On 24 April 2015, the hundredth anniversary of the commencement of the Armenian Genocide, Armenians around the world collectively mourned for and remembered their ancestors who had lost their lives in the massacres and deportations of 1915.1 These commemorations took place in many forms, including marches, candlelight vigils, ceremo- nial speeches and cultural performances.
    [Show full text]
  • FIRST SECTION CASE of KARAPETYAN and OTHERS V
    FIRST SECTION CASE OF KARAPETYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA (Application no. 59001/08) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 17 November 2016 This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. KARAPETYAN AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA JUDGMENT 1 In the case of Karapetyan and Others v. Armenia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of: Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, President, Kristina Pardalos, Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, Paul Mahoney, Aleš Pejchal, Robert Spano, Armen Harutyunyan, judges, and Abel Campos, Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 30 August and 11 October 2016, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on the last- mentioned date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in an application (no. 59001/08) against the Republic of Armenia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by four Armenian nationals, Mr Vladimir Karapetyan, Ms Martha Ayvazyan, Mr Araqel Semirjyan and Ms Karine Afrikyan (“the applicants”), on 29 November 2008. 2. The applicants were represented by Mr Vahe Grigoryan, a lawyer practising in Yerevan. The Armenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr G. Kostanyan, Representative of the Government of Armenia before the European Court of Human Rights. 3. The applicants alleged, in particular, that their dismissal from office following their statements in the media had violated their right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the Convention. 4. On 17 November 2011 the applicants’ complaint under Article 10 of the Convention was communicated to the Government.
    [Show full text]