Паст инфо

On September 23, 2010 a soldier of one of the military units of the NKR Varujan Avetisyan assumed duties of the day guard, however refused to fulfill certain duties of the military service and voluntarily left the military unit the same day around 19:30 leaving a bayonet knife on the wardrobe of the person on duty.

On the way the military absentee dropped by the house of V. Karapetyan in Norashen village of the Hadrout district and stole  “Nokia” phone, 9900 AMD, 5 boxes of “Noy” cigarettes, a pair of trousers, two shirts and one pair of shoes.

Three months later on December 13, he threw a stone at “Nissan” car of the commander who appointed disciplinary fine for him and 10 days of imprisonment, causing a material damage of 56,000 AMD.

Afterwards the case was sent to Syunik District Court of First Instance. G. Avetisyan was found guilty by reference to several articles of the RA Criminal Code and was sentenced to imprisonment for the term of 2 years, 5 months, 27 days.

After this sentence G. Avetisyan sent complaints to the Court of Appeal and could finally reach his goal.

It was exactly at that time, on My 26, 2011 when the RA Parliament made a decision on granting amnesty on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence of the Republic of Armenia.

The Court of Appeal overruled the decision of the Court of First Instance with reference to numerous articles of the RA Criminal Code, the Amnesty Act and terminated the prosecution of V. Avetisyan.

However, a new complaint on the case was later brought to the Court of Cassation by S. Khachatryan. Since “the decision of the Court of Cassation can have a substantial meaning in connection with uniform application of the law”, the Court initiates new proceedings of the case.

The Court of Cassation stated that if the term of imprisonment does not exceed 3 years than the prisoner can be released under the amnesty. Additionally, the Court stated with reference to Article 82 of the RA Criminal Code that “a person who has committed a crime can escape criminal liability by the Amnesty Act of a legislative body, and the defendant can be fully or partially released both from main and supplementary punishment or the part of the punishment not yet born can be replaced by a less strict punishment or the sentence can be cancelled”.

The Court of Cassation also states that ‘the implementation of the Amnesty Act is possible at any stage of the court’s procedure. Moreover, the limitations of the implementation are defined by the Amnesty Act and should be unconditionally preserved’.

The Court of Cassation referred to the cases where amnesty cannot be granted based on the qualitative characteristics of the crime and not quantitative.

Thus, based on the cases from international legal practice and relevant documents, RA Constitution and relevant articles of the RA Criminal Procedure Code, the decision of the Court of Appeal remains unchanged and the appeal of the accusing party rejected.