The criminal sentence of
lifer Arsen Artsruni concerning Dro’s case
remained unchanged.

On July 12 the court of general jurisdiction of Erebuni
and Noubarashen administrative districts (judge Vladimir Grigoryan) published
the judicial act, according to which the decision made in1996 by the RA Supreme
Court on Arsen Artsruni’s case would be reconsidered and complied with the 222 Article first  part of the RA Criminal Code (banditry) and
the 1^st point of the 2^nd part of Articles 38-104 (murder
of two or more people), and the criminal punishment of life sentence towards
him will remain unchanged.

“The politics in our
country is incomprehensible: they think that no lifer should be set free and
they try to keep them imprisoned through all means. And today’s illegal and
groundless decision of the court is the continuation of that policy,” says
Arsen Artsruni’s lawyer Narine Rshtuni.

Artsruni’s advocates
are planning to appeal the judgment up to the European Court of Human Rights.

To remind Arsen Artsruni
has been imprisoned for already 17 years. In1996 the Supreme Court of Armenia
found him guilty in motivating two different murders and sentenced him to
death. In 2003 based on the decree of the President of Armenia the sentence to
death was replaced with life imprisonment. In 2006 on the basis of the motion
of the RA Prosecutor’s office the Court reconsidered the case making it in
compliance with the amendments of RA Criminal Code.

After several years, in
2011, Artsruni’s lawyer found out that another Article (murder of two or more
people) was added to the Judicial Act made in 2006, that wasn’t included in the
judgment made in 1996. The lawyer has appealed the decision and on December 22^nd
of 2011 the RA Court of Cassation overturned the judicial act of 2006 and sent
the case to the Court of First Instance for examination.

Today at the end of
the session after the promulgation of the judicial act the judge commented that
the 1^st part of Article 104 (murder as illegal deprivation of another’s
life) “was consumed in the 1^st point of the 2^nd part as a
murder of two or more people”.

Artsruni’s lawyers
continue insisting that Artsruni’s activities should not have been requalified by
the 1^st point of the 2^nd part Article 104 (murder of two
or more people), as one murder took place in 1993, the other in 1994, and yet
in 1996 the RA Supreme Court decided that those two murders didn’t have any
connection and must be examined separately.

“Artsruni’s activities
could have been qualified as a “murder of two or more people” only in the case
when those two murders had been committed during one crime or had a
connection,” told Narine Rshtuni to www.hra.am.

In her words Arstruni’s
activities could have been qualified under 15^th point of the 2^nd
part of Article 104 (murder, by a person who previously committed murder). But
due to the amendments made on 23.05.2011 to the RA Criminal Code the 15^th
point of the Article 104 was taken out. So, Rshtuni thinks that her client’s activities
must be qualified under the 1^st part of the RA Criminal Code (Murder
as illegal deprivation of somebody’s life is sentenced from 6-12 years’
imprisonment) with two different episodes and taking into account that Artsruni
has been imprisoned for 17 years, he must be released.

The court decision
didn’t surprise the lawyers.

“In the conditions of justice
in Armenia a decision like this was expected and I doubted that the judge would
find the courage to go against the opinion of Prosecution,” Narine Rshtuni told
the journalists.

Artsruni’s other
advocate, lawyer Rouben Rshtuni insisted on his opinion, “Courts continue being
attached to Prosecution and will never go against its word. Our Courts are in
agony, dead, they don’t exist any longer. We don’t have justice, forget about
it”.

Based on years of
advocacy experience Rouben Rshtuni approximately calculated that the 1/3 of the
convicted are either innocent or are undergoing too severe punishments.

P.S. Arsen Artsruni’s
family members and relatives are present at all his judicial outgoing sessions.
Today they also were at “Noubarashen” Penitentiary Institution, but couldn’t be
present at the promulgation of the decision, as they were only let in after the
decision was announced. The Judge said that he ordered to let everybody in, but
the employees of the institutions didn’t get him quite right.