Source:

AEPLAC: Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Armenia 1998 ("http://www.aeplac.am/") [ID 2946]

Document(s): http://www.aeplac.am/

01.10.2005 - Source: UN High Commissioner for Refugees

English full text translation of the Law of the Republic of Armenia on Making Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of 1 October 2005 ("Law of the Republic of Armenia on Making Amendments to the RA Criminal Procedure Code") [ID 24404]

Document(s): Open document

28.02.2005 - Source: US Department of State

Defendants are required to attend trials, have access to lawyers, may confront witnesses and present evidence ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2004") [#29491],  [ID 2941]

"Defendants are required to attend their trials unless they have been accused of a minor crime not punishable by imprisonment.

They also have access to a lawyer of their own choosing, and the Helsinki Association reported that the Government provided a lawyer to defendants who requested legal counsel; however, individuals often chose to defend themselves. More than half of all defendants chose to argue their own case in court due to the perception that public defenders colluded with prosecutors.

Defendants may confront witnesses and present evidence. Defendants and their attorneys may examine the Government's case in advance of trial. Judges generally granted requests by defendants for additional time to prepare their cases."

Document(s): Open document

08.05.2003 - Source: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights

Arbitrary detentions ("Human Rights in the OSCE Region: Armenia") [#12599],  [ID 2942]

"Arbitrary detentions were commonplace - According to the Criminal Procedure Code, the maximum term of detention without bringing charges was 72 hours. In practice, police arrested people suspected of a specific criminal act, registered it as “minor hooliganism” and kept them in detention for 15 days during which time they carried out investigation to see if there was evidence to fill in the detention protocol. Despite such misconduct, no officers are known to have been held accountable for arbitrary detentions. In most cases, suspects were held in custody pending trial. Bail could be used in cases of minor or average offenses. A bail could be given only upon payment of a large sum of money, starting from 200 times the minimum monthly salary, i.e. 200,000 drums (€342). On the basis of the laws “On the Holding of Detainees and Arrested Persons” (adopted on March 7, 2002), “On the Police,” and the Criminal Procedure Code, law enforcement agencies were obliged to inform relatives about the whereabouts of detainees, and detainees had the right to contact a lawyer and doctor. The police informed detainees about these rights by giving them a paper listing their rights without explaining them. According to the Criminal Procedure Code, the maximum term of pre-trial detention was two months, which, however, could be prolonged by two months, but not longer than for a total duration of a year. There was a right to state-appointed and paid lawyers, but the defendants usually rejected their services due to the poor performance in defending them: in some cases, such defense lawyers had even pressured their clients into pleading guilty on the basis of an arrangement with the prosecution or judge and for money. Parity of the two parties was undermined by the fact that during preliminary investigation, the defense did not have legal access to the case file and therefore could not properly prepare the case, including challenging the prosecutor’s claims for the necessity to detain a suspect or to prolong detention."

Document(s): Open document

31.03.2003 - Source: US Department of State

In some cases there is a evident lack of defending rights ("Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2002") [#11840],  [ID 2943]

"The Criminal Procedure Code does not allow detainees to file a complaint in court prior to trial to redress abuses committed by the Prosecutor's Office, the police, or other security forces during criminal investigations. Witnesses have no right to legal counsel during questioning while in police custody--even though failure to testify is a criminal offense--and detainees must obtain permission from the police or the Procurator's Office to obtain a forensic medical examination to substantiate a report of torture. Although defense lawyers may present evidence of torture in an effort to overturn improperly obtained confessions, and according to law, all such charges must be investigated, judges and prosecutors routinely ignored such complaints even when the perpetrator could be identified.
All trials are public except when government secrets are at issue. Defendants are required to attend their trials unless they have been accused of a minor crime not punishable by imprisonment. Defendants have access to a lawyer of their own choosing. The court appoints an attorney for any indigent defendants who need one. However, during 2001, the Helsinki Association conducted a survey of the courts together with the International Helsinki Federation, the International Union of Armenian Lawyers and the Moscow Helsinki Group. According to their joint report, 38 percent of 50 respondents stated that they were not provided with defense attorneys during the preliminary investigation. Reportedly individuals often choose to defend themselves in court because they had little respect for a defense attorney's professional skills and ethics.
Defendants may confront witnesses and present evidence. The Constitution provides that those accused of crimes shall be informed of charges against them. The constitutionally mandated presumption of innocence was not always observed in practice, and acquittals were rare once a case went to trial. Defendants and prosecutors have the right to appeal; figures released by the Association of Armenian Judges showed that in 2000, three out of four appeals were turned down by higher courts. During 2000 563 of 2,266 court rulings were overruled or annulled."

Document(s): Open document

10.2002 - Source: Schweizerische Flüchtlingshilfe

Personen können nach dem Gesetz nur nach Gerichtsentscheidung festgenommen werden ("Analysen und Hintergründe ") [#10328],  [ID 2944]

"Der Gesetzgeber Armeniens hat seit 1995 eine Reihe wichtiger Gesetze verabschiedet. Dabei wurde die Beweisführungspflicht den Streitparteien übertragen, wodurch die Verfahrensparteien die Gerichte bei der Durchsetzung des Rechts unabhängig machen. Das neue Zivil- und Strafgesetzbuch (10. Oktober 1997) der Republik Armenien garantieren die Verteidigung. Danach können Personen nur nach Gerichtsentscheidung festgenommen werden."

Document(s): Open document

10.2002 - Source: Schweizerische Flüchtlingshilfe

New Criminal Procedure Code 1997 ("Analysen und Hintergründe ") [#10328],  [ID 2945]

"Der Gesetzgeber Armeniens hat seit 1995 eine Reihe wichtiger Gesetze verabschiedet. Dabei wurde die Beweisführungspflicht den Streitparteien übertragen, wodurch die Verfahrensparteien die Gerichte bei der Durchsetzung des Rechts unabhängig machen. Das neue Zivil- und Strafgesetzbuch (10. Oktober 1997) der Republik Armenien garantieren die Verteidigung. Danach können Personen nur nach Gerichtsentscheidung festgenommen werden."

Document(s): Open document