CC went to consultation room
Head of the legal department at the National Assembly and defendant of the claim by "A1" at the Constitutional Court Ashot Khachatryan believes that the CC will quash the claim by "A1+".
"A1+" demands that the CC recognize Part 1 of Article 204/28 of the Civil Trial Code that prohibits RA citizens from exercising their right to defense in a trial and fulfill the verdicts reached by the European Court in Armenia as anti-constitutional.
"The CC has already recognized Part 1 of the article as anti-constitutional and that served as grounds for us to petition the CC to quash the case," Ashot Khachatryan told "A1+". Accepting Part 1 of Article 204/28 of the Civil Trial Code as grounds, the Cassation Court refused to fulfill the demand of the European Court's verdict favoring "A1+" in June 2008.
So, you find that the Cassation Court accepted Part 1 of Article 204/28 of the Civil Trial Code to impede the fulfillment of the European Court's verdict favoring "A1+" as an anti-constitutional norm as grounds? In response, Ashot Khachatryan avoided responding and said: "Let's wait for the court's decision."
The high-level court, that is, the CC, is examining the claim of "A1+" through a written procedure. In the previous trial where the NA representative claimed that the CC had already recognized Part 1 of Article 208/24 of the Civil Trial Code as anti-constitutional, President of the CC Gagik Harutyunyan demanded explanations from him as to why the anti-constitutional norm had remained in the code to this day. Not receiving any explanation from the NA representative today, the CC went to the consultation room.
In the previous trial, defendant, Head of the Legal Division at the National Assembly Ashot Khachatryan announced that the CC had already recognized Part 1 of Article 204/28 of the Civil Trial Code as anti-constitutional; in other words, the Cassation Court had denied the claim filed by "A1+", accepting the already non-existing norm as a basis.
Representatives of the case of "A1+" Artak Zeynalyan and Ara Ghazaryan claimed that the CC had not recognized Part 1 of Article 204/28 of the Civil Trial Code as anti-constitutional. "Otherwise, the CC wouldn't have accepted the claim by "A1+" as a case. I repeat-this is not just the issue of "A1+". This will be a strategic decision that will solve the issue of fulfilling all the verdicts reached by the European Court in Armenia," said Artak Zeynalyan.
