Criminal Case Over a Facebook Post Transferred from Gyumri to Yerevan

After several months of proceedings in the Shirak region, Mher Khachatryan's case will now be heard in the capital, Yerevan. According to the national judicial information system "Datalex", Shirak regional judge Arpine Shtoyan ruled that the exact location of the alleged crime is unclear, making it impossible to continue the trial in Gyumri.

"...when determining territorial jurisdiction, the regulation of the criminal procedure code should be taken as a basis..." noted Judge Shtoyan.

Since the preliminary investigation was conducted by Armenia's Anti-Corruption Committee, the case will be heard in Yerevan. According to Khachatryan, judges are simply trying to avoid extra workload by passing the case to one another.

The Core of the Accusation and the Defense's Position

According to the indictment, on February 1, Khachatryan made a defamatory Facebook post against the Chairman of the Investigative Committee, Artur Poghosyan, and other investigators. This post followed Poghosyan's interview on Public Television, where cases involving clergymen were discussed. In his post, the accused called the state official an "unprincipled clown".

The citizen pleads not guilty, insisting that he merely expressed his opinion. He believes that if the head of the committee felt insulted, he should have filed a civil lawsuit instead of utilizing the state apparatus for prosecution.

"When a person has a public opinion, they are judged for that opinion," Khachatryan told Azatutyun.

Initiated Proceedings and Human Rights Concerns

Following the preliminary investigation by the Anti-Corruption Committee, a 220-page criminal case was compiled and forwarded to the court in April. A travel ban was imposed on Khachatryan, preventing him from leaving the country. The criminal article he is charged with carries a penalty of up to 5 years in prison. According to the accused, state funds were wasted to transport him to Yerevan, even though he was ready to voluntarily present himself to law enforcement.

Human rights defenders have noted a discriminatory approach in similar cases, highlighting the following issues:

• Individuals with opposition views quickly become defendants for their online posts.
• Similar actions by pro-government social media users often do not result in criminal proceedings.

Although official bodies have refused to disclose the exact number of cases initiated over social media posts, it is widely known that law enforcement agencies actively monitor the internet.