The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, together with the Civil Society Institute (CSI) express serious concern over renewed judicial proceedings initiated by Lydian Armenia, a mining company, against women environmental human rights defenders Nazeli Vardanyan and Tehmine Yenoqyan.
Paris, Geneva, Yerevan, 9 October 2026. The undersigned organisations are concerned that the proceedings, viewed in the context of previous litigation against the same defenders, bear characteristics of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) and may have a chilling effect on environmental advocacy and public-interest debate in Armenia. The Observatory and CSI call for an end to the use of judicial proceedings that may intimidate, silence or discourage environmental human rights defenders (HRDs) and other public watchdogs from speaking out on matters of significant public interest.
Nazeli Vardanyan is a lawyer and long-standing environmental HRD, as well as the head of Armenian Forests NGO. She has been actively engaged for many years in legal and public advocacy concerning the Amulsar gold mine and its environmental, social and human rights implications. Tehmine Yenoqyan is an environmental HRD, journalist and President of Green Armenia NGO, who has for many years raised concerns about the effects of the Amulsar project on local communities and the environment.
New proceedings against Nazeli Vardanyan
In February 2026, Lydian Armenia initiated new legal proceedings against Nazeli Vardanyan in connection with statements made by her during an interview published on 20 January 2026 concerning the Amulsar project and Lydian Armenia. For context, the Amulsar project is a gold mining project in southern Armenia that has been the subject of longstanding environmental and human rights concerns raised by local communities and civil society organisations.
In its public statement announcing the lawsuit, Lydian Armenia alleged that Ms Vardanyan’s statements did not reflect reality and damaged the company’s business reputation and the reputation of the Amulsar project.
According to the claim, Lydian Armenia is asking the court to require Nazeli Vardanyan to publicly retract the disputed statements and state publicly that the information she disseminated was false. The company is also seeking AMD 6 million in compensation (approximately EUR 13,000) from the HRD.
Ms Vardanyan maintains that the issues she raised concern matters of substantial public interest related to the Amulsar mining project and reflect concerns and positions that she has expressed publicly for many years. The Observatory and CSI are particularly concerned by the combination of a substantial financial demand and a request compelling the HRD to make a public declaration that the information she disseminated was false. Such remedies may have consequences extending far beyond the individual defendant by discouraging others from scrutinising the environmental and human rights impacts of major economic projects.
New proceedings against Tehmine Yenoqyan
At the same time, Tehmine Yenoqyan is facing a new lawsuit brought by Lydian Armenia concerning a Facebook publication in which she raised concerns regarding incidents of water pollution and fires allegedly connected with construction activities at Amulsar.
According to a report submitted in February 2026 by complainants in the framework of the Bern Convention case concerning the Amulsar gold mine, the proceedings relate to a Facebook post accompanied by a photograph of polluted water in which Ms Yenoqyan stated that construction activities at Amulsar had on several occasions resulted in water pollution and fires.
The report states that Lydian Armenia is demanding that Tehmine Yenoqyan publicly retract the disputed statement through the media and pay AMD 6 million. The complainants expressly characterise the proceedings as a new SLAPP case.
The fact that Lydian Armenia is simultaneously pursuing proceedings against two women environmental HRDs, in both cases seeking a public retraction and AMD 6 million, heightens concerns regarding the proportionality of the measures sought and their potential chilling effect on environmental advocacy and public participation.
A recurrent pattern of judicial harassment
The current proceedings should not be viewed in isolation from a longer history of litigation and other forms of pressure targeting environmental defenders who have publicly scrutinised or criticised the Amulsar project.
Already in May 2019, the Observatory, acting on information provided by Civil Society Institute, had previously expressed deep concern over judicial harassment and defamation campaigns against Nazeli Vardanyan, Tehmine Yenoqyan and other environmental defenders, journalists and lawyers in connection with their work concerning the Amulsar mine.
The Observatory has documented civil defamation proceedings brought by Lydian Armenia against several environmental defenders, including Nazeli Vardanyan. It has also documented offensive and sexist smear campaigns against women environmental defenders, including Tehmine Yenoqyan, as well as efforts aimed at discrediting Nazeli Vardanyan’s professional reputation as a lawyer.
In December 2018, Lydian Armenia had already brought a civil defamation claim against Nazeli Vardanyan over statements connected with her scrutiny of the Amulsar project. The proceedings resulted in judicial findings against her at first instance and on appeal, although the financial award was ultimately reduced and the requirement to publish a retraction was removed on appeal.
Tehmine Yenoqyan has likewise faced sustained pressure linked to her environmental work. The Observatory had previously documented sexist attacks against her and proceedings she initiated after abusive materials and surveillance-related content concerning her were disseminated online.
The fact that several years later the same two women environmental HRDs are once again facing civil claims related to their public-interest advocacy raises particular concerns about the real motives and cumulative effect of repeated litigation.
Even where a defendant ultimately succeeds in court, lengthy proceedings and claims for damages may consume significant time and resources, generate substantial legal and financial costs, impose psychological pressure and deter other environmental defenders, journalists, lawyers, scientists and affected residents from participating in public debate.
Environmental criticism is protected public-interest speech
Questions concerning the environmental and health consequences of a major mining project, the protection of water resources and biodiversity, the adequacy of environmental impact assessments, the transparency and legality of decision-making processes, and the activities of companies implementing such projects are matters of evident public interest.
The Observatory and CSI recognise that businesses have the right to protect their reputation and seek judicial remedies where legitimate grounds exist. However, this right must be balanced against the right to freedom of _expression_ and the essential role played by HRDs, journalists, lawyers, environmental organisations, experts and affected communities in scrutinising projects that may have significant environmental and human rights impacts.
The Council of Europe has recognised this risk in Recommendation CM/Rec(2024)2 on countering the use of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). which identifies disproportionate remedies and multiple or coordinated proceedings, among other factors, as indicators of potential SLAPPs.
Armenia’s obligation to protect environmental defenders
The protection of environmental defenders is also expressly recognised by the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters — the Aarhus Convention, to which Armenia is a Party.
Article 3(8) of the Aarhus Convention requires each Party to ensure that persons exercising their rights under the Convention are not penalised, persecuted or harassed in any way for their involvement.
The UNECE has clarified that environmental defenders include individuals, groups, local communities, environmental NGOs, lawyers and journalists seeking to protect the right to live in an environment adequate to their health and well-being.
This places a positive responsibility on Armenian authorities to ensure that legal proceedings initiated by private entities do not become a mechanism through which environmental defenders are subjected to retaliation or disproportionate pressure for exercising rights protected under the Convention.
Particular concern regarding women human rights defenders
The Observatory and CSI are particularly concerned that both defendants are women HRDs who have faced sustained pressure in connection with their environmental advocacy.
The gendered smear campaigns previously documented by the Observatory demonstrate that the litigation against these defenders occurs within a broader environment in which women who publicly challenge powerful economic interests may face not only legal and financial pressure but also gender-based attacks on their dignity and reputation.
Such circumstances require particular attention to the cumulative and gendered impact of reprisals against women HRDs.
Observatory and CSI call for action
The Observatory and CSI call on Lydian Armenia to withdraw the proceedings against Nazeli Vardanyan and Tehmine Yenoqyan, and address criticism concerning the Amulsar project through transparency, access to information, scientific evidence and meaningful public dialogue rather than through proceedings capable of producing a chilling effect on public participation.
They also call on the Armenian authorities to ensure that Nazeli Vardanyan and Tehmine Yenoqyan can exercise their rights to freedom of _expression_, environmental participation and human rights defence without intimidation, retaliation or harassment, including by ensuring that judicial procedures are not used to impose disproportionate burdens on human rights defenders; and to develop effective anti-SLAPP safeguards in line with Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2024)2; and fully implement Armenia’s obligations under Article 3(8) of the Aarhus Convention.
The Observatory and CSI further call on international human rights and environmental mechanisms, including the Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention, to closely monitor the proceedings against Nazeli Vardanyan and Tehmine Yenoqyan and the broader situation of environmental human rights defenders in Armenia.
—