COURT CASE ON ISSUE OF “ZHARANGUTIUN” PARTY OFFICE DELAYED TILL JULY 1
Noyan Tapan
May 23 2006
YEREVAN, MAY 23, NOYAN TAPAN. Heritage (Zharangutiun) Party Chairman
Raffi K. Hovannisian’s legal claim against the administration of the
Paronian Theater was heard on May 19 at the Court of First Instance of
Yerevan’s Central and Nork-Marash communities. The hearing was presided
over by Judge Edward Avetisian. The events leading to Hovannisian’s
petition began on March 4, 2006, when party representatives witnessed
the unlawful replacement, without prior notice, of the already-smashed
lock of the outside door to the party’s main office, whose space,
located at 7 Vazgen Sargsian Street, Raffi Hovannisian has leased
since 1994. The lock was replaced by the chief engineer and two
members from the auxiliary staff of the theater. In the meantime, the
entire process was supervised by two unknown men who were sitting in
a nearby car. The very same day, the theater’s administration assumed
responsibility for this act and concealed its true architects. Since
then, the party’s seal and documents necessary for normal operations,
as well as personal and family belongings of Hovannisian and his staff,
are kept under the control of the theater’s management. Hovannisian
had sent a communique to Armenia’s Attorney General Aghvan Hovsepian
and Police Chief Haik Harutiunian in regard to the unlawful operation
carried out against the office and formally requested that they give
an imperative legal assessment of what had occurred and bring those
responsible to justice. They, however, sent a reply stating that the
dispute between Hovannisian and the administration of the theater
is a civil disagreement and thus must be resolved by the courts. An
official claim was filed on April 11 at the Center-Nork Marash Court
against the Paronian Theater’s management wherein it was demanded that
the infringement upon the right of control and usage of property be
lifted. In order to prohibit the taking of certain actions by the
theater’s management against the property under its control, the
plaintiff simultaneously submitted a petition to restore the right
of access to the belongings of Raffi Hovannisian and the Heritage
Party. The court ruled in favor of this petition, and the order was
forwarded to the Service for Mandatory Execution of Judicial Acts at
the Ministry of Justice. However, in an unprecedented action that
lacked clear explanation, this body returned the petition and the
order back to the Court. On May 19, Judge Avetisian sent the same
ruling to the aforementioned service a second time. On May 19, the
first hearing of the case opened in the absence of the defendant,
which had not presented a formal request for the continuance of the
trial. It had instead previously informed the court of its position
that the lease signed between the theater administration and the tenant
was not officially notarized and consequently void, and so the petition
is unsubstantiated and subject to dismissal. This “objection” by the
defendant became grounds for Vahan Grigorian, Raffi Hovannisian’s
attorney to submit, by way of introducing relevant evidence, a request
for making additional claims, in particular those which derive under
the law by consequence of nullification of contracts. The Court,
taking all submissions into account, adjourned and set a new hearing
on June 1.