WHERE WAS DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION WHEN DESTINIES OF 20 CASES WERE BEING DECIDED?

A1+
[08:32 pm] 27 September, 2007

"If the verdict of "Royal Armenia" was absent among the examined
cases regarding Pargev Ohanyan’s activities, then it is absolutely
legal", said Armen Ashotyan, lawyer who represented the case of
"Royal Armenia". "Where were the members of the Justice Board and the
Disciplinary Commission when destinies of 20 cases have been decided",
wondered Mr Sargsyan and noticed that the proceeding was commenced
by Ohanyan himself after he took up the case of "Royal Armenia".

Why that case was not involved in the 20 cases which were observed
with harsh violations, Ashot Sargsyan commented: "There could be only
two reasons, first that case was not involved in the 20 cases, not to
make vivid that the persecution was connected with "Royal Armenia"
or the Disciplinary Commission examined the case and concluded that
Pargev Ohanyan made an unbiased and legal decision".

The fact that the verdicts of 16 cases among 20 were not appealed
either by the prosecutor’s office or by defendants, served ground
for Ashot Sargsyan to suppose that Pargev Ohanyan made fair decisions.