At the court hearing held on 8 August 2025, defense counsel Arnold Vardanyan submitted a professional legal opinion (amicus curiae) under Article 338 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Armenia in the case concerning Arusyak Aleksanyan. He also responded to the presiding judge’s questions, presenting the following key conclusions:
- On concurrence of criminal norms: Under the rules of competition between criminal law provisions, a person’s act cannot simultaneously be classified under both general and special provisions of the Criminal Code. Accordingly, the accused cannot at the same time be charged under Article 441 (abuse of official authority or exceeding official powers) and Article 482 (delivering a manifestly unjust judgment or decision).
- On the constitutionality of Article 482: The Constitutional Court’s reasoning in Decision SDO-1586 of 26 March 2021 applies mutatis mutandis to Article 482. This provision does not meet the quality of “law” required for defining a criminal offense, as it does not provide individuals with sufficient clarity on the constituent elements of the offense or allow them to foresee which actions (or omissions) would give rise to criminal liability.
- On the scope of “other judicial acts”: A decision on changing a preventive measure does not have the features of a final procedural act. Therefore, applying the doctrine of ejusdem generis interpretation, a ruling replacing detention with bail cannot be considered as an “other judicial act” within the meaning of Article 482. The list in the provision is exhaustive and does not cover interim procedural rulings of this kind.
No comment