Within the  criminal case investigated in the proceedings of the Investigation Department of RA  Tavush region on October 6, 2018 a decision has been made  to involve R. M, a resident of Azatamut community of Tavush region, as an accused, according to p.  2 art. 258 and p. 1 art. 316 of the RA Criminal Code.

 

The basis for the decision has been the combination of obtained evidence  that on September 28, 2018 at 08:30, upon the request of the resignation of J.M., head of Azatamut community of  Tavush region, during a peaceful meeting held by the residents of the same community in the central part of the village, his son, R. M., has showed disrespect for society,  grossly violated public order,  prevented them from exercising their constitutional right to freely participate and organise peaceful assemblies.

 

On  October 6 and 8, 2018 despite being duly notified, R. M. did not introduce himself to the body carrying out the proceedings for the second time and did not provide a valid reason.

 

On October 13, 2018 R. M. voluntarily appeared in the regional investigation department of Tavush region, he has been  presented with an accusation in which he pleaded not guilty and refused to give a testimony . The body conducting the proceedings has filed a petition to the court in order to confirm the detention as a measure of restraint on the grounds that there is a high probability that the accused will abscond from the body conducting the proceedings and there is a possibility of committing a crime prohibited by criminal law. Although the court considered the petition on the choice of detention as a measure of restraint justified but at the same time, he granted the petition to replace detention as a measure of restrant with a bail, setting the size of the bail in the amount of 1 million drams.

 

It is noteworthy that after release as a result of the use of bail, as a measure оf restraint, factual data has been obtained on new possible criminal acts committed by R.M.

 

On November 7, 2018 the RA Criminal Court of Appeal has made a decision to satisfy the appeal of the prosecutor and recognize bail as unacceptable.

 

This case clearly confirms the previously expressed concern of the RA General Prosecutor's Office  that the courts very often unreasonably make decisions when choosing a  measure of restraint, ignoring the arguments that have been  presented by the investigator or prosecutor  confirming the inadmissibility of applying a bail.