Armenia's Administrative Court judge Karine Baghdasaryan has allowed several violations of the law on Administrative Procedure Code, the Constitution of the RA, and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Judge Karine Baghdasaryan of the RA Administrative Court has breached the section 1 of Article 77 and section 2 of Article 79 of the Administrative Procedure Code. In particular:

Upon receiving a complaint Pursuant to the Article 77 (1) of the Administrative Procedure Code, within one week, administrative court shall take one of the following decisions:
1) On the acceptance of the application 2) on the returning of the claim 3) on the rejection of the claim 4) on the redirection of the application.
Pursuant to the Article 79 (2) of the Administrative Procedure Code the Administrative Court shall decide on the returning of a claim and attached documents to the applicant within three days.Judge-Karine-Baghdasaryan
The administrative case under the number VD/0719/05/17 was assigned to Judge Karine Baghdasaryan on January 30, 2017 /On the request of recognizing the unlawfulness of the inaction of the RA Compulsory Service/, but the judge has violated the maximum period prescribed by law, which in this case was the February 10, 2017 and the application along with the attached documents has returned only on March 07, 2017. Moreover, the latest has indicated at judicial information system as the return date the February 06, 2017 thus either the prescribed term has been breached for 24 days, either non-existent and false data were submitted to the judicial information system.

Referring to the certain basis of returning the application, has stated by her decision that the grounds for returning of the application is the absence of a clearly defined subject of the request directed to the court, indicating   "that, although the application consists the subject of the request, but is not clearly formulated which would allow the court to determine the merits of the claim by the court, thus this fact shall be construed as the absence of the same in the application”

It shall be noted that the merits of the claim were formulated to suit specific and clear, and was the "/ the request on recognizing the unlawfulness of the inaction of the RA Compulsory Service’’  
The legal ground of returning the application is provided for by the section 7 of the Paragraph 2 of Article 73 of the Code of Administrative Procedure which refers that the absence of the merits shall entitle the court to return the application, but the Court along with indicating the presence of the subject of the claim has ruled by the same provision acting unlawfully.  
Hereby the judge has actually held an ex parte substantive examination of the case and instead of accepting the merits of a claim has returned the application to the plaintiff violating prescribed exhaustive grounds, the presence of which would make it possible to return the application.
It should be noted that although the merits were more than clearly defined, but even if were not, that was not a valid ground for returning the application as provided by the Code.

That is, Judge Karine Baghdasaryan has refused to admit the complaint filed, providing the arguments contrary the law, thereby refusing administration of justice and allowing violations of the articles 18 and 19 of the RA Constitution, "Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights” by adopting unsubstantiated decision.
The court decision will be appealed in the Court of Appellation.

© 2010 Ilex law firm. 
Ilex ™ All rights reserved


Site development by