On September 17, 2024, during the sitting of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), when examining the question of subjecting Artush Gabrielyan, Judge of the First Instance Court of General Jurisdiction of the City of Yerevan to disciplinary liability (pursuant to the decision of the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Armenia, the report submitted by the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Armenia constituted the basis for the motion submitted to the SJC) Mr. Gabrielyan voiced a number of observations (afterwards during the question and answer session) regarding the activity of the Prosecutor’s Office and the Prosecutor’s Office shall make the following announcements regarding thereto:

Oleg Nefedov, the individual wanted by U.S. competent authorities, was arrested on June 21, 2024 at 11:00 a.m. The prosecutor submitted the motion on temporary detention on June 22, 2024 at 13:30, id est, 26 hours after the arrest of the individual (this period involves obtaining necessary documents from the competent authorities of the Republic of Armenia, translation thereof, their submission to the prosecutor, drafting of the motion on application of temporary detention against the person by the prosecutor and submission of the motion to the court).

However the court scheduled a court session for examining the motion on June 24, 2024 at 10:00 a.m., that is more than 44 hours after the prosecutor submitted the motion to the court, as a result of which the Court failed to render a decision on application of temporary detention against Oleg Nefedov during 72 hours and he was released, afterwards he left the building of the court and his whereabouts is unknown.

As for the observation of the judge that the prosecutor failed to submit the translation of the relevant Interpol Card into the language understandable for the arrested person, the Prosecutor General’s Office highlighted that neither applicable international agreements, nor Article 478.4 of the Criminal Procedure Code, adopted in 1998 envisage that the inquest body or prosecutor shall be obliged to provide the individual with the translation of the motion or any attached material (in this case Interpol’s card).

With this regard the Prosecutor General’s Office reiterated, that the prosecutor ensured the participation of the translator for the relevant language during the court session. Therefore, if the court session were scheduled during the reasonable term and if the court made a substantiated request, the individual would be given an opportunity to get acquainted with the materials submitted to the court with the help of a translator.