– As a human right protector, it’s understandable why you protect Zhirayr Sefilyan, however do you really agree with the announcements made by Sefilyan and Vardan Malkhasyan? Do you see signs of violence in there?
– As a legal protector I protect everyone even the last criminal perpetrator. I protect them regardless of their announcements. Quite often I don’t share the same views or ideas that share my clients. However as a legal protector I have to protect them. I have even protected the rights of Nairi Hunanyan but it doesn’t mean I consent with what he had done. Thus, I don’t even delve in the ideas and announcements made by Sefilyan or Malkhasyan. That’s a secondary issue for me. Those are people, who need legal assistance and I as a protector protect their rights. Regarding their speeches I am not the one to estimate or judge them. The court trial will determine how guilty they are. I am not a lawyer and thus cannot judge them. I cannot say how objective and equitable our courts are, however the vindication of the three soldiers, who were sentenced to life imprisonment, proves the opposite. As much as I know Sefilyan has nationalistic ideas. Those ideas are strange to me too. I am personally against any radical methods of patriotism expression.
– After October 27 everybody was blaming the NSS, which has ignored the announcements made by Hunanyan in many places, according to which he was pledging to “slaughter” the current government, etc. Don’t you think that this time the government envisioned potential threat coming from Sefilyan and his partners? Or do you think any action made by the government must be subject to criticism?
– Only the fact that NSS was not able to undertake actions to prevent the terror act realized by Hunanyan and his friends gives me ground to insist that the NSS and other relevant state institutes are not properly functioning. This fact also gives me grounds to believe that NSS based on their malfunctioning might arrest me or you according to Article 301 just to show that they are busy with something and that the state needs them. Bu the limits of Article 301 are so broad that may cause imprisonment of many civil and political activists. I wouldn’t like to speak on behalf the current government or especially the NSS. Vice versa – I’d like to speak against them. And now their role is to really prove that Sefilyan and Malkhasyan were really trying to undertake a terror act to radically change the government. Originally I have great doubts about the incumbent government and the NSS, which give me grounds to doubt their activity in the legal field as well. I of course share the opinion of Hakobyan, by which the authorities have to echo on not only any terror announcements but also undertake prophylactic means to prevent them. However before accusing and arresting someone the NSS must be really careful. No one can prove that Sefilyan wasn’t ever planning to conduct a terror act. As much as I understand he was only saying that he wouldn’t ever let anyone give the liberated lands back, adding that he “would smash their heads.” I know few people in Armenia, who agree with the compromise version. I, for example, am ready and announce that there must be compromises. Sefilyan is against that and may say that he’s going to smash Vardan Harutyunyan’s head. If that’s the reason why Sefilyan was arrested then every other citizen must be arrested in this country because they disagree with the compromise option.
– But he mentioned not only the return of territories. He asked people to be more organized and finish everything very quickly within a month or two and not wait for elections.
– He was saying, “let’s collect people and bring them out on the street not to let the government falsify elections and reproduce themselves through people’ pressure within one or two months.” Many people have written about this through slightly different accents. For example, I wrote that in the framework of international law we should do our best to prevent the reproduction of the current government. This idea is mentioned everywhere; people speak about it and it’s not a criminal deed. But as a political actor, Sefilyan was planning to realize his program much faster and receive the support of the people.
– His announcements don’t say anything about changing power through the help of people. His speech was aimed at the activists, who he was petitioning the following, “the more organized we are the better we will be able to make the opposition join us, if necessary we will even intimidate them.” What do you think about this?
– Now you are asking me questions, which you should have asked Sefilyan’s attorney. I am not his lawyer but I can express my subjective opinion. As much as I understood from his speech they wanted to be organized and united, the result of which would be to have a better reputation among other oppositionists. Sefilyan’s purpose was to make the opposition more active. I don’t see anything to condemn Sefilyan for. I don’t want and cannot delve into judicial nuances and norms. They say he had connection with “Dro” case. But if the government announced that he was arrested based on “Dro” case things would be different right now. As a legal protector I’d still protect him but this time I’d at least understand why he’s in prison. Now I know that he is in jail because he wanted to work not on behalf of the government. Sefilyan is an active civil activist and was arrested for his public activity. He didn’t hold a secret three-person meeting and didn’t have any weapons with him.
– When he made those announcements it was a closed meeting.
– There is no closed meeting with hundreds of people present. We have parties, which hold closed meetings but they are not arrested. On the contrary, they are in the legislative body and write laws for us. Why couldn’t Sefilyan gather in one place with his supporters?
– Don’t you think that it’s the right of the opposition to be active or passive and Sefilyan doesn’t have the right to do anything to them through radical and intimidating methods?
– I can’t say what Sefilyan meant by that. As much as I know the opposition doesn’t complain about the threats made to them. Vice versa, it supports Sefilyan. I think it’s wiser to protect the one or the ones, who need protection and believe me the police and the court will bring accusations against him. They are very good at that. Let them prove that there are signs of violence in the speeches of Sefilyan and let them arrest him. I don’t have to be occupied with NSS functions.
– They might announce that he was guilty and was arrested.
– I don’t believe them. Three years ago they arrested three young people and through different violent methods they were trying to prove that the boys were murderers. I always communicate with our prisoners and know how “active and well” our police and courts work. Thus, don’t have any grounds to believe their objectiveness.