Yesterday the session of the NA ad hoc commission on the investigation of the March 1 clashes took place, during which the head of the group investigating March 1 presented the opinion, which was supported by Russia’s experts who said identification was impossible, which related to the presentation of the Russian-made “Cheryomukha 7” weapons and gas cartridges.
The government urgently needed that the Russian experts stated that there was no identification. This is what the certain services of our strategic partner answered. The bullets of a Cheryomukha 7 over-sized, gas powered special device can be identified, hence the murderers of at least three victims of March 1 deadly clashes cannot be disclosed. Until recently, the Special Investigation Service (SIS) and the Prosecutor General’s Office claimed gas bullets found in the bodies of the victims couldn’t be identified. Their opinion was supported by Russia’s experts who said identification was impossible. The head of the SIS investigation group looking into the March 1 events, Vahagn Harutyunyan, presented Russia’s answer in the Armenian parliament today. Harutyunyan says though the enquiry into the matter is still under way the chances to identify the gunners are exhausted. Harutyunyan said the gas weapons which the police used on March 1 killing three citizens are wrapped in a special substance through which gas does not pass while inside the barrel of the gun. The weapons are Cheryomukha 7 which were used on March 1. The special investigation service says it is impossible to identify the weapon from which the bullets were shot, killing citizens. It means that even after a year of the tragic events of March 1 the investigative body wasn’t able or more accurately didn’t wish to reveal, who were the ones, who shot at the 10 victims. Armenia’s state human rights ombudsman, Armen Harutyunyan, on Friday brushed aside law enforcement authorities’ assurances that they are unable to identify police officers who mishandled riot equipment during last year’s post-election unrest in Yerevan. At least eight civilians and two police servicemen were killed in the March 1 clashes between security forces and opposition protesters who barricaded themselves in the city center. The Special Investigative Service (SIS), a law-enforcement body investigating the clashes, say three of the civilian victims were directly hit by tear gas weapons fired by riot police from close range. It says investigators have so far failed to establish which of the four policemen, who they say used tear gas on that day, was responsible for these deaths. According to Vahagn Harutyunyan forensic experts from the Russian Interior Ministry have also examined weapon fragments extracted from the victims’ bodies and the rifles from which they were fired and concluded recently that such an identification is technically impossible. He made the comments while being questioned by members of an Armenian parliamentary commission that has been conducting a separate inquiry into the clashes. Ombudsman Harutiunyan, who is involved in the commission’s work, dismissed the explanation. “I don’t trust these forensic tests,” he said. “I don’t believe that four officers used tear gas weapons and three people died and that it is impossible to clarify who is to blame for the deaths.” The SIS investigators have yet to explain circumstances in which the five other civilians lost their lives on March 1. None of more than 100 opposition members and supporters arrested following the bloody suppression of post-election opposition protests in Yerevan was charged in connection with these and other deaths. “We are not able to resolve the issue of identification but they should have predicted that the use of these weapons would cause death. You are a lawyer and you should have known that these murders are judicially different categories. You have not turned death into murder but blame these people of murders and keep them under custody,” said Harutyunyan. “Yes, we don’t know who committed the murders. At this moment we don’t have the ones, who committed the murders and it’s not mandatory that an agreement should exist between the perpetrator and the organizer,” responded the investigator. Thus, the 7 political detainees didn’t kill anyone and didn’t even order others to do so but the Special Investigative body doesn’t see any problem arresting these individuals. On the other hand it would be naïve to think that the Investigative Body wouldn’t know who among those four policemen killed or wounded the protesters. But their names are not revealed and perhaps the members of the ad hoc also know this fact. Thus being loyal to their assignments they were asking questions to V. Harutyunyan one by one. Despite the fact that the chair of the National Agreement party Aram Harutyunyan is against but he thinks that by using old police methods, such as beating and pressuring, it will be possible to find out who among these four officers killed and wounded the protesters. “If they pressure them by telling that they would hang them if they don’t confess they surely will,” joked the Ombudsman. “So what shall we do? So we are in a deadlock situation. What shall be done not to have anything like this in future? What if we have the same situation that they send the same servants to appease the people with the same carbines? Something must be undertaken definitely, such as coloring these weapons so that the servants wouldn’t resemble it with deadly weapons. This is a slap shot to Armenian statehood. The modern Armenia was able to open a new page in the current criminal law. This is offensive for all of us,” said the ULP chairman Gourgen Arsenyan. The chair of the New Times Party Aram Karapetyan was interested why the investigative body was so late in terms of ordering the identification test. On November 10 as a result of the investigation in Armenia it turned out that it was impossible to conduct the identification test. Why wouldn’t they apply to the Russian services for help? As a response V. Harutyunyan only said that he didn’t agree that applying to them only after 10 months is too late. Karapetyan was also interested whether these shots were targeted or ricocheted. Harutyunyan responded that it wasn’t possible to find this out either. According to Harutyunyan he tried to find out whether there were cases in the world when people died as a result of gas weapons. Harutyunyan also added that he had even applied to an Irish expert and received a negative response, “In terms of the technical part the investigation is worn out. Our only option is to investigate the case purely through examination and operative methods in order to find out what actually happened,” he said by hinting that the theme of blaming any of the policemen in the cases of murder must be forgotten. “Thus we can close the theme and never receive the answer of the reason, which caused the death of three victims. Do you see any possibility that the international expertise may give some product or do you think that this resource can bring no use? Can we ever not find the culprits of these three murders? The people, who took away the lives of these three individuals, must be punished,” says member of the Prosperous Armenia faction Naira Zohrabyan. Of course V. Harutyunyan added that at this moment that resource doesn’t exist. But I don’t exclude that some day one of the international organizations says that it can determine, which weapon these bullets were fired from. The investigator also warned the journalists in this regard, “Please, don’t curve my words and mar the meaning that I tried to make here because you may think that we are against the revelation of the actual culprits of the crime.” The commission also received an answer from the chief of police, who said that this outdated “Cheryomukha 7” was used during regular trainings. “People made a mistake right there,” said member of the commission and the ARF Artsvik Minasyan. There were also opinions about the prohibition of the use of the mentioned weapon. Minasyan also wanted to know whether separate cases were launched regarding the 10 murder cases. He was also interested whether the operation of the 4 police officers, who used force, shouldn’t be postponed. “Isn’t it dangerous for the society to have the policemen, who killed 3 citizens remain their jobs as police officers?” asked the MP. V. Harutyunyan responded that a separate case is not filed for each of the cases of murder. All these cases are investigated in the framework of a single criminal case and as there is no concrete indictment filed against the policemen it is not expedient to have them quit their functions. And so for the second time Harutyunyan confirmed that not only will the policemen, who killed the three citizens, be jailed but also no one will reveal them. They will keep doing their job. Indeed there were also directing questions. For example, member of the Legal State Hovhannes Margaryan expressed an opinion that perhaps these protesters died because of the negligent and reckless actions of the policemen. Maybe we could declare that the ones, who confess will get a mild punishment. The chair of the ad hoc Samvel Nikoyan saw a controversy between the words of the policemen, who used special means and the commander of the internal forces Grigor Grigoryan. In his words all the policemen wrote that they shot at a 45 degree angle and Grigoryan wrote that the policemen directly shot at the bus, which was moving into the police troops. The whole reason why Nikoyan raised this question was perhaps to hint that maybe the policemen shot the bus driver with a justification. V. Harutyunyan is aware of that episode but doesn’t see any controversy because there are no clear details in the reports of the policemen. In his words the driver before fleeing threw a three-liter gallon on the policemen. According to Harutyunyan the balloon was in the bus, which was used by the policemen to make meals. “I don’t believe in the mentioned expertise. It’s very hard to find out who’s guilty and who’s innocent under these circumstances. I have the same opinion that symmetry wasn’t maintained. It means that whenever we speak about the policemen everybody becomes all doubtful about their steps and it’s taking so much longer to find out whether they are guilty or innocent. But the same cannot be said when speaking of the protesters.” “Thus, it means that people don’t feel protected. You should say something hopeful, Mr. Harutyunyan,” said Minasyan when addressing to the investigator. “Thus, the man came out and said that don’t lean on us,” said Karapetyan.