Pashinyan has no authority to interfere in affairs of private companies — Varazdat Harutyunyan

Lawyer Varazdat Harutyunyan stated that there are only two possible ways to seize the shares of Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA): expropriation and forced alienation of ownership.

“‘There are no grounds for expropriation, as there is no such liability measure as seizure of shares as a fine. That leaves only compulsory alienation. Its essential condition, enshrined both in the Constitution and in the first protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights as well as relevant court practice, is prior and adequate compensation. That is, talk of nationalizing the ENA may sound pleasant to some, but there is only one way in which a company can become state-owned: through prior and fair compensation. This raises the question—who would provide that compensation? Also, I learned from today’s news that these shares are pledged to some international financial organization. And if they are indeed pledged, then there is a question of protecting the rights of the third party, the pledgee. The only way to overcome this is to satisfy the demands of this international financial institution as a pledgee,” he told Alpha News.

According to the lawyer, the possible nationalization of the ENA may be the result of some behind-the-scenes arrangements and pressure.

“That is, the owner may be forced under pressure of certain circumstances to sell his share to another entity, and this entity, in turn, will transfer some part of the shares of this company to the state as part of the deal,” Harutyunyan noted.

Commenting on Pashinyan’s threats against ENA employees, the lawyer said, “Pashinyan has no authority to interfere in the affairs of any private company. His actions may contain elements of a crime: abuse of official position”.