Use of force against detainee continued when they were already under police control – HRD

On the instructions of the Human Rights Defender, the HRD’s staff continues to work in an emergency mode due to the ongoing protests and gatherings.

The rapid response teams of the HRD’s staff are in the police stations to visit the detained persons and to learn whether their rights are ensured or not.

As of now, visits have been made to seven police departments, and the HRD’s staff has had private conversations with more than 160 persons and clarified the grounds for their arrest.

The HRD’s staff continues to monitor the situation, examining posts and press releases that contain violence, calls for violence, and hate speech.

As a result of the monitoring, a case was recorded when a member of the Armenian National Assembly was detained by police officers, apparently using physical force. Later, according to the clarification received from the police, the MP was released from the police car. The Defender emphasizes once again that a member of the Armenian National Assembly is endowed with special constitutional and legal status. They can be deprived of their freedom according to a special procedure defined by the legislation. The Defender has referred to this issue many times and considers the existence of the mentioned practice to be concerning.

The Defender emphasizes that it is necessary to introduce serious tools to ensure the exclusion of the aforementioned practice.

The Defender considers the use of disproportionate force by a police officer to be highly unacceptable. Each case of the use of disproportionate physical force must be immediately and properly addressed to prevent such cases from happening.

Moreover, cases were recorded when the use of force against a person continued in conditions when the latter was already under the control of police officers. The Defender considers the mentioned way of working to be unacceptable.

During the monitoring and visits to the police stations, the HRD’s office found out that there are many cases of detention without presenting a requirement of law, without clarifying the reasons and grounds for detaining citizens, and without informing people about their rights.

Cases were also recorded when, regardless of the end of the actions taken against a person within the framework of administrative proceedings, persons continued to be kept in the police stations until the 3 hours defined by the law expired.

In this regard, the Defender especially emphasizes that the above-mentioned 3 hours is the maximum period in which the police can deprive a person of their liberty as part of the administrative arrest. At the same time, before the expiration of that period, after the completion of administrative actions with the person’s participation, the person must be released immediately, regardless of whether 3 hours have passed since the moment of their actual arrest.

In all recorded cases, clarifications will be requested from the competent authorities.

At the same time, the Defender emphasizes that guaranteeing the peaceful course of gatherings also implies the organizers’ and participants’ compliance with the requirements set by the legislation. It refers, among other things, to abstaining from violence, calls for violence, and expressions of hate speech during gatherings, which are also obvious and problematic.

The Defender once again urges competent state bodies and protesters to ensure the peaceful course of gatherings.