About author: Ani Grigoryan is the founder and editor of CivilNetCheck - a fact checking department at CivilNet online TV. She has extensive experience in journalism, for more than 8 years. In the last three years she specialized in fact checking and investigative journalism.

Thirteen former officials in Armenia have been sued for the property of illegal origin. In 13 lawsuits, Armenia's Prosecutor's Office demanded confiscation of 26 billion 326 million AMD (approximately € 52 652 890), 202 movable and immovable properties, as well as shares in 36 law firms, estimated to be worth 49 billion 428 million AMD (approximately € 98 856 599).

During the 2018 Velvet Revolution and after that, Armenia's authorities, including Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, repeatedly announced and promised that everything stolen from the Armenian citizens must be returned.

For this purpose, in April 2020, Armenia's government adopted the Law "On Confiscation of Property of Illegal Origin," which, by a court decision, allows the confiscation of property, the acquisition of which is not justified by legal sources of income. The Pashinyan’s government has consistently stated that the law is aimed at former and current officials and portrayed it as a major anti-corruption measure.

This allows prosecutors to seek asset forfeiture in case of having sufficient grounds to suspect that the market value of an individual’s properties exceeds their legal income by at least 50 million drams ($100,000). Courts can allow the confiscation of such assets even if their owners are not found guilty of corruption or other criminal offenses. The latter will have to prove the legality of their assets.

In September 2020, the Prosecutor's Office launched the Department for Confiscation of Property of Illegal Origin, which investigates suspected illegally-acquired assets and defines the evidence needed to prove the legitimacy of their origin, among other things.

The officials with lawsuits filed against them

Over the past two years, the department received 345 materials on 574 people. Among the first 230 people checked, there was no illegal property found, so investigations were initiated on the remaining 342 people. 13 of those 342 investigations have already been referred to the court, while about 330 are still in progress.

The prosecutor's office does not disclose information about those under investigation. However, it is known that former ministers and high-ranking officials of the law enforcement, customs, tax, and police services are among people with lawsuits filed against.

One of them is Vladimir Gasparyan, Armenia's former police chief, who held this position from 2011 to 2018. Prior to that, he held government positions exclusively. The prosecutor's office has demanded that the former police chief and his family forfeit five real estates or their market value of 2 billion drams (approximately € 4 000 000), three cars or their market value of 90 million drams (approximately € 180 000), 169 million drams (approximately € 338 000) obtained through various transactions, as well as 5.2 million rubles (approximately € 84 000) invested in the bank. All these are not justified by the legal income of Gasparyan and his family. Gasparyan, his wife, mother-in-law, daughter, and son must prove in court how they acquired the property targeted by the prosecutor's office; otherwise, it will be transferred to the state.

Another lawsuit relates to Seyran Ohanyan, a member of the opposition Hayastan faction in the parliament, who previously served as Armenia’s minister of defense, as well as served in the army for many years.

Prosecutor's office demands that he seize three immovable properties, including the private house located in Armenia's elite Vahagn district, and if that is not possible, the average market value of the properties, which amounts to 1 billion 93 million AMD (approximately € 2 190 000) and around 1 billion 78 million AMD (approximately € 2 156 000). While investigative journalists have revealed Ohanyan's connection to Vahagni's luxury mansion, he denies that it belongs to him.

Currently, there are only two ongoing cases in court, and there has yet to be a single decision that recognizes the property of officials and their families as illegal and returns it to the state.

We asked the prosecutor's office whether any officials had accepted the illegality of their property and agreed to turn it over to the state without going to court. According to the answer, there were such individuals, but reconciliation negotiations with them did not succeed.

The opposition demands that the law be declared unconstitutional

Adopting the Law "On Confiscation of Property of Illegal Origin" was not universally supported in Armenia, especially by former officials.

It was reported in November 2021 that 26 members of the opposition factions "Hayastan" and "I have honor" of Armenia's National Assembly, many of whom previously held positions, had filed a request with the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia to declare the Law "On Confiscation of Illegally Originated Property" unconstitutional.

It is noteworthy that the Department of Illegal Property Confiscation of the Prosecutor's Office is analyzing the legality of the property origins of six members of parliamentary factions that applied to the Constitutional Court. At present, only Ohanyan’s name is known; the others remain unknown.

In February 2022, the Constitutional Court decided to examine the claim of conformity of the law with the Constitution. Although the trial phase was supposed to begin in May, it has been postponed twice.

At the beginning of July, however, it was revealed that the Constitutional Court had appealed to the European Commission for Democracy Through Law, more commonly known as the Venice Commission, to obtain an advisory opinion regarding the Law "On Confiscation of Property of Illegal Origin."

The Constitutional Court has submitted four questions. It notes the necessity to obtain an advisory opinion as to best practices for interpretation and application of the rights and freedoms stipulated in the international human rights treaties ratified by Armenia, as well as the solutions described in some of the questions submitted to The Constitutional Court.

Concerning the above-mentioned issues, the Constitutional Court suspended proceedings until it received the Venice Commission's advisory opinion. The Commission is expected to send its conclusion in a few months, but there is no specific date.

Was there a need for a new law?

Until the new regulation, property could only be confiscated in criminal proceedings. Particularly, the property (wealth) resulting from the commission of the crime is confiscated from the person found guilty.

However, not all cases imply that an illegal possession was acquired through criminal activity. There are cases when the initiation of a criminal case is impossible (e.g., when an amnesty law has been passed, the statute of limitations has expired, a person has died or is hiding from the investigation), and illegally acquired property cannot be confiscated.

To solve this, the Law "On Confiscation of Property of Illegal Origin" was introduced, which allows the prosecutor's office to send a claim to the court, which investigates the claim using the civil procedure. The court will examine the validity of the claim and the arguments of the parties (including the defendant) before deciding whether to confiscate the property.

Transitional justice and the new law

Artur Sakunts, a human rights activist and head of the Helsinki Citizens' Assembly-Vanadzor, states that from the beginning, the Law "On Confiscation of Property of Illegal Origin" was considered one of the tools of transitional justice, which had to be applied in order to restore social justice.

"It should have been paired with providing a political assessment of the confiscation by the state, implementing vetting in the judicial and state systems, and introducing benevolence. In other words, it should not be isolated," says Sakunts.

A human rights defender said that in many countries, this institute is considered one of the effective tools for fighting corruption. For instance, when the criminal ways cannot be substantiated within the framework of a criminal case. Therefore, if the property owner cannot justify the legality of the acquisition, this regulation applies.

In evaluating this regulation and the activity of the relevant body in Armenia, Sakunts finds that the process has been very slow despite objective reasons: war and pandemic. The most problematic thing, in his opinion, is that no systematic approach has been shown. There has yet to be a specialized anti-corruption court, which has been discussed for years.

"When we speak in the context of transitional justice, we mean it. It is necessary to ensure that the system undergoes benevolence, vetting, because bodies formed with corrupt interests and motives - judicial, prosecutorial, investigative, etc. - can pose a serious risk,” Sakunts notes, adding that under the current judicial system, the process might fail. As an example, he notes the experience of Ukraine, where the Constitutional Court declared the Law "On Confiscation of Illegally Originated Property" unconstitutional.

Armenia’s Ministry of Justice and the Prosecutor's Office have always argued that this law cannot contradict the Constitution. It was put forward for public discussion as a project, had international experts work on it, was sent to international bodies for an opinion, and it fully complies with international obligations and agreements. Similar laws exist in the Netherlands, Italy, Ireland, and Bulgaria, and "it has been successful in all of them", according to the authorities.

The relevant authorities claim that when the law is put in action without obstacles, and when the “loot” is finally returned, there will be more tangible results within 2-3 years.