The provisions of the new penal code of RA regarding the transfer of convicts to lower security zones do not work.
Convicts have repeatedly expressed their protest in this regard, human rights defenders and mass media have addressed the topic, but the cart does not move.
Article 68 of the Penal Code stipulates that “during the execution of the sentence, based on the behavior of the convict or for the purpose of preparing to release the convict from the sentence, the type of security zone can be changed”.
According to part 2 of this article, a convict who exhibits positive behavior may be transferred to a security zone with a lower level of security to continue the further execution of the sentence there. Article 69 of the Code defines the procedure and conditions for changing the type of security zone. According to point “c” of Part 2 of this article, a life-sentrenced prisoner can be transferred to a lower security zone “if he is serving his sentence in a medium security zone after serving at least 20 years of the prescribed sentence.”
In practice, even in the case of lifers who spent 25-30 years in prison, these provisions do not work. There is an impression that these provisions were planned just for the purpose of blowing dust in the eyes of Europeans and creating a democratic image for the state.
Recently, we were alerted by one of the life-sentenced convicts, who has been in prison for 31 years. The convict presented details from the court session regarding the change in his detention regime. Below, without publishing the convict’s name, we present his story, which is astonishing and extraordinary.
The trial on the issue of changing the convict’s safety zone took place with unnecessary delays. A court session has been scheduled and postponed several times, with the next session scheduled for months later. One of the sessions, for example, was scheduled for March 26, but the employee of the penitentiary service did not appear. The next session was scheduled almost 3 months later, on June 10.
“I presented my complaint according to the points and articles of the law. They examined all my papers with a magnifying glass and couldn’t find a single place to cling. I stated that according to Article 69 of the Penal Code, the convict must be imprisoned for no less than 20 years. But I have been sitting for 31 years. Second, the resocialization committee of the institution should give a characteristic about positive behavior. I have already applied 3-4 times and all my characteristics are positive. The representative of the correctional service stood up, announced that I went through all the resocialization programs in my current regime, resocialized-finished, but this is where the “but” begins: because the nature of my case is serious, I must remain in a strict regime,” the convict tells.
Currently, our interlocutor is kept in the medium security zone, in soft mode.
The next level would be the strict regime of the low security zone.
“It’s almost the same as my current regime; the only difference is that the number of short and long visits in “strict regime of the low security” is two more. However, the advantage is that if they transfer me to “strict of low”, after 6 months I can ask the boss to transfer me to the open regime, but they are cautious of that. In the court, they openly announced that if we transfer you to the “strict of low”, after six months you will insist with the courts to take you to open custody, and then to parole. I have ived in prison for 31 years, what more do they want from me? The law provides for it: why did they write the law, which they are violating now? It would have been better if that point had not been there, we would have known that there is no salvation, we would not apply. This would be better than giving hope to people and then constantly pour cold water on their heads, saying that it won’t happen,” complains the life convict.
It is interesting that during the session there was some incomprehensible chaos in the court.
“The judge announced a break and the running around started. For about 40 minutes, they were taking out and bringing in papers from my case. In addition to the secretary, two young girls were also brought for carrying the papers. It was an impression that someone from the Ministry was sitting in the next room, and Judge Diana Ghukeyan was coordinating his actions with him,” says the life convict.
But the strangest thing happened after the judge announced the rejection decision. He turned off the recorders, then turned to the convict, saying: “I am sure that you will apply to the appeals court. Don’t be discouraged: you have a great chance to win the appeal.”
From this statement of the judge, the convict concluded that he was put under severe pressure. He is going to go all the way, up to to the European Court of Human Rights for his violated right. Forrights.am will continue to follow his fate.
Syuzan Simonyan