The European Court of Human Rights made a decision on the case of Teymurazyan v. Armenia on March 15 of 2018. Araks Melkonyan, lawyer of the Protection of Rights without Borders NGO presented the interests of the applicant V. Teymurazyan at the ECHR.
The ECHR recorded a violation of the right to illegal detention, as well as the right to the receiving of moral damage compensation for the inhumane treatment by the policemen on the grounds of Article 5.5 and 13 of the Convention.
For the recorded violation, the ECHR obliged the Republic of Armenia to pay 11.700 Euros to the Applicant as a moral damage compensation.
Thus, the Applicant was sentenced to 4 and 1.5 years of imprisonment during the 1980s. On 2001, the applicant was justified on the grounds of the judgments being illegal and ungrounded, on the basis of which by the force of Article 5.5 of the Convention, the Applicant had a right to get moral damage compensation.
His demands were rejected by the domestic courts and moral damage compensation were not prescribed by the RA legislation during that period of time.
Moreover, in 2005 an accusation on the grounds of subjecting the Police officers to inhumane treatment was instituted, but according to the acquittal verdict made by the First Instance Court of Yerevan Kentron and Nork Marash Administrative District in regard to the Applicant, it was confirmed that the Applicant did use violence against the policeman, but acted likewise in necessary protection situation. The Court recorded, that the police workers subjected the latter to violence causing serious physical injuries.
The applicant, nevertheless, has not received moral damage compensation caused in the outcomes of ill treatment due to the lack of such opportunity prescribed by the RA Legislation.
As a result, the applicant was deprived of the effective remedy in the domestic courts.
Within this case, the Applicant also raised the issue of being subjected to ill treatment by the police officer in 2005 and in that regard the failure of Armenian authorities to implement effective examination under Article 3 of the Convention, since after the confirmation of the ill treatment against the applicant, the domestic courts demonstrated inaction and did not institute criminal persecution against the policemen who used violence.
The given demands of the complaint application were unaccepted by the ECHR grounded by the circumstance, that the rule to maintain 6 months deadline for the submission were violated.