The Preliminary Investigation of the Suicide Case of a Soldier is Questioned

The objectivity of the investigation in the case of Vladimir Asatryan, who allegedly committed suicide on October 9th at a military base in Martakert, is questioned in the evidence of the internal and preliminary investigations and there are even suspicions of government inactivity.  
This is a conclusion we arrived at after studying the documents and materials obtained by Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor.  

First of all, an internal investigation was conducted parallel to the preliminary investigation of the case. It revealed that Vladimir Asatryan’s death was preceded by some incidents which were going on for a long time. On August 3rd, a case was initiated against Asatryan under the provisions of the 2nd and 3rd points of Article 177 of the Criminal Code, for leaving the territory of the army unit on July 24th and stealing civilian clothes from the apartment of a resident in the Town of Martakert. The case was dismissed on August 18, for lack of corpus delicti. Previously, V. Asatryan received a 10-day disciplinary isolation order from the commander of the unit, for leaving the territory of the unit, however the commander instead transferred Vladimir to the 3rd infantry battalion (I,B.) upon Vladimir’s request.

The internal investigation also revealed that before being recruited to the army, in 2006, V. Asatryan was sentenced to 2 years in prison for theft by the Yerevan Erebuni and Nubarashen Court of First Instance, however he was released by general pardon. This fact was not recorded in V. Asatryan’s pre-recruitment documents, and was not revealed during the formal background check at the army unit.  As to the circumstances of death, the internal investigation recorded: “On October 8, 2011, at 11:00 p.m., while relaying the duty at the military base the receiving Lance Corporal, Sedrak Sargis Madoyan (born in 1992) and private Armen Martin Zakaryan (born in 1992) reminded Lance Corporal V. Asatryan, who was relaying the duty, that he had to bring them some hot tea.   However, Lance Corporal V. Asatryan had refused to bring tea during the night shift, and Private Armen Aleksey Ayvazyan (born in 1991) brought the tea instead. According to Ayvazyan, taking tea to the night shift observers is a common practice. On October 9, 2011, from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Lance Corporal V. Asatryan and Private A. Ayvazyan were on an off-duty shift but had to clean the area.

At around 8:00 a.m., after the clean up, they returned to the cabin to have a rest, but the P.O. of the post, V. Yeghiazaryan (born in 1991) ordered V. Asatryan to rest only after cleaning his  weapon. V. Asatryan complained that the staff on duty with him always had to do sanitary clean-up during the morning quiet time. Later, he tried to clean his weapon but was not able to dissemble it, because the safety of the rifle had broken the day before.  Private A. Zakaryan, learning about the malfunctioning of the automatic rifle, informed the P. O. of the post, Junior Sergeant V. Yeghiazaryan that V. Asatryan stood on the observation post all night with a malfunctioning weapon.  Junior Sergeant V. Yeghiazaryan shouted obscenities at Lance Corporal, shoved and hit him a few times, qualifying V. Asatryan’s action as “pr…ness”, which is a highly immoral action according to the army jargon. After hearing from A. Zakaryan that Lance Corporal V. Asatryan had not brought tea for the night shift observers, Ayvazyan again shouted obscenities at Lance Corporal V. Asatryan, called him a “pr..k”, and hit him several times in the face. The investigation revealed that the P. O. of the post, Junior Sergeant V. Yeghiazaryan and Private A. Zakaryan had periodically humiliated V. Asatryan and had insulted his dignity in prior instances.  

On October 9, 2011, at 9:00 a.m., V. Asatryan and Private A. Ayvazyan went to the observation post to receive the duty without the P. O. of the post. The evidence obtained during the internal investigation revealed that the relay of the duty at the observation post was frequently done without the P. O. of the post. At around 10:40 a.m., Private A. Ayvazyan was in the underpass of the post, when he heard the sound of a cartridge being put placed in the weapon. He immediately came out of the observation post and saw V. Asatryan shooting himself with a short burst of gun fire.

Approximately 10 minutes later, the Commander of the 3rd I.B. Deputy Commander for Political Work, Captain S. Aghasyan and Company Commander, Captain B. Navoyan arrived at the scene and found Lance Corporal V. Asatryan dead. There was a note found in this pocket, written and signed by him, where he apologized to his family for his action and stated that the military personnel was guilty of the incident. The examination of the body showed that the names of the other servicemen, Junior Sergeant V. Yeghiazaryan and Private A. Zakaryan, were written on his left wrist, with the words “it is their fault”. 

“On October 9, 2010, at approximately 10:45, mandatory serviceman, Lance Corporal, Vladimir Andranik Asatryan (born in 1992, Shengavit m/c) died of a shot fired in the area of his jaw, from his own AKM assault rifle.” Before analyzing this document, we would like to draw the reader’s attention to another document: the petition to detain A. Zakaryan, which states that A. Zakaryan, appointed as an observer at a front-line duty, “during the period between September 23-24, 2011, cursed and humiliated Private Vladimir Asatryan for performing the service duty on the front-line without a helmet.

From September 24 to October 9, 2011, Armen Zakaryan  periodically humiliated Vladimir Asatryan by using obscenities, as a result of which… Private Vladimir Asatryan committed suicide with his own AKM assault rifle at the observation post of the front-line, which means A. Zakaryan’s actions incited V. Asatryan’s suicide. Armen Zakaryan performed criminal actions provided under the 1st part of Article and the 1st part of Article 360,” Armen Zakaryan was charged and taken into detention.

The defendant A. Zakaryan found himself partially guilty of the charges and testified that “actually, Vladmir Asattryan periodically violated the rules while on the front-line duty, that was why he had used obscenities against him.  He considered himself fully guilty of charges under the 1st part of Article 360; and he did not find himself guilty under the first part of Article 110, as testified by the defendant Vahan Yeghiazaryan and witnesses: Razmik Yengoyan, Sedrak Mardoyan, Andranik Avetisyan, Armen Ayvazyan, Spartak Aghasyan (officer), and Baghish Navoyan.” Armen Zakaryan was taken into detention, justifying it on the grounds that if he remained free, he could hide from the investigation, obstruct the court examination of the case while in the pre-judicial proceedings, have an illegal impact on the participants of the criminal procedure, conceal or fabricate significant materials or avoid criminal liability.  

According to HCAV information, the witnesses testified against Officer Spartak Aghasyan, who had beaten V. Asatryan before the tragedy. Until the investigation gives answers to this, let us make a few observations. The materials of the internal investigation showed that there were two names written on the victim’s hand, and although the investigation showed that V. Yeghiazaryan had done the same things A. Zakaryan had done, he was involved as a defendant but was not taken into detention. Why?  Or when recruiting V. Asatryan, why didn’t the relevant bodies find out and record that he had previously been convicted? Isn’t this an instance of government inactivity? Why wasn’t this circumstance revealed at the army unit during the private interview? This is also government inactivity. Eventually, why was he taken to the base? This is a risky factor and the responsible people risked the borders of the country, by displaying such an inactivity. And what if they knew but pretended during the internal investigation that they did not know about Asatryan’s previous conviction, to be able to use it against him afterwards?   For example in Karo Ayvazyan’s case (July 28) they knew about the conviction but recruited him and none of the officials was held liable.

The prejudice against V. Asatryan revealed during the internal investigation is also suspicious. This was expressed in having him clean his weapon and the territory during quiet time.  Eventually, why was Asatryan on duty at the base for 17 days in a row? And why was not V. Yeghiazaryan taken into detention, if the internal investigation revealed that the relay of the duty at the observation post was frequently done without the P. O. of the post? Thus, logical conclusion from the information of the internal investigation and investigation body would be charging V. Yeghiazaryan with at least two crimes: violation of statutory interacactions between soldiers, accompanied with humiliation and violence, as well as leaving the front-line post which could create a risk of a sudden attack on our  country.  The objectivity of the preliminary investigation was questioned from the beginning. After all, would it be possible for Vladimir Asatryan to commit a suicide with his own weapon and shoot himself, when the weapon had a malfunction? He had, essentially, performed the front-line duty with a malfunctioning, possibly a non-working weapon, which became a reason for the fight.  Maybe someone had intentionally damaged the rifle to incite a fight and punish Vladimir, and the shot was fired by another person with another weapon. This appears to make the suicide hypothesis questionable.

Source: www.1in.am