Fundamento destacado: 161. En vista de las consideraciones mencionadas anteriormente, el tribunal concluye que el solicitante fue víctima de un arresto realizado en masa, sin ninguna evaluación individualizada de ninguna criminalidad en sus acciones. Los únicos documentos oficiales disponibles elaborados con respecto a su privación de la libertad indican diferentes motivos legales, y no contienen detalles sobre los actos reales atribuidos al solicitante. Por lo tanto, no se puede decir que el arresto del solicitante se basara en una sospecha razonable de haber cometido un delito. Además, su colocación en la custodia policial no siguió un procedimiento prescrito por la ley porque, si bien era un sospechoso de facto con respecto a un delito (y por lo tanto una persona arrestada bajo la ley doméstica), no se redactó ningún registro de arresto con respecto a su privación de la libertad (como se requiere en el artículo 1311 del PCCh).
[Traducido por LP]
161. In view of the above-mentioned considerations, the Court concludes that the applicant was a victim of an arrest conducted en masse – without any individualised assessment of any criminality in his actions. The only available official documents drawn up in respect of his deprivation of liberty indicate different legal grounds, and contain no details whatsoever concerning the actual acts attributed to the applicant. Therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant’s arrest was based on a reasonable suspicion of his having committed an offence. Moreover, his placement in police custody did not follow a procedure prescribed by law because, while he was a de facto suspect in respect of a crime (and thus an arrested person under the domestic law), no arrest record was drawn up in respect of his deprivation of liberty (as required under Article 1311 of the CCP).
[Idioma original]
CASE OF ISHKHANYAN v. ARMENIA
(Application no. 5297/16)
JUDGMENT
In the case of Ishkhanyan v. Armenia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Chamber
composed of:
Mattias Guyomar, President,
María Elósegui,
Armen Harutyunyan,
Gilberto Felici,
Andreas Zünd,
Kateřina Šimáčková,
Mykola Gnatovskyy, judges,
and Victor Soloveytchik, Section Registrar,
Having regard to:
the application (no. 5297/16) against the Republic of Armenia lodged with
the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by an Armenian national, Mr Hovhannes Ishkhanyan (“the applicant”), on 23 December 2015;
the decision to give notice to the Armenian Government (“the Government”) of the complaints raised under Articles 3 (keeping him in police custody in wet clothes and with no time to rest), 5 § 1 and 11 of the Convention and to declare inadmissible the remainder of
the application; the parties’ observations; Having deliberated in private on 21 January 2025, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted
INTRODUCTION
1. The case concerns the dispersal of a mass sit-in demonstration and the applicant’s subsequent arrest following its dispersal. The applicant invoked Articles 3, 5 § 1, 10, 11 and 13 of the Convention.
THE FACTS
2. The applicant was born in 1988 and lives in Yerevan. He was represented by Mr R. Revazyan and Mr A. Zeynalyan, lawyers practising in Yerevan.
3. The Government were represented by their Agent, Mr Y. Kirakosyan, Representative of the Republic of Armenia on International Legal Matters.
4. The facts of the case may be summarised as follows.
[Continúa…]
