About us   Activities   Structure   Reports   Partners   Library   News
Feedback   
Armenian Young Lawyers Association

Opinion

SHOULD THE ADVOCATES HAVE OFFICES IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA COURTS OR NOT?

E. Sedrakyan

EDGAR SEDRAKYAN
Chief of the Judicial Department of the Republic of Armenia

The problem is rather painful and urgent. We have faced the problem to ensure natural operation of the court employees in the court buildings and thus to have corresponding administrative rooms (offices) there. And the problem emerged in places (the problem is not widespread) where the advocates had their own office spaces in the court buildings in the course of years.
On what legal bases did they do it? These were different in different times. There are definitely no such bases today. And we set a condition: the court buildings should serve only for the purpose of realization of justice, which is a rather important function. We also had a problem of inventory of the space of the court buildings, so that they are provided to the court employees. This is an actual problem; the advocate may not realize business activities in the court buildings. This is also an occurrence, which contradicts to the ethics of judges. The advocate who is in the court building and represents the citizens' rights is in every day contact with the judge, and this may jeopardize the judge's reputation. Another question is why 10 advocates from 500 should have privileges and office spaces in the court buildings. Let them answer to this question. Why not all 500 and who decides which ten should have privileged office spaces in the court buildings. And we set a task to refrain from using the court buildings as offices for the advocates. Nevertheless, we shall have rooms for the advocates where they may get ready for the corresponding court case. But carrying out business activities there is excluded.

D. Abgaryan

DAVID ABGARYAN
Member of the Chamber of Advocates of the Republic of Armenia, Advocate

The practice of "sheltering" the advocates in the court buildings was formed since the soviet times, when advocacy in fact and in its essence was the appendage of the judicial system, and naturally did not realize its main right protective function. This was the reason that very often advocates were equated with the court employees, with all consequences issuing from this. Thus, from the point of view of traditions and logic of the soviet times, the fact of working in the court buildings may not be considered as something extraordinary. The present is quite different. Unfortunately the soviet mode of thinking still prevails, and a lot of advocates refer to their role and functions wit the logic of soviet times. No doubt it is quite unacceptable that the advocate's office may be in the court building or even in any building, which may affect upon the advocate's independence or limit his professional activity. Of course it is a fact that at present many advocates cannot afford themselves to have own offices or to rent them based upon the objective but very often upon the subjective reasons. Yet, if there is anyone who should support the advocates in this issue, it should be the Chamber of Advocates, and not the state, or the court all the more. Especially, when the RA Law on Advocacy and the Charter of the Chamber of Advocates of the Republic of Armenia provide assistance to realization of professional activities of its members, as one of the objectives of the Chamber.

L. Harutyunyan

LIANA HARUTYUNYAN
Member of the Chamber of Advocates of the Republic of Armenia, Advocate

I think this problem has both positive and negative edges. The positive is that the advocacy institute, as an independent structure, should not depend from the court and other state bodies while realizing its mission. Consequently the presence of the advocate's offices in the court buildings is not only contradicting to the principles of realizing the advocate's activities, but also does not issue from the interest of justice.
And the negative her is that the state, which in compliance with Article 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia undertakes responsibility to guarantee the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of a man and citizen, should conceive the importance of the role of advocacy in the process of protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of a man and citizen, and undertake corresponding measures to assist to the establishment of this institute.

Opinion           top

Interviews

K. Zadoyan

THE SECOND GENERATION REFORMS SHOULD START FROM THE SYSTEM OF JUSTICE. December 2007
Karen Zadoyan, Managing Partner of the "LEGAL ALLIANCE" Law Firm, Advocate

A. Gyulumyan

THE EXTENT TO WHICH AN INDIVIDUAL'S HUMAN RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED DETERMINES THE LEVEL OF JUSTICE WITHIN THE COUNTRY. June 2007
Alvina Gyulumyan, A Judge for the European Court of Human Rights

A. Osikyan

THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE STATE TAXATION SERVICES IS THE PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF HONEST TAXPAYERS. April 2007
Arthur Osikyan, PhD in Law, Deputy Head of the State Taxation Services at the Armenian Government

H. Manukyan

THE RA JUDICIARY SYSTEM SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT, JUST, TRUSTWORTHY AND PREDICTABLE. March 2007
Hovhannes Manukyan, Chairman of the Court of Cassation of the Republic of Armenia

A. Harutyunyan

THERE IS NO NEED TO EXPAND THE AUTHORITIES OF HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER, IT IS IMPORTANT TO USE THEM EFFECTIVELY. January 2007
Armen Harutyunyan, Ombudsman of the Republic of Armenia

Publications

A. Yeghikyan

IT IS NECESSARY TO PASS FROM FREQUENT INNOVATIONS TO FUNDAMENTAL REFORMS OF THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM. December 2007
Arpine Yeghikyan, Advocate, AYLA Board Member

K. Zadoyan

THE CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS REGARDING POLITICAL EQUALITY FOR MEN AND WOMEN IN ARMENIA. June 2007
Karen Zadoyan, President of the Armenian Young Lawyers Association, UN Expert

H. Bazikyan

FORMATION OF THE HUMAN CAPITAL THROUGH EDUCATION AS A SOURCE FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND ECONOMIC GROWTH. May 2007
Hripsime Bazikyan, Lawyer

L. Davtyan

SOME PROVISIONS OF CONSTITUTIONAL REGULATIONS OF FREEDOM AND IMMUNITIES OF AN INDIVIDUAL. April 2007
Lyudvig Davtyan, Lawyer

L. Tadevosyan

SOME ISSUES OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR INCOHATE CRIMINAL ACTION. March 2007
Lilit Tadevosyan, Prosecutor of the RA General Prosecutor’s Office Department on Supporting the Prosecution on Criminal Cases in Courts, PhD, lecturer of the law department in Yerevan State University