Armenian Lawyers are not Satisfied with Recent Amendments in the RA Law on State Duty
It would be more honest if it was said that there is a need to replenish the budget.
The lawyers are dissatisfied with the amendment of the law on state duty.
The recent amendment initiated by the Ministry of Justice of the RA Law on State Duty has caused dissatisfaction among a number of lawyers and citizens. According to these amendments, in case of refund of complaints by the Court of Cassation, the state duty, the minimal amount of which is 20,000 dram(appr.41$), will not be refunded.
The government has already approved the draft amendments to the law “On State Duty” submitted by the Ministry last week.
The Minister of Justice Hrayr Tovmasyan explained this change by two circumstances at the previous government session. “These changes have two goals. first, to unload the Court of Cassation from thousands of applications which are not justified and returned, and secondly, the essence of the substance of the amendment is that the Court of Cassation, as opposed to other courts, before returning the case, performs a series of actions that will be solved by this amendment, “the minister said.
Attorney Tigran Ter-Yesayan thinks that the Ministry of Justice is not sincere and does not disclose the real reasons for this change. “It would be more honest if it was said that there is a need to replenish the budget. It would be simpler and more frank. Perhaps they have calculated that they can work in this direction and return the complaint, can solve two problems, including filling in the budget, and have gone to that step. Otherwise, what does it mean to unload the Cassation Court from unreasonable applications? Nobody wants to go to the courtroom. The man is compelled to go to court. The court is for him to work and listen to the complaints of those people. If they are overburdened, let them do the stuffing, not the money they charge. This is not a solution. ”
In the opinion of the lawyer, in any case this amendment will not yield any results, that is, the number of complaints to the Court of Cassation will not decrease. “The applicant will appeal. this is not a solution. If a person has a problem, he has gone to court, has gone through two stages, spent money, then he will not go to the end and will not look at that 20,000 drams. Simply this change puts people in a poor financial state, and in some ways an attempt is made to hinder the advocate’s activities, “Tigran Ter-Yesayan thinks.
Judge-expert Georgi Khachatryan is also inclined to believe that with this change, the number of complaints will not decrease, and the goal is to fill the budget more.
For the expert, the approach is also unclear why there is discrimination between the three-tier court instances. “If we find that the Court of Cassation provides a certain service to be paid, then the same logic, this service, ie the question of accepting the application, is provided by the court of first instance and the appellate court. Why isn’t the same logic used in their case? It turns out that the Court of Cassation is separated into a three-tier judicial system and is limited to the right of judicial protection in the Court of Cassation, “said Khachatryan, adding that it is not clear yet that the Cassation Court’s perceived position is related to accepting complaints:
As to the argument that this change attempts to reduce the number of unreasonable complaints lodged with the Court of Cassation, the expert says that if there is a reduction, it will be very trivial and artificially done.
“A person wants to exercise his right to the end, especially if a person wants to go to the European Court, he or she will appeal to the Court of Cassation. If we take this into consideration, it turns out that it is just a means of filling the budget. ”
It should be noted that only 4 thousand complaints were submitted to the Court of Cassation last year, of which only 5-7% were admitted to proceedings. If we take into account the practice that more and more complaints are being filed from different courts every year, including the Cassation Court, one can draw conclusions that the Ministry of Justice has solved the problem. After the application of the law, only a huge amount of money will go to this budget, nothing is ordinary citizen on the other side.
Let’s also remind that an attempt by the Ministry to pay the budget was made lately in connection with the institute of advocates. The Ministry wanted to keep a record of lawyers, for which each attorney would have to pay 60,000 drams annually. Against this innovation, a great wave of protests broke out, and advocates announced that they would not pay that amount. After the noise, representatives of the ministry and attorneys are still trying to find an optimal solution.
Photo by PanARMENIAN Photo: