Venice Commission registered that the overthrow of constitutional order with the formulation like it is in Armenia has not been found in international experience: attorney

The Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, after getting familiarized with the provisions of the Article 300.1 of the RA Criminal Code found it so uncertain that considered there even an issue of translation, member of Armenia’s second president’s defense team Aram Vardevanyan told the reporters.

“The Venice Commission came to the conclusion that in general the encroachments toward the constitutional order contain in them elements of violence or threat of violence. We do not have formulation if violence, but we have actual elimination while actual elimination is incomprehensible not only for us but even for 4 authoritative experts of the Venice Commission which perceived it as translation mistake and not a real provision in the criminal legislature,” the attorney said.

Vardevanyan said the Venice Commission just registered that the overthrow of the constitutional order with the formulation like it is in Armenia has not been found in the international experience.

“In the conclusion part the Venice Commission has registered that no conclusion can be drawn with respect to what constitutes a best practice from the perspective of legal certainty. Nevertheless, it said that in view of this principle and the principle of proportionality, it seems only reasonable to expect that the more broadly the statutory provision is worded, the more consideration should be given to the individual freedoms and basic rights of the accused. Such a provision should be interpreted narrowly, taking into account the principle in dubio pro reo,” Aram Vardevanyan said.

The Council of Europe Venice Commission’s advisory opinion—based on the petition by the Constitutional Court of Armenia—on the constitutionality of Article 300.1 of the Criminal Code of Armenia, was made public Thursday evening.