1) The norm
Armenia’s judiciary is a three-tier system (trial, appellate, cassation). The Constitution guarantees separation of powers and judicial independence. Pre-trial detention is a last resort; due process and adversarial procedure are the backbone.
2) The practice
In reality, several chronic distortions persist:
-
Detention as default, not exceptional. Courts often echo prosecutors with minimal proportionality analysis.
-
Delay-as-punishment: fragmented hearings that stretch for months.
-
Copy-paste rulings with poor individualization.
-
Structural imbalance: investigative bodies dominate; courts act as rubber stamps.
-
Politically sensitive cases feature maximal restraint and minimal transparency, fueling the perception of executive influence.
-
Communication vacuum: few public calendars, statistics, or disciplinary records.
3) Why decay set in
Weak oversight by the High Judicial Council, judicial career dependence on narrow decisions, low pay and heavy caseloads, a 1990s prosecutorial culture, and zero KPI-based accountability.
4) “Serving the PM?”
That claim is an opinion, but three observable patterns sustain it: (i) timing of rulings aligns with political agendas; (ii) premature public commentary by officials; (iii) little discipline for abusive detention or delay. The problem is supra-partisan: a dependent court will serve any government.
5) National costs
Polarization, capital and talent outflow, weaker bargaining abroad, and a vicious circle of distrust → more agenda-driven justice → deeper distrust.
6) A 12-step repair plan (with metrics)
Procedure & balance: monthly judicial reviews of detention; scale of alternatives (bail, e-monitoring); public case calendars; sanctions for delay.
Institutions & cadre: reform of the High Judicial Council; annual statistics; higher pay and staffing; mandatory training/recertification.
Transparency & oversight: amicus curiae mechanism; communication code banning pre-trial pressure; open data registry; justice ombudsman.
7) KPIs for success
Higher refusal rates for detention motions; shorter average case length; more non-custodial measures; fewer ECtHR violations; rising public trust.
Bottom line. Independent courts are not a favor to the opposition or to the government; they are state insurance. Without them, today’s agenda power becomes tomorrow’s legal boomerang — for whoever holds office next.
By Lida Nalbandyan, Founder and CEO of Octopus Media Group