Armenian authorities have moved to dismiss Judge Vahe Misakian, known for acquitting former President Serzh Sarkisian of corruption charges in a high-profile case. The current official reason for this dismissal request centers around alleged delays in handling a separate trial involving Vazgen Manukian, a political figure charged with organizing mass riots. Misakian defends himself, stating that a heavy caseload and scheduling conflicts caused the delays, and he denies any intentional wrongdoing.
This development has raised suspicions of political motives behind the decision to remove Misakian, given his role in the Sarkisian case. His acquittal of Sarkisian, a former president of Armenia and the third to serve, was a significant legal victory for the ex-president. It took place in a corruption trial that stemmed from allegations of embezzlement related to a state agricultural program. Sarkisian had been accused of redirecting government funds towards a company linked to his associates, but Misakian’s ruling acquitted him on grounds of insufficient evidence, marking a controversial conclusion to the case.
This attempt to dismiss Misakian, coming shortly after that ruling, has led to widespread speculation that his acquittal of Sarkisian may have placed him in the crosshairs of those in power. Critics claim that the judicial system in Armenia is increasingly being used to settle political scores, with the dismissal of judges becoming a tool to influence or penalize decisions unfavorable to the current government.
Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian’s administration, which came to power following the 2018 “Velvet Revolution,” has pledged to reform Armenia’s judicial system, long perceived as corrupt and politically biased. However, critics argue that the government’s handling of the judiciary has instead become a means of consolidating power. Dismissal proceedings against judges, such as the one currently facing Misakian, have become more frequent, raising concerns about judicial independence in the country.
Opponents of Pashinian claim that he has leveraged his political power to weaken the independence of the judiciary, a tactic allegedly used to pressure judges into making decisions that align with the government’s interests. The ongoing scrutiny of Misakian’s case only fuels this argument, with many seeing the attempt to oust him as an effort to ensure the judiciary’s compliance with the government.
At the same time, there are voices within the government who insist that the judiciary’s inefficiency and lack of accountability must be addressed, and Misakian’s case is presented as part of a broader initiative to ensure that delays and improper management in court cases are dealt with swiftly.
Whether this dismissal request is truly about judicial inefficiency or political reprisal is at the center of the ongoing debate. This controversy surrounding the judiciary in Armenia serves as a broader reflection of the tension between reform and political influence in post-revolution Armenia. The challenge remains to balance the need for a transparent and fair judicial process with the equally pressing concern of safeguarding judicial independence from political interference.
As the dismissal proceedings against Judge Misakian unfold, this case could become a litmus test for the state of judicial reform in Armenia.