Tensions Rise in the Case of the Bread Carrier's Death: Response to Arpine Hovhannisyan's Statement

Former Minister of Justice Arpine Hovhannisyan recently addressed the circumstances surrounding the death of Arthur Sargsyan, more commonly known as the 'Bread Carrier,' in a Facebook post, listing those she believes are responsible for the decisions made in the 'Bread Carrier' criminal case.

Among those mentioned as decision-makers, Hovhannisyan included the name of Argam Hovsepyan, the director of the National Bureau of Expertise, who, according to her, is responsible for clarifying whether the illness is compatible or incompatible with detention.

Hovhannisyan also referred to the conclusions of a second forensic medical examination received in the case on February 8, 2017, raising the question: 'Why does the second examination take eight days, and how is it that the conclusion is received on the same day Arthur is arrested (did the investigator already know the answer)?' In this regard, the National Bureau of Expertise felt it necessary to clarify:

• During the time of the forensic examination of Arthur Sargsyan's case, Argam Hovsepyan was not the head of the expert institution (he assumed the director's position after July 19, 2017).
• The organization of the second forensic examination and the determination of the expert panel was carried out by A. Javadyan, who held the director’s position at that time.
• Furthermore, Argam Hovsepyan, who served as the chief forensic expert during that period, was not involved in the judicial expert commission concerning Arthur Sargsyan's health and has never acted as an expert in the case.

Regarding the timeframe and conclusions of the repeat forensic examination involving experts from the National Bureau of Expertise, we emphasize:

• The examination was conducted in compliance with the requirements of the RA legislation,
• The experts exercised their rights and obligations defined by the criminal procedure code appropriately and fully.

In the course of the examination, the criminal proceedings authority was requested, received, and analyzed medical documents related to the examined person and imaging data from computerized and magnetic resonance imaging, including the neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvic regions. A request was also made to present Arthur Sargsyan for examination, but he refused to appear. Following the receipt of the notice regarding his refusal to present himself, guided by Articles 85, 245, and 250 of the RA Criminal Procedure Code, the expert commission, comprising leading specialists in the field, concluded the examination based on the presented medical data.

Regarding the eight-day timeframe for the examination, it should be noted that the RA Criminal Procedure Code does not define durations for conducting examinations, and these timelines depend on the scope of necessary research and the type of examination. Furthermore, under conditions where experts fully realized potential studies and procedural rights and obligations, the examination can be completed in a shorter timeframe.

To avoid misunderstandings, we find it important to clarify: According to the terms established by the RA Government's decision N 825-N dated May 26, 2006, which was in effect at that time, ankylosing spondylitis (Bechterew’s disease) is classified among serious illnesses that preclude serving a sentence only if it manifests with severe progressive course and significant, stable functional impairments.

Thus, it results from the legislative regulations that when a person suffers from Bechterew's disease, which is not accompanied by significant and stable impairments of organ function, their illness cannot be classified as a serious illness impeding the serving of a sentence.

As for the possible causes of death for individuals suffering from Bechterew's disease, it should be noted that ankylosing spondylitis, particularly in situations where there are no internal organ impairments and functional disturbances, cannot be causally linked to a person's death. Generally, it should be noted that the development of acute complications in patients with such illnesses can occur suddenly, for example, due to unsuccessful or prolonged attempts at intubation during anesthesia for surgical procedures, leading to inadequate artificial ventilation, resulting in severe hypoxia and related complications.

Arthur Sargsyan, according to reports, underwent surgical intervention; hence, the objective reality should be clarified through a thorough and comprehensive investigation of all related circumstances and should not be superficially analyzed. In conclusion, the National Bureau of Expertise urges parties to refrain from disseminating unfounded information and from attempting to undermine the authority of expert institutions in our country, which are carrying out significant missions.