“Justice” According to Azerbaijan

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Traveling to Artsakh Deemed a Crime Against the Order of Governance — Part 15

CRIMES AGAINST THE ORDER OF GOVERNANCE

Article 318.2 — Illegal crossing of the protected state border of azerbaijan by a group, an organized group, or through violence

Alleged Act: Arriving in Artsakh via the Berdzor (Lachin) corridor (September 2022) and subsequent entries and exits.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: The evidence here directly refutes the charge itself. Presented are the examination of an Armenian passport seized on September 27, 2023, and data from the Intersystem Automated Monitoring and Accounting System (IAMAS), according to which Ruben Vardanyan never crossed Azerbaijan’s border through checkpoints. Other members of the alleged “group” were not identified, and there is no evidence of violence.

Imposed Penalty: The verdict handed down a four-year prison sentence, within the statutory limit of up to five years.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: Under Point 6 of the Trilateral Statement, the Berdzor corridor remained under the control of Russian peacekeepers, while Azerbaijan itself guaranteed the safe movement of citizens and cargo in both directions through the corridor. In other words, movement was explicitly permitted by Azerbaijan’s own binding commitments.

An Azerbaijani checkpoint only appeared on that road on April 23, 2023, seven months after Ruben Vardanyan’s entry. Consequently, in September 2022, there was no checkpoint “outside” of which he supposedly crossed the border. The reliance on IAMAS data is particularly notable: the fact that his border crossings do not exist in the system does not prove a crime, but rather confirms that no checkpoint existed. The court draws the exact opposite conclusion from its own evidence.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan’s Acceptance of the Position of Minister of State Deemed a “Usurpation of Power” — Part 14

CRIMES AGAINST STATE POWER

Article 278.1 — Actions aimed at the forcible seizure or retention of power or the forcible alteration of the constitutional order

Alleged Act: Accepting the position of Minister of State (04/11/2022–23/02/2023) characterized as a usurpation of power in the “sovereign territory of Azerbaijan.”

Evidence Underlying the Charge: No evidence regarding violence or the threat of violence was presented. The charges rely solely on the fact of Ruben Vardanyan’s appointment and dismissal as Minister of State of the Republic of Artsakh, as well as his pre-trial testimony describing his responsibilities as an official in charge of economic and social affairs.

Imposed Penalty: Twenty years of imprisonment handed down by the verdict.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: A mandatory element of this article is violence. The verdict describes no violent acts whatsoever. Ruben Vardanyan was essentially appointed to a position within an administration that had existed since 1991. All of this occurred under the status quo established by the trilateral statement (09/11/2020), which Azerbaijan itself signed.

The most obvious contradiction is that after 3.5 months, Ruben Vardanyan voluntarily resigned. Someone “forcibly retaining power” does not leave voluntarily. These two assertions cannot be true simultaneously. Thus, accepting an administrative appointment and conducting several months of economic work were qualified as the forcible seizure of state power, which carries a 20-year sentence.

Article 279.3 (Articles 279.1 and 279.2 dismissed) — Creation of unlawful armed formations and execution of attacks as part of such formations resulting in loss of life or other grave consequences

Alleged Act: “Participation in the creation and operation of armed formations, supplying them with weapons, leading them, and organizing training and attacks” — specifically, military exercises near the Badara River (May–August 2023).

Evidence Underlying the Charge: There is no evidence establishing a causal link between the grave consequences (loss of life) and the actions of a specific formation. The charges rely on testimonies from M. Grigoryan and K. Hayrapetyan (who were among the few Armenians remaining in Artsakh after the displacement and were used by Azerbaijan to give fabricated testimony against Ruben Vardanyan – ed.), as well as “operational intelligence,” including reports regarding 70,000 USD worth of military uniforms. The courtroom testimonies of the two witnesses contradicted each other and their own pre-trial statements, whereas their written pre-trial statements were virtually identical word-for-word.

Imposed Penalty: Twenty years of imprisonment handed down by the verdict.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: To apply this article, there must be grave consequences — namely, loss of life — and a proven link between those deaths and the actions of a specific formation. The verdict fails to establish this connection in any way, yet imposes a 20-year sentence. Furthermore, the Artsakh Defense Army had been in existence since 1992, making its alleged “creation” by Vardanyan chronologically impossible.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan accused of jamming a Singapore–Helsinki flight — Part 13

AVIATION SAFETY

Article 270-1.2 — Transmission of false information to an aircraft in flight or interference with the operation of air navigation equipment

Alleged Act: Electronic jamming of civilian flights utilizing Pole-21, Repellent-1, and “Mortira” defense systems.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: There is no evidence connecting Ruben Vardanyan to the operation of electronic warfare systems. The prosecution presented only the geographical coordinates of the stations and a list of jammed flights (e.g., May 31, 2022; July 8, 2022; August 11, 2022). Across all pages of the indictment pertaining to this charge, Vardanyan’s name appears precisely once, within the generic phrase “under the direct leadership of Ruben Vardanyan and others,” without describing any specific action on his part.

Imposed Penalty: No penalty was imposed due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: Electronic warfare systems are military assets belonging to the Defense Army, and the verdict fails to establish any connection between Vardanyan and their operation, relying solely on the formulaic assertion: “under the direct leadership of Ruben Vardanyan and others.”

The timeline speaks for itself: the flights cited by the court are dated May 31, July 8, and August 11, 2022, all of which precede Ruben Vardanyan’s relocation to Artsakh.

Furthermore, a revealing detail highlights the “reliability” of the prosecution’s evidence: according to the verdict, the jamming of the Singapore–Helsinki flight “began at 02:09 and ended at 01:28,” meaning it purportedly ended 41 minutes before it began.

Article 270-1.4 — Intentional destruction of or damage to an aircraft in service

Alleged Act: Planning the procurement of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and electronic warfare systems, framed as acts endangering aviation safety.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: There is no evidence whatsoever of any destroyed or damaged aircraft. The prosecution submitted only correspondence regarding the attempted purchase of Liaz (November 2022) and Malloy (September 2023) UAVs, alongside planning materials related to electronic warfare systems.

Imposed Penalty: Seven years of imprisonment (within the statutory range of three to eight years).

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: This statute requires a material corpus delicti (actus reus), necessitating proof of a specific destroyed or damaged aircraft. The verdict identifies no such aircraft. Consequently, the core element of the crime, and thus the crime itself, is entirely absent.

Factually, the alleged radio jamming falls under Article 270-1.2, for which no penalty was imposed due to time-barring. The seven-year sentence was instead assigned under a charge whose statute of limitations had not yet expired. Qualifying unfulfilled negotiations to purchase UAVs as the “destruction of an aircraft” is logically equivalent to inferring a traffic collision from an intent to purchase a car.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan’s tenure as State Minister was itself considered a crime — Part 12

VI. ORGANIZED CRIME

Article 218.1 — Creation or leadership of a criminal association (organization)

Alleged Act: Decisions on armed resistance, financing of formations, and procurements during his tenure as State Minister (November 4, 2022 – February 23, 2023); creation of the Artsakh Security and Development Front (May 18, 2023); and involvement with ASALA and Nemesis groups.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: Evidence regarding Ruben Vardanyan’s period of governance is absent; there is no order, decision, protocol, or subordination document. The evidence presented consists of the fact of his appointment and dismissal, letters from the State Security Service (SSS), examination of an iPad, and the examination protocol of the bag seized at the time of arrest. In the presented documents and materials, there is no mention of the existence of any such groups, nor is there a list of participants, registration, or testimony.

Imposed Penalty: Eleven years of imprisonment, handed down by the verdict.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: According to the court, the “organization” has been operating since 1987, and Robert Kocharyan is named as one of its leaders. Vardanyan “joined” in 2020, meaning he could not have been its creator. That leaves leadership, but his only position was as State Minister for 3.5 months, whose functions were limited to economic and social affairs, and after that, he was a private citizen. No order or decision demonstrating leadership exists in the verdict.

Most critical is the application of the concept of “criminal association.” By law, this refers to a stable group created to commit grave crimes; however, the court applies this designation to an entire state entity — the Republic of Artsakh — including its administration with its government, army, schools, and elected bodies. If applied consistently, any teacher or doctor who worked in that system would be considered a member of a criminal association.

Article 218.2 — Participation in a criminal association (organization)

Alleged Act: Joining the “criminal association” — as characterized by Azerbaijan — namely, the Republic of Artsakh, in “early December 2020” and participating until his arrest on September 27, 2023.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: No independent evidence exists. The materials from Articles 100.2 and 218.1 are repeated, including the financing of the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative on December 9, 2020, “operational information,” and SSS letters.

Imposed Penalty: No penalty was imposed. The penalty prescribed by the article is six to 12 years of imprisonment.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: The article is included in the list of convictions, but it is missing from the list of penalties. The law requires assigning a punishment for each crime separately (Criminal Code, Article 66.1), and this obligation was simply not fulfilled.

There is also a deeper underlying issue: an individual is convicted simultaneously as both a leader and an ordinary member of the same entity, even though a leader is inherently a participant. Tellingly, in the cases of Articles 279.1 and 279.2, the court dropped the redundant charges for this very reason, yet failed to do so here, despite this being the fundamental charge upon which the entire prosecution relies.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan’s political stance framed as a call to terrorism — Part 11

V. TERRORISM AND FINANCING OF TERRORISM

Article 214.2.1, .3, .4 — Terrorism committed by an organized group or criminal enterprise, involving the use of firearms, and recklessly causing death

Alleged Act: 308 acts of terrorism (1988–2023), resulting in 449 fatalities; 285 landmine explosions (1990–2024).

Evidence Underlying the Charge: None of the 308 acts contain evidence proving Ruben Vardanyan’s involvement. The court presented only a general list of incidents, data from the mine clearance agency, and the search record of the Stepanakert office, dated October 3, 2023. No connection is established between the results of that search and 308 incidents spanning 35 years.

Imposed Penalty: Twenty years of imprisonment, a single aggregate sentence handed down for all three sub-clauses.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: Terrorism is a specific act committed for a specific purpose. The 308 “incidents” listed by the court refer to combat operations conducted by armed forces during a 35-year armed conflict, which are governed by International Humanitarian Law (IHL). International conventions on counter-terrorism explicitly exclude such actions from the scope of terrorism, reserving them for IHL.

The only physical evidence presented consists of a few grenades and rounds of ammunition found in a cupboard. These are the subject of a separate charge (Article 228.2.1) and do not, in themselves, constitute terrorism. Inferring participation in 308 acts of terrorism over 35 years from those few items amounts to building a charge on evidence unrelated to the elements of the crime. Furthermore, the majority of the incidents predate December 2020, while the count of mine explosions continues through 2024, a period during which Vardanyan was already in custody.

Article 214.1 — Financing of terrorism

Alleged Act: In May 2023, the We Are Our Mountains Development Agency raised 212,000 USD (360,400 AZN) and transferred it to the Artsakh Security and Development Front NGO. Attempted procurement of UAVs and electronic warfare (EW) systems; conducting the Davit Bek Sports and Tactical Games (May–August 2023).

Evidence Underlying the Charge: The prosecution presented facts that actually refute the charge. Bank documentation demonstrates that the 212,000 USD was raised from the Ruben Vardanyan Foundation, Dilijan Community Center, Aznavour Foundation, and IDeA Charitable Foundation. As for the Davit Bek program, the court itself describes it as a six-month competition for 16-to-18-year-old high school students in Armenia’s provinces.

Imposed Penalty: Thirteen years of imprisonment.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: To establish liability under this article, the defendant must have intent or at least be aware that the funds are directed toward terrorism. This is precisely where the verdict contradicts itself: the prosecution’s own evidence describes a competition for schoolchildren in Armenia, reconnaissance-grade UAVs, and an unfulfilled procurement inquiry.

The financing method is equally telling. The funds originated from public, accountable foundations and were processed through official accounts across three reputable banks. Terrorism is not financed this way, as the core objective of terrorist financing is to conceal the source and destination of funds.

Ultimately, the court’s reasoning forms a logical fallacy: the”Front is deemed a terrorist organization because Ruben Vardanyan financed it, and the financing is deemed criminal because the Front is a terrorist organization.

Article 214.2 — Public calls to terrorism

Alleged Act: No specific act is formulated anywhere in the verdict. The article appears exactly once in the entire document, only in the list of sentences.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: No evidence exists, as no charge was ever formally brought under this article and no investigation was conducted. If the court was referring to Vardanyan’s public speeches, those pertain to expert reports No. 3-16-16/2-4/717-4/730 and No. 3-16-16/2-4/703-4/712 (both dated November 26, 2024), whose concluding sections are virtually identical word-for-word.

Imposed Penalty: Fourteen years of imprisonment, handed down without prior charge or formal finding of guilt. Furthermore, the maximum penalty prescribed by this article is five years.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: This is among the most shocking violations in the verdict. Ruben Vardanyan was never charged under this article, it was not examined in court, and it was absent from the list of charges. Consequently, he was never afforded the opportunity to defend himself against a charge for which he ultimately received a 14-year sentence.

Compounding this issue is the statutory violation regarding the sentence length: the maximum penalty under this article is five years, yet the court imposed 14 years, nearly three times the legal maximum.

Even assuming the charge refers to his public statements, the statute requires a call to commit a specific act of terrorism. Nothing in the statements cited by the court, such as “I will not submit to Azerbaijan’s terms” or “Integration is out of the question,” contains any call for explosions, arson, murder, or violence. Classifying a political stance as an incitement to terrorism distorts the legal definition of the offense and violates freedom of expression.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Aurora, Troika Dialog, and Ameriabank labeled as “Illegal Entrepreneurship” in Azerbaijan — Part 10

IV. ECONOMIC CRIMES

Article 192.3.1 — Illegal entrepreneurship

(Carried out without state registration or a license, generating income on a particularly large scale)

Alleged Act: Conducting business activities “without Azerbaijani registration and licenses” through Ameriabank, the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative, the We Are Our Mountains Development Agency, and Troika Dialog. Alleged damages: 103,047,605,899.53 AZN (approximately 60,616,000,000 USD).

Evidence Underlying the Charge: The Republic of Artsakh was treated as Azerbaijani territory, yet there is no evidence of entrepreneurial activity or income generation within Azerbaijan’s jurisdiction. The charges rely solely on letters and “operational information” from the State Security Service of Azerbaijan, including Letter No. 249 (dated November 30, 2023) concerning his biography. The same materials contain uncharged allegations, such as alleged “money laundering through Hungary” and “links to organized crime groups,” as well as references to sanctions imposed under Ukraine’s Decree No. 726 (dated October 19, 2022). The methodology behind calculating the 103 billion AZN in damages is entirely absent.

Imposed Penalty: The court sentenced him to six years of imprisonment under this count.

Taron Simonyan’s Legal Analysis: Entrepreneurship, by definition, is aimed at generating profit. Aurora and We Are Our Mountains are charitable foundations, which by nature do not seek profit. Ameriabank is a financial institution licensed by the Central Bank of Armenia, and Troika Dialog was a Russian company. None of these entities operated within the territory of Azerbaijan, and criminal law strictly applies within the territorial jurisdiction of the state concerned.

To apply this article, generating “income on a particularly large scale” is mandatory. Instead, the court substitutes this requirement with the figure of 103 billion AZN, which, according to the prosecution itself, represents the total “damage caused” during the conflict, not income earned by Vardanyan. “Damage” and “income” are fundamentally distinct legal concepts, and the applicability of the article hinges directly on this conflation. Notably, the court verdict did not even confiscate this 103 billion AZN; it merely ordered the recovery of 1,584 AZN (approximately 930 USD) in court expenses.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan Accused of Murder and Attempted Murder — Part 9

III. MURDER AND ATTEMPTED MURDER

Articles 120.2.1, .3, .4, .7, .11, .12 — Aggravated intentional homicide

(Committed by an organized group or criminal association; against a person performing official duties; with particular cruelty; against two or more persons; tied to terrorism; motivated by national hatred)

Alleged Act: 18,850 individuals killed (1988–2024). Post-ceasefire: 285 landmine incidents resulting in 353 fatalities. Dated episode: the shelling of an individual village on September 19, 2023.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: No evidence establishes an order, act, or any criminal intent by Ruben Vardanyan. In more than 208 forensic medical reports concerning causes of death, his name is not mentioned a single time. Of the testimonies provided by victims and legal successors of the deceased, only three mention his name, none of which are based on personal observation. Testimonies regarding the episode involving the shelling of the individual village say nothing about Vardanyan.

Imposed Penalty: The court sentenced him to 20 years of imprisonment, once again issuing a single, overall sentence across six sub-clauses.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: To convict a person for murder, there must be a specific victim, a specific act, a causal link between them, and an intent to kill. None of these four elements are present in the verdict. Most telling is the fact that in the extensive forensic section concerning the causes of death, Ruben Vardanyan’s name is never mentioned once.

The only dated episode is the shelling of the village of Mollalar, which took place on September 19, 2023, during Azerbaijan’s own military operation and at a time when Vardanyan had already been a retired civilian for seven months. As a result, all deaths spanning a period of 36 years are attributed to a single individual without a single specific case to substantiate it. Furthermore, the same aggravating factors — acting as part of a group, cruelty, and national hostility — were taken into account a second time as general aggravating circumstances, which is explicitly prohibited by Article 61.3 of Azerbaijan’s Criminal Code.

Articles 29 + 120.2.x (six combinations) — Attempted aggravated intentional homicide

(Attempted murder involving the same six aggravating factors)

Alleged Act: 56,268 victims of attempted murder (1988–2024). 882 injured by landmine explosions. Dated episode: the injury of M. Hasanov in Mollalar on September 19, 2023.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: Once again, no evidence supporting the charge was presented. The prosecution relies on the testimonies of the injured and forensic medical reports regarding their injuries. The victims even include individuals involved in routine accidents: two witnesses whose vehicle skidded into a minefield due to rain in the Agdam region on September 30, 2021, and one witness who tripped in the dark while carrying an ammunition box on the night of September 20, 2023.

Imposed Penalty: The court sentenced him to 15 years of imprisonment.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: An attempted murder can only be committed with direct intent: it must be proven that the individual specifically sought the death of a particular person. The court fails to prove such intent in any of the 56,268 cases.

Here, the prosecution’s choice of evidence itself refutes the charge. A vehicle skidding due to rain or a trip in the dark lacks criminal intent and, therefore, by definition, cannot constitute attempted murder.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan Accused of Mining 1,166,702 Hectares of Territory — Part 8

II. WAR CRIMES

Article 115.2 — Violation of the laws and customs of war

Alleged Act: Use of prohibited methods of warfare: landmining; “at least 1,087,226 landmines” across an area of 1,166,702 hectares (September 1988–September 2024).

Evidence Underlying the Charge: There is no evidence establishing a link between Ruben Vardanyan and the landmining operations. The prosecution relies on general data from the Mine Action Agency of the Republic of Azerbaijan and testimonies of mine explosion victims. The thesis asserting an “acceleration” of landmining following Ruben Vardanyan’s move to Artsakh is unsupported by any order, map, military unit, or comparative data.

Imposed Penalty: Imprisonment for a term of nine years.

Taron Simonyan’s Legal Analysis: Liability under this article attaches to an individual who personally employs prohibited methods or orders their execution. The verdict contains no military order, no designated unit, and no mined location linked to Ruben Vardanyan.

The assertion that “landmining accelerated” is a comparative thesis that inherently requires numerical proof: how many mines were laid prior to his appointment versus how many were laid after? The court presents neither figure.

Article 116.0.1, .2, .10, .11, .16, .18 — Violation of the norms of international humanitarian law (Methods causing widespread destruction, environmental damage, attacks on civilian populations, violence and destruction of property, prohibited weapons/means, unlawful detention of protected persons)

Alleged Act: 18,850 murders and 56,268 attempted murders (1988–2024); 1,284 hostages; use of cluster munitions and landmines.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: There is no evidence confirming any action by Ruben Vardanyan regarding any of the six distinct counts. The case relies on testimonies from approximately 540 victims questioned in court and various forensic medical reports. Out of these victims, only three even mention Vardanyan’s name. Two refer vaguely to “formations funded by Vardanyan,” and the third references information heard on “social media.” The victim pool even includes individuals involved in non-combat accidents.

Imposed Penalty: Imprisonment for a term of 20 years, a single aggregate sentence covering six distinct sub-clauses.

Taron Simonyan’s Legal Analysis: Six sub-clauses presuppose six distinct offenses: damaging the environment, attacking civilians, and unlawfully detaining individuals are legally distinct acts. The law mandates proving each offense individually and issuing a separate sentence for each. The court fails to describe any specific action taken by Vardanyan for any of these counts and instead imposes a single aggregate penalty.

The prosecution’s own evidence demonstrates the groundlessness of the charges: out of roughly 540 victims, not a single one describes any direct act committed by Vardanyan, while the three who mention his name rely entirely on hearsay.

Included within this same body of evidence are incidents such as a vehicle sliding into a mined zone due to rain, along with a soldier slipping at night while carrying an ammunition crate. These occurrences are categorized as consequences of a war crime, effectively attributing legal culpability to events that are mere accidents, rather than intentional human acts.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Baku Court Treats Aurora Prize Money as Mercenary Payment — Part 7

I. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE AND THE SECURITY OF MANKIND

Article 114.1 — Mercenarism (recruitment, training, financing, or use of mercenaries)

Alleged Act: “At least 2,000” foreign nationals since September 27, 2020. An alleged “agreement” with V. Vardanov, founder of VoMA. Distribution of Aurora Prize for Awakening Humanity funds to “150 mercenaries of Kurdish origin.”

Evidence Underlying the Charge: Evidence of recruitment or financing is entirely lacking. The prosecution presents only a single WhatsApp message (dated May 22, 2022) listing seven VoMA instructors, a single news publication regarding Ruben Vardanyan’s participation in a VoMA training session on May 1, 2022, and generalized “operational information.” There are no lists, names, or payment documents concerning the alleged “2,000 foreign nationals.”

Imposed Penalty: Sentenced to 11 years of imprisonment, handed down by the verdict.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: The court treated the Aurora Prize award ceremony as a payment for mercenary activities. Regarding VoMA, its instructors are citizens of Armenia and thus cannot fall under the legal definition of mercenarism. Furthermore, merely attending a training session does not constitute recruitment.

The timeframe attributed to the alleged “2,000 foreign nationals” coincides with a period when Ruben Vardanyan was not even physically present in Artsakh. Notably, the court cites 2013 as the date of the alleged “agreement” with VoMA, which is actually the year VoMA was founded, whereas the referenced correspondence dates from 2022.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan Found “Guilty” of Torturing 414 Prisoners of War and 1,284 Civilian Hostages — Part 6

I. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE AND THE SECURITY OF MANKIND

Article 113 — Torture

Alleged Act: Torture of 414 prisoners of war (48 killed, 366 returned) and 1,284 civilian hostages.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: No evidence connecting Ruben Vardanyan to any specific victim or episode was presented. The charge relies solely on aggregate summary figures spanning the entire conflict, lacking a chronological breakdown and without a single instance specifying Vardanyan’s individual role.

Imposed Penalty: Sentenced to nine years of imprisonment, handed down by the verdict.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: Torture legally requires a specific victim and a specific perpetrator who either inflicted pain directly or ordered others to do so. The verdict links no victim, no specific incident, and no date to Ruben Vardanyan. Instead, it presents generalized summary statistics of the conflict.

This methodology effectively holds one individual accountable for actions allegedly committed by a group over the span of 30 years. Applied consistently, this logic would make anyone who lived or worked in Nagorno-Karabakh responsible for “torture,” regardless of when they were born or what actions they actually took.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan found “guilty” of the enforced disappearance of 3,980 Azerbaijanis — Part 5

I. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE AND THE SECURITY OF MANKIND

Article 110 — Enforced disappearance

Alleged Act: Refusal to provide information regarding the fate of 3,980 individuals (1989–2020), including 490 men, 283 women, and 3,207 military personnel.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: Once again, the prosecution offers no evidence connecting Ruben Vardanyan to this charge. Instead, it relies on Official Response No. 542 (dated December 5, 2023) from Azerbaijan’s State Commission on Prisoners of War, Hostages and Missing Persons. This document lists 3,890 individuals registered as missing in connection with the First Nagorno-Karabakh War, comprising 3,171 service members and 719 civilians. The numbers in the prosecution’s own evidence fail to match the figures in the formal charge, a discrepancy the court left entirely unexplained.

Imposed Penalty: The court handed down the maximum penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: Under this article, criminal liability applies only to those who actively participated in abductions or who were legally obligated and equipped to provide information about the individuals’ fate. Ruben Vardanyan served as State Minister of the Republic of Artsakh for just 3.5 months — from November 4, 2022 to February 23, 2023 — with a portfolio strictly limited to economic and social affairs. The verdict fails to demonstrate that he ever possessed such information, let alone held the legal authority or duty to disclose it.

Furthermore, the period of the alleged offense (1989–2020) entirely predates his arrival in the region. He is being held criminally responsible for events that occurred before he was even present. To compound this, the court arbitrarily inflated the figure from its own primary piece of evidence, substituting 3,890 with 3,980 without any justification.

Despite the complete absence of even a remote piece of evidence establishing Ruben Vardanyan’s individual guilt, he was sentenced to 20 years in prison under this charge.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan charged with an offense where the sole “evidence” is his Armenian identity — Part 4

I. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE AND THE SECURITY OF MANKIND

Article 109 — Persecution of a group on political, national, ethnic, and other prohibited grounds

Alleged Act: Persecution on national and political grounds, and obstructing the return of displaced persons.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: No independent evidence whatsoever is presented against Ruben Vardanyan. The prosecution relies solely on a response letter (No. 3-36/2-3659/2023, dated November 4, 2023) from the State Committee of Republic of Azerbaijan for Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons, alongside a historical narrative. There is zero evidence regarding any decision, action, or statement by Vardanyan.

Imposed Penalty: Nine years of imprisonment, handed down by the verdict.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: Persecution entails intentionally depriving a specific group of people of fundamental rights. However, the verdict cites no victims, no decisions, and no actions personally committed by Ruben Vardanyan.

The most problematic element is the motive, which is essentially inferred from the defendant’s nationality: his Armenian identity. Yet being Armenian in no way implies an intent to persecute Azerbaijanis. In essence, guilt has been substituted here by Vardanyan’s ethnic origin.

Incidentally, Vardanyan’s only documented activity in the region was providing humanitarian assistance to the population of Artsakh.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Ruben Vardanyan Found “Guilty” of Deporting the Azerbaijani Population in 1988–1994 — Part 3

I. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE AND THE SECURITY OF MANKIND

3. Article 107 — Deportation or forcible transfer of the population

Alleged Act: Deportation of the Azerbaijani population: 442,841 individuals across 924 settlements (1988–1994).

Evidence Supporting the Charge: There is no evidence whatsoever pertaining to Ruben Vardanyan. The only material submitted is Official Response No. 3-36/2-3659/2023, dated November 4, 2023, from the State Committee of Republic of Azerbaijan for Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons, alongside a narrative on historical background. Furthermore, the figure provided in the letter itself — 635,646 internally displaced persons — does not match the 442,841 stated in the indictment, a discrepancy the court fails to account for.

Imposed Penalty: The court sentenced Vardanyan to 14 years of imprisonment under this article.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: All episodes refer to the years 1988–1994, when Ruben Vardanyan was between 20 and 26 years old. During this period, he was studying, then working, and living in Moscow. Notably, the act of deportation is legally complete at the moment the population is displaced, meaning participation in an already completed offense is impossible. Therefore, Vardanyan’s liability is ruled out under Azerbaijan’s own law (Article 34.6 of the Criminal Code).

The court attempts to bridge this 30-year gap using the theory of “preventing return.” However, “preventing return” constitutes an act distinct from deportation, and the court fails to specify what concrete actions Ruben Vardanyan allegedly took to prevent such return. Only the heading of the article remains intact. Moreover, applying a 2006 statute to acts committed between 1988 and 2000 violates the prohibition on retroactive law, a principle the judgment itself quotes from the Constitution, only to ignore it in the very next line.

Nevertheless, this sequence of absurdity and lack of logic did not prevent the Baku Military Court from finding Vardanyan “guilty” under this article.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Azerbaijan criminalized what it had itself permitted — Part 2

I. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE AND THE SECURITY OF MANKIND

2. Article 100.2 — Conducting an Aggressive War

Alleged Act: “Participation in the continuation of the occupation of sovereign territories.” Ruben Vardanyan’s “joining” of this alleged act — namely, the “continuation of the occupation of sovereign territories” — took place, according to the case files, in December 2020.

Evidence Underlying the Charge: No evidence was presented regarding any action aimed at “conducting a war.” The sole factual basis for “joining” is the allocation of funds to Artsakh by the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative on December 9, 2020, and the arrival of laureate Mirza Dinnayi in Stepanakert, alongside undisclosed “operational information.” Missing entirely are any formal act of joining, date, counterparty, or connection between humanitarian funding and military operations.

Imposed Penalty: Twenty years of imprisonment handed down by the verdict, one of the maximum sentences issued under the ruling.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: Most absurd here is that the Baku Military Court managed to consider “proven” the charge of “conducting an aggressive war” brought against Ruben Vardanyan, a man who never had a military career and never took part in any military operations.

“Conducting a war” entails executing an armed attack. The court substitutes this concept with “continuation of occupation,” thereby punishing presence in the territory rather than an actual act. Furthermore, after November 10, 2020, the status of that territory was established by the Trilateral Statement, signed also by the President of Azerbaijan, under which Russian peacekeepers were deployed there. Azerbaijan is effectively deeming a crime that which it had itself permitted.

There is an inherent contradiction: according to the charge, Vardanyan “joined” the “continuation of the occupation of sovereign territories” in December 2020, at a time when the war had already ended, and he was in Moscow. Yet, the Baku court found a way around this, as well: according to the charge, the “joining” itself is proven by the funding from the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative, which in turn is deemed criminal simply because its founder had supposedly already “joined” the “continuation of the occupation of sovereign territories.”

Naturally, searching for logic here is futile, as none exists. You have a circular argument in which not a single link is independently proven. Yet, this did not prevent the charge from being deemed “proven,” resulting in Vardanyan receiving the maximum penalty specified under this article: 20 years.

“Justice” According to Azerbaijan: Pastinfo begins analysis of the verdict in the case of Ruben Vardanyan — Part 1

The Armenian news and information agency Pastinfo is launching a series of publications under the title “Justice according to Azerbaijan,” analyzing the verdict in the case of Ruben Vardanyan.

At the beginning of September, Siranush Sahakyan, representative of the interests of Armenian prisoners of war at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), announced that English translations of the indictment and verdict in Ruben Vardanyan’s case were published in full for the first time on the Free Armenian Prisoners website. She also called on the professional legal community and research centers to make the case a subject of academic study and professional discussion, which we are now undertaking.

Throughout this series, we will present to our readers the quality of the “trials” that took place and the nature of the case concocted by Azerbaijan’s authoritarian regime against our compatriot. For the professional analysis, we have engaged Taron Simonyan, an international law expert and founding partner of the ELL PARTNERSHIP law firm.

We will present the analysis according to the charges and legal articles.

I. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE AND THE SECURITY OF MANKIND

1. Article 100.1 — Planning, preparation, or launching of an aggressive war

Alleged Act: Participation in the preparation of “plans for new attacks” within a “criminal organization.”

Evidence Underlying the Charge: Evidence substantiating the alleged act is completely absent. Presented as “evidence” are the search warrant/protocol of Ruben Vardanyan’s office in Stepanakert (03.10.2023) and the documents seized there, official correspondence from the State Security Service Military Counterintelligence, and “operational information.” Their content is not disclosed in any manner within the verdict, nor are any causal links between these documents and the alleged act established.

Imposed Penalty: Eleven years of imprisonment, handed down by the verdict.

Taron Simonyan’s Analysis: The conviction is based on assumptions.
The verdict specifies neither the state whose aggression was allegedly planned, nor the plan’s content, date, author, or recipient, and it fails to substantiate any intent to unleash an aggressive war.

Consequently, a private individual who has never held a military or security position is made the subject of a state crime, which constitutes a logical and legal error and violates even Azerbaijan’s own domestic legislation.

None of the essential elements of the crime that are required by Azerbaijani criminal law have been established. The conclusion relies entirely on anonymous documents seized following the arrest — documents whose contents the court itself fails to present, as it is evident that either no such “content” exists or that it does not serve their narrative.

This violates the legal requirements of sufficient proof of guilt and the presumption of innocence, which dictate that a guilty verdict cannot rest on conjecture (Civil Procedure Code, Article 351.2).

Furthermore, none of the “new attacks” attributed to Ruben Vardanyan ever occurred, a fact that the court itself does not dispute.

Despite all this, the court deemed the charge “proven.”