The prosecutors in the case of second President of Armenia Robert Kocharyan consider the motion for recusal unsubstantiated. There were two motions, and both concerned prosecutor Petros Petrosyan.

Prosecutor Gevorg Baghdasaryan said his colleague was objective and added that he was against the motion. “There is no evidence of the submitted arguments. In essence, this is due to the fact that the attorneys are against Petrosyan because he has an opinion that differs from their opinion,” Gevorg Baghdasaryan declared and cited the European Court of Human Rights, according to which the fact that a party doesn’t agree with a particular opinion doesn’t serve as a ground for recusal.

In his detailed responses to the attorneys’ questions regarding the existence of materials in the case that may serve as evidence favoring the accused-on-trial, the prosecutor emphasized that the attorneys, who admit that they are familiar with only one third of the case materials, can’t know about the content of the other materials, and thus, they can’t make substantiated statements regarding the materials. “The statements on concealing materials are small tricks to mislead the public,” the prosecutor declared.