The refusal of the second judge to consider the case against Garegin II raised questions about the justice system.

Judge Serge Rushanyan decided to transfer the case against the Catholicos of All Armenians and six bishops to the Yerevan City Court of General Jurisdiction to determine the feasibility of considering this case in the Armavir court. The judge used the theory of jurisdiction to avoid a complex case, lawyers stated.

As reported by "Caucasian Knot", Judge Akop Manukyan recused himself at the first hearing on August 7 regarding the criminal case of the Catholicos of All Armenians Garegin II and six hierarchs. The Catholicos, two archbishops, and four bishops are accused of obstructing the execution of a judicial act. A new judge, Serge Rushanyan, was appointed.

Judge Serge Rushanyan decided to transfer the case against the Catholicos of All Armenians and six bishops to the Yerevan City Court of General Jurisdiction for consideration and to determine the feasibility of considering this case in the Armavir court. The parties expressed objections, but the judge insisted on his decision, NNews.Am reports.

Garegin II's lawyer Ara Zograbyan stated after the court session that the defense disagrees with the court's decision to send the case of the Catholicos and six clergymen to Yerevan. According to him, the case should be considered in the Armavir region court. Zograbyan also regarded the court's decision as evidence that the judges understand that the case is "problematic." The lawyer expressed concern that in Yerevan, the case might be assigned to a judge whom the defense does not trust, Armenia Today reported on August 28.

Lawyer Ruben Melikyan stated that the decision to send the case to Yerevan due to the issue of territorial jurisdiction was "worse than the previous judge's decision."

"The theory of jurisdiction is not some particularly complex mathematics: a case can only be transferred on jurisdiction if the alleged act was undoubtedly committed within the jurisdiction of another (specific) court. If there is no clarity, the court cannot act in this way. Period. I have a question: why Yerevan, and not, for example, Shirak or Syunik regions? And are we sure that the Yerevan judge will send the case to the Court of Cassation to resolve the jurisdictional dispute, rather than accept it for his consideration, 'not noticing' the jurisdictional problem?" Aysor.Am quotes him.

When judges refuse to consider a case one after another, it indicates the instinct of self-preservation of each individual judge in the system, which prevails over the idea of justice, stated former Deputy Chairman of the Investigative Committee of the RA, Doctor of Law, Professor, Honored Lawyer of the RA Arthur Gambarayan.

According to Gambarayan, everyone is trying to "pass the ball" to the next, avoiding responsibility.

"One of the reasons for the fragility of the judicial system, which has turned into a caste of officials, is the lack of functional existence of the Supreme Judicial Council. Finally, my and many others' natural demand is for the judge to act solely out of a sense of duty, not based on the calculation of possible consequences. Justice cannot exist without courage. A judge cannot choose cases, just as a doctor cannot choose a patient. A judge, guided by a sense of duty, must resist pressure, not flee from it," he pointed out.

I demand that the judicial system consider and resolve this disgraceful accusation against the Supreme Patriarch and others. We have reached the point where we demand from the judicial system not justice based on law, but merely formal (procedural) justice," the publication quotes him.

On the day of the court session, August 28, a rally against the criminal prosecution of clergymen took place in Moscow. With placards reading "8-year power judges 1725-year Church," "The authorities of Armenia are destroying the Church and have renounced God," numerous representatives of the Armenian community held a protest near the Embassy of the Republic of Armenia in Moscow in connection with the court's consideration of the criminal case concerning the Catholicos of All Armenians and six high-ranking clergymen.

Participants of the rally, viewing the judicial process as unconstitutional and illegal, demanded an end to the persecution of the Church and the unlawful criminal prosecution of clergymen, reported the Telegram channel "Armenian Church in Moscow."

"We gathered to support and pray for the clergymen of the Armenian Apostolic Church, so that the authorities of Armenia would stop their harmful actions not only against the Catholicos but also against the Church and our people," said clergyman Gevorg Vardanyan of the Armenian Apostolic Church, as reported by AlpaNews.

The conflict between the authorities of Armenia and the Armenian Apostolic Church has been ongoing since 2018, when Pashinyan came to power. This conflict became evident against the backdrop of the 2020 Karabakh war and the authorities' desire to establish relations with Turkey, analysts interviewed by "Caucasian Knot" indicated.

In May 2025, Nikol Pashinyan sharply criticized the church, and in response to the objections of Archbishop Arshak Khachatryan, he replied with insults on Facebook*. Armenian politicians and church representatives demanded an apology from Pashinyan for insulting the church.

More about the persecution of political opponents of the current authorities of Armenia can be read in the "Caucasian Knot" reference "Main points about political arrests in Armenia in the summer of 2025."