Court news
Ruben Vardanyan, a Russian philanthropist of Armenian origin, has been illegally detained by Azerbaijani authorities since September 2023. Now his case is being examined in the Baku military court. From the very beginning, the trial has had a number of blatant legal violations. In addition, since his arrest, Ruben has repeatedly complained about the conditions of his detention. In this section we will publish the latest news on his case.
Subscribe to the latest news!
Stay updated on the latest developments in the Ruben case
-
January 17, 2025
The first hearing of Ruben’s case was held in the Baku military court. From the point of view of international law, it is illegal to hold the trial in a military court, since he is a civilian and was not even indirectly related to the activities of military units.
The trial in Baku is organized in such a way as to create an illusion of transparency. But the international press, representatives of foreign embassies and ordinary observers were forbidden to attend. Nevertheless, Azerbaijani state media published a video of the trial to make it appear legitimate.
After the introductory part, Vardanyan and his lawyer made two motions: to merge his case with the cases of 15 other former leaders of Artsakh and to grant an additional term for consideration of the criminal case.
As a result of the hearing, the court granted only the second motion. The state prosecutor objected to the motion to merge the criminal cases and asked the court not to grant it. However, Ruben and his lawyer were given additional 10 days to get acquainted with the materials of the case.
Most of the charges and “evidence” in the case are classified as state secrets. And other materials, to which the defense has access, are in Azerbaijani. Let us remind you that defendants in criminal cases have the right to have all materials translated into the language they speak.
Ruben was also denied access to the lawyer of his choice: the international defense lawyer was not allowed to visit the political prisoner in Baku. In addition, the prosecution did not disclose any details about the alleged testimony of witnesses.
Without free access to all alleged evidence in English and Russian, as well as to information about witnesses, Ruben and his lawyer will not be able to build a defense, let alone prepare and present documentary and testimonial evidence in his defense.
The court ordered the penitentiary service to provide Vardanyan with a tablet with the indictment in Russian and to provide him with access to an interpreter to get acquainted with the case materials. But the time given is no longer enough to prepare a full-fledged defense.
-
January 27, 2025
Many people attended the second hearing of Ruben Vardanyan’s case, but the trial itself remained closed to the public. Security measures at the entrance to the Baku military court were noticeably stricter compared to the first hearing: only observers from the list approved by the Azerbaijani government were allowed to attend the hearing. There is no confirmation that journalists, representatives of foreign embassies and non-governmental organizations were allowed to attend the hearing.
Last week, Ruben and his lawyer filed several motions, including for postponement of the trial and waiver of the state lawyer. The court rejected all the motions. In addition, the prosecutor accused Ruben and his lawyer of abusing their rights, which, according to the prosecutor, was the basis for the rejection of the motions.
Vardanyan spoke at the hearing and shared his views on the situation. He drew attention to the following procedural violations during the investigation and ongoing proceedings:
1. Only 23 days were given for getting acquainted with the 422 volumes of the case.
2. No translations of essential documents from Azerbaijani were provided.
3. No proper conditions for viewing video evidence were created.
4. Exchange of documents between the defendant and his lawyer was limited, which significantly hindered the work of the latter.
5. No Internet access was provided, which further limited the ability of Ruben and his lawyer to build a defense.
-
February 6, 2025
The third hearing on Ruben Vardanyan’s case was held in Baku Military Court.
The prosecutor began reading charges dating back to 1988. They have nothing to do with Ruben, as he was studying at Lomonosov Moscow State University at the time.
The court rejected all the motions filed by Ruben and his lawyer:
- motion for copies of all written documents and materials that the prosecution will use at trial;
- motion for translation of all the mentioned materials into Russian or English, as Ruben does not speak Azerbaijani;
- motion for access to video evidence (with translation if necessary);
- motion for regular access to the Internet to get acquainted with materials necessary to prepare for trial.
To date, less than 5% of the thousands of pages of the indictment and evidence that will be used against Ruben have been orally translated for him. And his local lawyer has only been able to review 20% of the materials.
In addition, Ruben’s lawyer filed a motion to disqualify the court-appointed interpreter after discovering serious inconsistencies in the translated documents, including:
- the translated decision on the results of the preliminary hearing contained references to the legislation of Belarus, which has no relevance to the case;
- the court explained that the translation was done by a different translator than the one now translating the materials of the trial. This motion was denied, but the court ordered to provide a correct and faithful translation.
Ruben’s lawyer also filed a motion to disqualify the trial panel. She stated that this motion would be considered only after the state prosecutor had completed the presentation of the charges.
The charges will be further read at the next hearings, which will be held on February 10 and 13.
-
February 10, 2025
At the fourth hearing, the Baku Military Court continued to read out the indictment in the case of Ruben Vardanyan, which contains many volumes and describes in detail events unrelated to the defendant.
At the hearing, Ruben and his lawyer filed two motions. One of them was about creating a confidential environment for discussion. The court granted this request: Vardanyan and his lawyer were allowed to confer in private.
Ruben also filed a motion to dismiss the judicial panel for the following reasons:
- violation of rights: the board did not consider violations of procedural rights at the investigation stage;
- Disrespect for international legal norms: The court ignored international standards that could ensure the fairness of the trial;
- Translation errors: the submitted materials contained serious errors that distorted the course of the trial, this violation was recognized by the court itself;
- Judicial inconsistencies: During the preparatory hearing, the court reflected in the decision only one motion (for postponement), and rejected the rest.
Ruben’s lawyer supported his petition with references to legal norms and confirmed the procedural violations that he observed as a participant in the investigation process. But the court did not consider the motion to dismiss the judicial board during the trial.
-
February 13, 2025
The fifth hearing, held at the Baku Military Court, was still mainly focused on the announcement of charges against Ruben. The courtroom was notably filled with students today, presumably from a law faculty.
Highlights of the hearing:
- Ruben’s local lawyer filed a motion requesting a confidential meeting with him (five minutes per lawyer, at Ruben’s request). The court granted this motion.
- After the session resumed, Ruben officially submitted a request to reject the services of the state-appointed lawyer, citing the illegality of his appointment. The state prosecutor acknowledged Ruben’s right to refuse the lawyer but suggested appointing another state lawyer instead. Ruben declined this proposal. The court accepted Ruben’srefusal and granted the motion.
To recall, during the preliminary hearing in January, the prosecutor proposed appointing an additional public defender for Ruben under the pretext of protecting the rights of the accused in such a complex case. The prosecutor’s proposal was supported by the court. This appointment was clearly illegitimate, as it violated Ruben’s fundamental right to choose his own defense.
The defense addressed the court with the following key issues:
- A newly translated version of the preparatory hearing decision was provided. However, upon review, serious inconsistencies were found again. The document only addressed one motion (the request for postponement), while all other motions were ignored.
- Despite submitting multiple requests, the defense has not yet received access to the court transcripts.
- The translated indictment provided in Russian is not certified by an authorized official. The defense demands an officially certified version.
The judge responded that since the reading of the indictment is still ongoing, these issues will be addressed only after its completion.
-
February 17, 2025
The sixth hearing, held at the Baku Military Court, was still mainly focused on the reading of charges against Ruben. The hearing was again secret and closed to the public.
Highlights of the hearing:
Ruben’s defense requested the recusal of the judicial panel due to procedural concerns. In response, the prosecution claimed the request lacked evidentiary basis. The court left the motion without consideration due to insufficient evidence.
Court’s Questions to the Defense:
Why request confidential meetings during sessions instead of beforehand?
Defense Response: Prison officers deny access before hearings without explicit court authorization.
Why refuse the opportunity to review court protocols?
Defense Response: The offer was made only 10 minutes before the session, which was unacceptable.
The court proposed to continue the announcement of the charges. The prosecution finished reading the indictment. Upon completion of the indictment announcement, the court read out all the charges and the possible penalties for each article.
The court then asked Ruben whether he considered himself guilty. Three possible answers were provided:
- 1. Yes, I consider myself guilty.
- 2. I partially consider myself guilty.
- 3. I do not consider myself guilty.
Before responding, Ruben requested confidential communication with his attorney.
Then, Ruben delivered an extensive speech, in which he:
- Declared he had committed no crimes.
- Emphasized the need for a real judicial process not one replete with egregious due process abuses.
- Highlighted that he had not received a signed indictment from the prosecutor, investigator, or translator.
- Stressed his lack of access to case materials and proper translations.
- Declared he was unable to respond to the court’s request because of the serious due process abuses in his case and inability to understand the nature of the indictment as he hadn’t had a chance to properly familiarize himself with it.
The next hearing is scheduled for February 25, 2025.
-
February 25, 2025
During today’s hearing, after a week being on a hunger strike, Ruben Vardanyan’s health has deteriorated substantially. His blood pressure was recorded at 140/110, classified as a dangerous level and requiring medical attention. His local lawyer informed both the court and the doctor that Ruben was in no condition to participate and could collapse in the courtroom. Despite this, the hearing was not postponed, and the proceedings continued. A total of five requests to postpone the hearing offered a various intervals were all rejected.
And none of Defense Counsel’s other motions were granted, and the ongoing violations of his fundamental rights remain unaddressed.
The only development is that Ruben was finally given the indictment with a certified translation, but it remains state secrets and cannot be shared with his family or counsel abroad.
Following this hearing, Ruben’s international legal counsel, Jared Genser, issued a statement detailing the critical situation. You can read the full statement here: link.
The next court hearing is scheduled for March 4 at 10:00 AM (Baku Time).
-
March 4, 2025
The eighth hearing took place against the backdrop of the second week of Ruben Vardanyan’s hunger strike. The session was focused on procedural motions filed by the defense.
Highlights of the hearing:
- The defense submitted four motions:
- To provide a translation of the decision on bringing charges.
- To allow access to the video materials of the case.
- To provide a notice of rights and obligations.
- To allow access to the court hearing protocols.
Of these, the court granted the first and fourth motions.
The judge stated that document review would take place on March 5. However, after the hearing, a court officer informed the defense that it has been postponed until March 8.
Following the discussion of motions, the prosecution continued questioning regarding the charges. The defense refrained from answering. Ruben was also visited by the Ombudsman of Azerbaijan, to whom he voiced all his concerns.
The next hearing is scheduled for March 11, 2025.
-
March 11, 2025
The ninth court hearing in the politically motivated trial of Ruben Vardanyan took place at the Baku Military Court on March 11, 2025. The proceedings continued in the same pattern – systemic violations of due process, baseless accusations, and an absence of any credible evidence.
At the beginning of the hearing, Defense Counsel submitted a motion requesting that Ruben be granted access to key legal resources, including the Criminal Procedure Code of Azerbaijan (CPC), the Criminal Code of Azerbaijan (CC), and European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) rulings.
The prosecution objected, claiming that the CPC does not grant such rights to the accused. The court denied the motion.
Defense Counsel filed a new motion to recuse the judicial panel, citing multiple violations of his rights.
The court did not review the motion.
The prosecution then presented additional so-called witnesses, none of whom Ruben knew. These individuals made fabricated claims that were not supported by any documentary or material evidence. The judicial panel simply allowed them to make generalized allegations. For example, one witness claimed that he heard Ruben recruited young men to serve in as mercenaries but presented no specific information about this allegation. Another “victim” witness claimed he was injured by a landmine. And another “”victim” witness in the Azerbaijan military claimed to have been injured in Kelbajar during their military service. But none of these witnesses had met Ruben, seen Ruben, or had any connection to Ruben, and none had any evidence to connect Ruben to the any of these allegations beyond alleging he was responsible.
Defense Counsel chose not to cross-examine the witnesses, as the court has consistently failed to uphold the principle of equality of arms, making fair participation in the process impossible. Specifically, the defense was not provided advance notice about the biographical details of the witnesses or the allegations they were expected to present, making it impossible to prepare to challenge their claims. And given the court failed to affirmatively apply any of the most basic requirements under Azerbaijan law for the acceptance of the presentation of evidence, including verifying the evidence’s clarity, accuracy, relevance, and sufficiency, the judicial panel continued to demonstrate its profound bias against Ruben as the defendant. As such, Defense Counsel once again reaffirmed its non-participation in the proceedings.
The next court session is scheduled for March 18, 2025.
-
March 18, 2025
The tenth hearing, held at the Baku Military Court, was mainly focused on the questioning of the alleged victims. The hearing was again closed to the public.
Highlights of the hearing:
At the beginning of the hearing, Defense counsel submitted a motion requesting access to the all hearing transcripts and audio recordings of past hearings. The judicial panel granted the motion. It is importance to emphasize, however, that there have been large discrepancies between what has been happening in the hearings and partial transcripts that have been released, and that Defense counsel has repeatedly asking for this information over many months. So the simply granting of this motion itself is only a first step and does not mean the Government has met its legal obligations to provide complete and accurate transcripts and Audi recordings.
After the motion was granted, the all alleged victims were summoned for questioning. They reported being wounded while serving in the Azerbaijani military in territories previously controlled by Armenian forces, as a result of enemy fire. They stated that they knew of Ruben Vardanyan from media publications and social media. Yet none of them knew Ruben personally, had ever met him, had any personal knowledge of his activities in Nagorno-Karabakh, or had any oral or documentary evidence to connect Ruben to the Armenian forces they claimed were responsible for their injuries.
In addition, the court read out medical examination reports for each victim and they answered prosecution questions about their service locations, the attacks, and the nature of their injuries. Despite having presented literally no evidence to connect Ruben to their injuries, they all demanded the harshest possible sentence be imposed on him.
The next hearing in the case is scheduled for April 1.
-
April 1, 2025
The eleventh hearing in the criminal case against Ruben Vardanyan was held at the Baku Military Court. As in previous sessions, the hearing was closed to the public.
Key Developments:
At the beginning of the session, the judicial panel acknowledged receiving several motions from the defense. However, it announced that formal responses to these motions would be provided within 30 days. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan stipulates in Article 122.2 that motions must be reviewed “without delay.” The judicial panel’s additional delay to address motions submitted by Defense Counsel further impedes Ruben’s right to a fair trial.
A group of alleged victims was summoned for questioning. As in previous hearings, none of them had ever met Ruben Vardanyan, had any personal knowledge of his activities in Nagorno-Karabakh, nor any evidence directly or indirectly connecting him to their accusations. They stated that they knew of him only through media and social networks.
The victims testified that they were injured by sniper fire and shelling while serving in the military in Kalbajar and Aghdam. They responded to questions from the prosecution regarding the locations of their service and the nature of their injuries. The forensic medical examinations of the victims were also presented to the court, but no evidence was presented to connect Ruben to the alleged incidents.
Defense Counsel reiterated its position of non-participation, citing egregious violations of Ruben’s rights.
The next hearing is scheduled for April 8.
-
April 8, 2025
Based on information provided by Defense Councel Avraam Berman
The twelfth hearing in the criminal case against Ruben Vardanyan took place at the Baku Military Court. As with previous sessions, the hearing was closed to the public.
Key Developments:
- At the beginning of the hearing, Defense Counsel Avraam Berman reminded the court of a statement submitted to the Court on March 10threquesting access to audio recordings attached to the hearing transcripts of January 17th and 27th, which have not been received as of April 8th. The court responded by stating that the materials would be provided.
- A new group of alleged victims was summoned for questioning. As in prior sessions, none of them had ever met Ruben Vardanyan personally or had any direct knowledge of his activities. All stated they knew of him only through media reports and social media.
- The victims testified to being wounded during military service in various regions.
- The court also presented forensic medical reports for each of the individuals questioned.
- Despite providing no evidence connecting Ruben Vardanyan to the incidents described, all victims requested the court to impose the harshest sentence.
- Defense Counsel reiterated its position of non-participation due to continued violations of the defendant’s rights and the lack of adversarial proceedings.
The next hearing is scheduled for April 15.
Representatives of the local press were present.
-
April 15, 2025
This hearing in the Baku Military Court was closed to the public. Only individuals on a pre-approved list of the Government were admitted.
At the start of the hearing, Defense Counsel Avraam Berman addressed the court to clarify a misrepresentation made by local media. He explained that the defense had not requested a re-examination of the court hearing transcripts, but rather access to the transcripts and corresponding audio recordings – materials that have still not been fully provided, aside from two partial transcripts from January. He warned that continued misreporting by media outlets could result in legal action.
A new group of alleged victims was summoned for questioning. As in prior sessions, they claimed to have sustained injuries during military clashes in various regions, allegedly as a result of actions by Armenian forces.
However, none of the victims had any personal knowledge of Ruben Vardanyan or direct evidence linking him to the incidents they described. The Court read out the medical examination reports for each victim and the Prosecutor asked questions about their service locations, the attacks, and the nature of their injuries, but failed to connect these facts to Ruben.
Again, though the witness testimony constituted hearsay, the judicial panel did not rule this testimony inadmissible or exclude it from the record. The judicial panel failed to affirmatively apply any of the most basic requirements under Azerbaijan law for the acceptance of the presentation of evidence.
Defense Counsel reaffirmed its position of non-participation in the questioning process, citing egregious violations of Ruben Vardanyan’s rights and the failure to uphold the principle of adversarial proceedings. Counsel emphasized that this refusal to participate should not be misconstrued as an absence of legal arguments, but rather a protest against the illegitimacy of the trial process.
The next hearing is scheduled for April 22, 2025.
The first hearing of Ruben’s case was held in the Baku military court. From the point of view of international law, it is illegal to hold the trial in a military court, since he is a civilian and was not even indirectly related to the activities of military units.
The trial in Baku is organized in such a way as to create an illusion of transparency. But the international press, representatives of foreign embassies and ordinary observers were forbidden to attend. Nevertheless, Azerbaijani state media published a video of the trial to make it appear legitimate.
After the introductory part, Vardanyan and his lawyer made two motions: to merge his case with the cases of 15 other former leaders of Artsakh and to grant an additional term for consideration of the criminal case.
As a result of the hearing, the court granted only the second motion. The state prosecutor objected to the motion to merge the criminal cases and asked the court not to grant it. However, Ruben and his lawyer were given additional 10 days to get acquainted with the materials of the case.
Most of the charges and “evidence” in the case are classified as state secrets. And other materials, to which the defense has access, are in Azerbaijani. Let us remind you that defendants in criminal cases have the right to have all materials translated into the language they speak.
Ruben was also denied access to the lawyer of his choice: the international defense lawyer was not allowed to visit the political prisoner in Baku. In addition, the prosecution did not disclose any details about the alleged testimony of witnesses.
Without free access to all alleged evidence in English and Russian, as well as to information about witnesses, Ruben and his lawyer will not be able to build a defense, let alone prepare and present documentary and testimonial evidence in his defense.
The court ordered the penitentiary service to provide Vardanyan with a tablet with the indictment in Russian and to provide him with access to an interpreter to get acquainted with the case materials. But the time given is no longer enough to prepare a full-fledged defense.
Many people attended the second hearing of Ruben Vardanyan’s case, but the trial itself remained closed to the public. Security measures at the entrance to the Baku military court were noticeably stricter compared to the first hearing: only observers from the list approved by the Azerbaijani government were allowed to attend the hearing. There is no confirmation that journalists, representatives of foreign embassies and non-governmental organizations were allowed to attend the hearing.
Last week, Ruben and his lawyer filed several motions, including for postponement of the trial and waiver of the state lawyer. The court rejected all the motions. In addition, the prosecutor accused Ruben and his lawyer of abusing their rights, which, according to the prosecutor, was the basis for the rejection of the motions.
Vardanyan spoke at the hearing and shared his views on the situation. He drew attention to the following procedural violations during the investigation and ongoing proceedings:
1. Only 23 days were given for getting acquainted with the 422 volumes of the case.
2. No translations of essential documents from Azerbaijani were provided.
3. No proper conditions for viewing video evidence were created.
4. Exchange of documents between the defendant and his lawyer was limited, which significantly hindered the work of the latter.
5. No Internet access was provided, which further limited the ability of Ruben and his lawyer to build a defense.
The third hearing on Ruben Vardanyan’s case was held in Baku Military Court.
The prosecutor began reading charges dating back to 1988. They have nothing to do with Ruben, as he was studying at Lomonosov Moscow State University at the time.
The court rejected all the motions filed by Ruben and his lawyer:
- motion for copies of all written documents and materials that the prosecution will use at trial;
- motion for translation of all the mentioned materials into Russian or English, as Ruben does not speak Azerbaijani;
- motion for access to video evidence (with translation if necessary);
- motion for regular access to the Internet to get acquainted with materials necessary to prepare for trial.
To date, less than 5% of the thousands of pages of the indictment and evidence that will be used against Ruben have been orally translated for him. And his local lawyer has only been able to review 20% of the materials.
In addition, Ruben’s lawyer filed a motion to disqualify the court-appointed interpreter after discovering serious inconsistencies in the translated documents, including:
- the translated decision on the results of the preliminary hearing contained references to the legislation of Belarus, which has no relevance to the case;
- the court explained that the translation was done by a different translator than the one now translating the materials of the trial. This motion was denied, but the court ordered to provide a correct and faithful translation.
Ruben’s lawyer also filed a motion to disqualify the trial panel. She stated that this motion would be considered only after the state prosecutor had completed the presentation of the charges.
The charges will be further read at the next hearings, which will be held on February 10 and 13.
At the fourth hearing, the Baku Military Court continued to read out the indictment in the case of Ruben Vardanyan, which contains many volumes and describes in detail events unrelated to the defendant.
At the hearing, Ruben and his lawyer filed two motions. One of them was about creating a confidential environment for discussion. The court granted this request: Vardanyan and his lawyer were allowed to confer in private.
Ruben also filed a motion to dismiss the judicial panel for the following reasons:
- violation of rights: the board did not consider violations of procedural rights at the investigation stage;
- Disrespect for international legal norms: The court ignored international standards that could ensure the fairness of the trial;
- Translation errors: the submitted materials contained serious errors that distorted the course of the trial, this violation was recognized by the court itself;
- Judicial inconsistencies: During the preparatory hearing, the court reflected in the decision only one motion (for postponement), and rejected the rest.
Ruben’s lawyer supported his petition with references to legal norms and confirmed the procedural violations that he observed as a participant in the investigation process. But the court did not consider the motion to dismiss the judicial board during the trial.
The fifth hearing, held at the Baku Military Court, was still mainly focused on the announcement of charges against Ruben. The courtroom was notably filled with students today, presumably from a law faculty.
Highlights of the hearing:
- Ruben’s local lawyer filed a motion requesting a confidential meeting with him (five minutes per lawyer, at Ruben’s request). The court granted this motion.
- After the session resumed, Ruben officially submitted a request to reject the services of the state-appointed lawyer, citing the illegality of his appointment. The state prosecutor acknowledged Ruben’s right to refuse the lawyer but suggested appointing another state lawyer instead. Ruben declined this proposal. The court accepted Ruben’srefusal and granted the motion.
To recall, during the preliminary hearing in January, the prosecutor proposed appointing an additional public defender for Ruben under the pretext of protecting the rights of the accused in such a complex case. The prosecutor’s proposal was supported by the court. This appointment was clearly illegitimate, as it violated Ruben’s fundamental right to choose his own defense.
The defense addressed the court with the following key issues:
- A newly translated version of the preparatory hearing decision was provided. However, upon review, serious inconsistencies were found again. The document only addressed one motion (the request for postponement), while all other motions were ignored.
- Despite submitting multiple requests, the defense has not yet received access to the court transcripts.
- The translated indictment provided in Russian is not certified by an authorized official. The defense demands an officially certified version.
The judge responded that since the reading of the indictment is still ongoing, these issues will be addressed only after its completion.
The sixth hearing, held at the Baku Military Court, was still mainly focused on the reading of charges against Ruben. The hearing was again secret and closed to the public.
Highlights of the hearing:
Ruben’s defense requested the recusal of the judicial panel due to procedural concerns. In response, the prosecution claimed the request lacked evidentiary basis. The court left the motion without consideration due to insufficient evidence.
Court’s Questions to the Defense:
Why request confidential meetings during sessions instead of beforehand?
Defense Response: Prison officers deny access before hearings without explicit court authorization.
Why refuse the opportunity to review court protocols?
Defense Response: The offer was made only 10 minutes before the session, which was unacceptable.
The court proposed to continue the announcement of the charges. The prosecution finished reading the indictment. Upon completion of the indictment announcement, the court read out all the charges and the possible penalties for each article.
The court then asked Ruben whether he considered himself guilty. Three possible answers were provided:
- 1. Yes, I consider myself guilty.
- 2. I partially consider myself guilty.
- 3. I do not consider myself guilty.
Before responding, Ruben requested confidential communication with his attorney.
Then, Ruben delivered an extensive speech, in which he:
- Declared he had committed no crimes.
- Emphasized the need for a real judicial process not one replete with egregious due process abuses.
- Highlighted that he had not received a signed indictment from the prosecutor, investigator, or translator.
- Stressed his lack of access to case materials and proper translations.
- Declared he was unable to respond to the court’s request because of the serious due process abuses in his case and inability to understand the nature of the indictment as he hadn’t had a chance to properly familiarize himself with it.
The next hearing is scheduled for February 25, 2025.
During today’s hearing, after a week being on a hunger strike, Ruben Vardanyan’s health has deteriorated substantially. His blood pressure was recorded at 140/110, classified as a dangerous level and requiring medical attention. His local lawyer informed both the court and the doctor that Ruben was in no condition to participate and could collapse in the courtroom. Despite this, the hearing was not postponed, and the proceedings continued. A total of five requests to postpone the hearing offered a various intervals were all rejected.
And none of Defense Counsel’s other motions were granted, and the ongoing violations of his fundamental rights remain unaddressed.
The only development is that Ruben was finally given the indictment with a certified translation, but it remains state secrets and cannot be shared with his family or counsel abroad.
Following this hearing, Ruben’s international legal counsel, Jared Genser, issued a statement detailing the critical situation. You can read the full statement here: link.
The next court hearing is scheduled for March 4 at 10:00 AM (Baku Time).
The eighth hearing took place against the backdrop of the second week of Ruben Vardanyan’s hunger strike. The session was focused on procedural motions filed by the defense.
Highlights of the hearing:
- The defense submitted four motions:
- To provide a translation of the decision on bringing charges.
- To allow access to the video materials of the case.
- To provide a notice of rights and obligations.
- To allow access to the court hearing protocols.
Of these, the court granted the first and fourth motions.
The judge stated that document review would take place on March 5. However, after the hearing, a court officer informed the defense that it has been postponed until March 8.
Following the discussion of motions, the prosecution continued questioning regarding the charges. The defense refrained from answering. Ruben was also visited by the Ombudsman of Azerbaijan, to whom he voiced all his concerns.
The next hearing is scheduled for March 11, 2025.
The ninth court hearing in the politically motivated trial of Ruben Vardanyan took place at the Baku Military Court on March 11, 2025. The proceedings continued in the same pattern – systemic violations of due process, baseless accusations, and an absence of any credible evidence.
At the beginning of the hearing, Defense Counsel submitted a motion requesting that Ruben be granted access to key legal resources, including the Criminal Procedure Code of Azerbaijan (CPC), the Criminal Code of Azerbaijan (CC), and European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) rulings.
The prosecution objected, claiming that the CPC does not grant such rights to the accused. The court denied the motion.
Defense Counsel filed a new motion to recuse the judicial panel, citing multiple violations of his rights.
The court did not review the motion.
The prosecution then presented additional so-called witnesses, none of whom Ruben knew. These individuals made fabricated claims that were not supported by any documentary or material evidence. The judicial panel simply allowed them to make generalized allegations. For example, one witness claimed that he heard Ruben recruited young men to serve in as mercenaries but presented no specific information about this allegation. Another “victim” witness claimed he was injured by a landmine. And another “”victim” witness in the Azerbaijan military claimed to have been injured in Kelbajar during their military service. But none of these witnesses had met Ruben, seen Ruben, or had any connection to Ruben, and none had any evidence to connect Ruben to the any of these allegations beyond alleging he was responsible.
Defense Counsel chose not to cross-examine the witnesses, as the court has consistently failed to uphold the principle of equality of arms, making fair participation in the process impossible. Specifically, the defense was not provided advance notice about the biographical details of the witnesses or the allegations they were expected to present, making it impossible to prepare to challenge their claims. And given the court failed to affirmatively apply any of the most basic requirements under Azerbaijan law for the acceptance of the presentation of evidence, including verifying the evidence’s clarity, accuracy, relevance, and sufficiency, the judicial panel continued to demonstrate its profound bias against Ruben as the defendant. As such, Defense Counsel once again reaffirmed its non-participation in the proceedings.
The next court session is scheduled for March 18, 2025.
The tenth hearing, held at the Baku Military Court, was mainly focused on the questioning of the alleged victims. The hearing was again closed to the public.
Highlights of the hearing:
At the beginning of the hearing, Defense counsel submitted a motion requesting access to the all hearing transcripts and audio recordings of past hearings. The judicial panel granted the motion. It is importance to emphasize, however, that there have been large discrepancies between what has been happening in the hearings and partial transcripts that have been released, and that Defense counsel has repeatedly asking for this information over many months. So the simply granting of this motion itself is only a first step and does not mean the Government has met its legal obligations to provide complete and accurate transcripts and Audi recordings.
After the motion was granted, the all alleged victims were summoned for questioning. They reported being wounded while serving in the Azerbaijani military in territories previously controlled by Armenian forces, as a result of enemy fire. They stated that they knew of Ruben Vardanyan from media publications and social media. Yet none of them knew Ruben personally, had ever met him, had any personal knowledge of his activities in Nagorno-Karabakh, or had any oral or documentary evidence to connect Ruben to the Armenian forces they claimed were responsible for their injuries.
In addition, the court read out medical examination reports for each victim and they answered prosecution questions about their service locations, the attacks, and the nature of their injuries. Despite having presented literally no evidence to connect Ruben to their injuries, they all demanded the harshest possible sentence be imposed on him.
The next hearing in the case is scheduled for April 1.
The eleventh hearing in the criminal case against Ruben Vardanyan was held at the Baku Military Court. As in previous sessions, the hearing was closed to the public.
Key Developments:
At the beginning of the session, the judicial panel acknowledged receiving several motions from the defense. However, it announced that formal responses to these motions would be provided within 30 days. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan stipulates in Article 122.2 that motions must be reviewed “without delay.” The judicial panel’s additional delay to address motions submitted by Defense Counsel further impedes Ruben’s right to a fair trial.
A group of alleged victims was summoned for questioning. As in previous hearings, none of them had ever met Ruben Vardanyan, had any personal knowledge of his activities in Nagorno-Karabakh, nor any evidence directly or indirectly connecting him to their accusations. They stated that they knew of him only through media and social networks.
The victims testified that they were injured by sniper fire and shelling while serving in the military in Kalbajar and Aghdam. They responded to questions from the prosecution regarding the locations of their service and the nature of their injuries. The forensic medical examinations of the victims were also presented to the court, but no evidence was presented to connect Ruben to the alleged incidents.
Defense Counsel reiterated its position of non-participation, citing egregious violations of Ruben’s rights.
The next hearing is scheduled for April 8.
Based on information provided by Defense Councel Avraam Berman
The twelfth hearing in the criminal case against Ruben Vardanyan took place at the Baku Military Court. As with previous sessions, the hearing was closed to the public.
Key Developments:
- At the beginning of the hearing, Defense Counsel Avraam Berman reminded the court of a statement submitted to the Court on March 10threquesting access to audio recordings attached to the hearing transcripts of January 17th and 27th, which have not been received as of April 8th. The court responded by stating that the materials would be provided.
- A new group of alleged victims was summoned for questioning. As in prior sessions, none of them had ever met Ruben Vardanyan personally or had any direct knowledge of his activities. All stated they knew of him only through media reports and social media.
- The victims testified to being wounded during military service in various regions.
- The court also presented forensic medical reports for each of the individuals questioned.
- Despite providing no evidence connecting Ruben Vardanyan to the incidents described, all victims requested the court to impose the harshest sentence.
- Defense Counsel reiterated its position of non-participation due to continued violations of the defendant’s rights and the lack of adversarial proceedings.
The next hearing is scheduled for April 15.
Representatives of the local press were present.
This hearing in the Baku Military Court was closed to the public. Only individuals on a pre-approved list of the Government were admitted.
At the start of the hearing, Defense Counsel Avraam Berman addressed the court to clarify a misrepresentation made by local media. He explained that the defense had not requested a re-examination of the court hearing transcripts, but rather access to the transcripts and corresponding audio recordings – materials that have still not been fully provided, aside from two partial transcripts from January. He warned that continued misreporting by media outlets could result in legal action.
A new group of alleged victims was summoned for questioning. As in prior sessions, they claimed to have sustained injuries during military clashes in various regions, allegedly as a result of actions by Armenian forces.
However, none of the victims had any personal knowledge of Ruben Vardanyan or direct evidence linking him to the incidents they described. The Court read out the medical examination reports for each victim and the Prosecutor asked questions about their service locations, the attacks, and the nature of their injuries, but failed to connect these facts to Ruben.
Again, though the witness testimony constituted hearsay, the judicial panel did not rule this testimony inadmissible or exclude it from the record. The judicial panel failed to affirmatively apply any of the most basic requirements under Azerbaijan law for the acceptance of the presentation of evidence.
Defense Counsel reaffirmed its position of non-participation in the questioning process, citing egregious violations of Ruben Vardanyan’s rights and the failure to uphold the principle of adversarial proceedings. Counsel emphasized that this refusal to participate should not be misconstrued as an absence of legal arguments, but rather a protest against the illegitimacy of the trial process.
The next hearing is scheduled for April 22, 2025.