Judge Withdraws From Criminal Case Against Catholicos Karekin II Minutes Into First Hearing

A judge withdrew Friday from the criminal case against Catholicos Karekin II just minutes after the first hearing began, delaying proceedings against the head of the Armenian Apostolic Church and six senior clerics. Judge Hakob Manukyan recused himself after initially closing the hearing to the public. A new hearing will be scheduled once another judge is assigned to the case, defense attorney Ara Zohrabyan told reporters outside the courthouse. The case charges Karekin II with obstructing the enforcement of a court ruling stemming from an internal dispute within the Armenian Apostolic Church. The proceedings come during a broader confrontation between Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s government and the Church leadership. Zohrabyan said Manukyan had previously worked as an attorney and received his law license while Zohrabyan was president of Armenia’s Chamber of Advocates. The judge stepped aside because that connection could raise questions about his impartiality, according to the attorney. “I welcome his decision because, in essence, he refused to become part of this shameful process,” Zohrabyan said. Before his recusal, Manukyan ordered the opening portion of the hearing held behind closed doors, citing matters involving private life. He did not publicly disclose the circumstances that prompted the decision. The case grew out of a dispute involving Gevorg Saroyan, formerly a bishop in the Armenian Apostolic Church. Saroyan was among 10 bishops who sided with Pashinyan during the prime minister’s campaign against Karekin II. Karekin II removed Saroyan from his position, but an Armenian court later ordered that he be reinstated. The Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin refused to restore him and later defrocked him. Church officials have argued that the state has no authority to determine who may serve as a bishop or hold an ecclesiastical position, saying such decisions belong exclusively to the Church. They have characterized the court’s involvement as interference wi