Businessman and lawyer Armen Sakapetyan claims that information considered banking secrets belonging to him, his wife, brother, and nephew has illegally ended up in the hands of the police.
According to Sakapetyan, this information was later included in an official letter sent to the prosecutor's office by the police. He asserts that there was no legal basis for obtaining the banking data.
“No criminal case has been initiated against me or any member of my family, and there is no criminal prosecution,” said Armen Sakapetyan.
The businessman describes the incident as a “massive leak of information constituting banking secrecy” and has filed a report with law enforcement to clarify the circumstances. However, no criminal case has been initiated.
Why were no proceedings initiated in the Investigative and Anti-Corruption Committees based on Sakapetyan's report? The Investigative Committee informed “Azatutyun” that the presented case does not contain the characteristics of any crime provided for by the Criminal Code. The Prosecutor General's Office also stated that the supervising prosecutor confirmed the decision of the previous two bodies not to initiate a criminal case.
Sakapetyan disagrees with this decision. “I have appealed to the court, which I will elaborate on later,” he said.
Sakapetyan, who has businesses in several sectors, claims that the issue is not about a specific transaction but rather a large volume of information regarding the banking activities of his family members.
“I intend to carry out this entire process openly and publicly, as I can only fight against the ongoing illegalities in this way,” he emphasized.
Sakapetyan claims that after a police investigation conducted in 2021, detailed information about his and his family members' banking transactions was included in the official letter sent to the prosecutor's office. He asserts that the document contained, in particular, the amounts deposited and withdrawn from his bank accounts over the years, as well as information about the accounts of his wife, brother, and nephew.
Although the businessman does not specify which banks are involved, he emphasizes that he has contacted them to find out how this data ended up with the police, but they responded that they had not provided any information constituting banking secrecy to anyone.
“If there was no leak of information containing banking secrecy, then how did our family's banking secret information end up entirely in the possession of a police officer?” he questions.
Sakapetyan also contacted the Central Bank 15 days ago. “I know from the inside that they do not know how to respond. I tell the police, the Anti-Corruption Committee, the prosecutor's office, the court, and the Central Bank: what is the problem, initiate proceedings, find out where this data came from, the whole problem is that they do not initiate a criminal case because if they do, they will have to take action,” he stated.
Sakapetyan also asserts as a lawyer that obtaining information constituting banking secrecy is legally restricted, and special conditions are provided for obtaining such data within the framework of operational investigative measures, which are not present in this case. He states that there has been no criminal proceedings against him or his family members, and he has not been suspected of committing serious or particularly serious crimes, and there has also been no court decision that would legally allow these data to be accessible to investigative bodies.
Armen Sakapetyan was appointed deputy head of the State Revenue Committee in 2016 and was dismissed in 2018 at his own request. From 2024, he is involved in a case regarding the confiscation of illegally obtained property. However, Sakapetyan does not wish to elaborate on this matter at this stage, emphasizing that the issue of possible illegal acquisition of banking data should be considered separately.
“Illegally obtained data constituting banking secrecy, the case of mass leakage has become the basis for initiating a case regarding the confiscation of illegally obtained property,” the businessman stated.
Sakapetyan has proposed a possible scheme in which he presents his hypothesis about how his banking data could have been transmitted. This is Sakapetyan's hypothesis, not a description of established facts, and is subject to verification and assessment by competent authorities.
As for the connection between the “leak of data constituting banking secrecy” and the case of confiscation of illegally obtained property, the Prosecutor General's Office did not comment.
