Aravot journalist Hripsime Jebejian has won a court case against Diana Martirosyan and Khazhak Tananyan, who posted insulting comments about her on Facebook.

In Diana Martirosyan’s case, Judge Nona Galstyan partially granted the claim, ruling that the defendant should apologize and pay the journalist 70,000 drams instead of the 400,000 drams demanded in the lawsuit. In Khajak Tananyan’s case, Judge Sargis Armenakyan completely granted the claim. Tananyan is required to apologize and pay Jebejyan 400,000 drams.

 Case details 

During Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s press conference on July 25, 2023, Online Aravot journalist Hripsime Jebejian asked the Prime Minister, “Have you ever considered how you will be remembered and who will mourn your passing besides your family or Hovik Aghazaryan?” Following the press conference, Hripsime faced insults, expletives, and threats on social media and in certain news outlets.

Hripsime says the Prime Minister’s supporters posted insults and threats under her Facebook pictures, posts, and YouTube videos following the press conference.
“They wrote, ‘We will kill you,’ ‘We need to burn her and force her out of Armenia,’ and many more obscene expressions. Threats and insults were also made against my minor children. Worried about their safety, I decided to contact the prosecutor’s office, the police, and an investigative committee so that the state, having a positive obligation, would reveal who these people were. Unfortunately, there has been no progress in this case.”

Hripsime Jebejian said she could identify two users, Diana Martirosyan and Khajak Tananyan, who had posted insults against her when she reported the crime.

The journalist is satisfied with the outcome of the year-long court process and considers both court decisions unprecedented in the media field.

“We have heard expressions like ‘the order takers’, ‘pizza eaters, ‘ and ‘sold’ so often that we have grown accustomed to them. I didn’t want the terms like “prostitute” to become common for journalists in the future,” says the journalist.

Hripsime’s lawyer, Shushan Avetisyan, also mentioned that Judge Sargis Armenakyan thoroughly addressed the insulting expressions in Khazhak Tananyan’s case and provided a detailed explanation in his judgment.

“The decision thoroughly presents the grounds, proving these expressions offensive. If, in the future, another journalist is insulted with the same words, he can hold those who insulted him accountable and refer to these judgments that have come into force, which are considered precedents,” said lawyer Avetisyan.

Expert opinion

Media expert Hakob Karapetyan points out that it has become a common phenomenon in today’s society for citizens or politicians to insult, threaten, or ridicule journalists who publish opinions different from their own. He believes that extreme political polarization is one of the main reasons for this and that legal measures should be taken to address it. He mentions recent court rulings as a positive step in this direction.

“Many journalists limit their social media activity for fear of being insulted or harassed because of their professional work. In this regard, these legal decisions set a valuable precedent. Regardless of our opinions about a journalist’s work quality or ethical standards, the principle of free speech implies that journalists should be able to work without facing insults or threats. This precedent is significant, and we should aim for more similar cases,” says the media expert.

According to the expert, user accounts that generate such content on Facebook are often created or directed by one political force or another.

“In societies that are in the process of forming, journalists must constantly try to curb the government and politicians’ appetite to suppress free speech. Both citizens and officials have the right to protect themselves from dishonest journalism if they believe they are dealing with such publications. There are equal legal ways for everyone to protect their rights,” says Hakob Karapetyan.