Communicated on 18 December 2013

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 8049/10 Armen HOVHANNISYAN against Armenia lodged on 27 January 2010

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Armen Hovhannisyan , is an Armenian national who was born in 1961 and lives in Vanadzor .

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

On 7 July 2006 the applicant began working as a specialist at the Lori Regional Municipality. He held the rank of First Category Civil Servant.

From 1 February to 5 March 2008 the applicant took holiday in order to be able to participate in the upcoming presidential elections.

On 19 February 2008 a presidential election took place in Armenia. On election day , the applicant acted as the main opposition candidate ’ s proxy.

According to the applicant, on 26 and 28 February 2008 he took part in demonstrations organised by supporters of the opposition candidate.

According to the applicant, on 6 March 2008 the Head of the Lori Regional Police Department sent a letter to the Head of the Lori Region to the effect that the applicant and several other employees of the Municipality had participated in electioneering f or the opposition candidate and in the subsequent unauthorised demonstrations.

On the same day the Head of Staff of the Municipality required the applicant to submit a written explanation of his conduct during the holiday.

On 7 March 2007 the applicant ’ s house was searched. Later he was taken to the police station and questioned about the demonstration organised by the opposition.

By an order of the Municipality ’ s Head of Staff on 11 March 2008 the applicant was dismissed from his job for breach of the principle of political restraint by a civil servant.

On 14 March 2008 the applicant was removed from the rank of First Category Civil Servant.

On 18 April 2008 the applicant brought an acti on against the Municipality requesting reinstatement in his job. He claimed, inter alia , that from 1 February to 5 March he had been on holiday and did not perform his official duties for the benefit of the opposition candidate.

On 28 April 2008 the Administrative Court set the case down for trial.

On 12 May 2008 the list of employees of the Municipality was modified and the applicant ’ s position was cut.

On 19 June 2009 the Administrative Court granted the applicant ’ s claim and annulled the order of the Municipality ’ s Head of Staff of 11 March 2008. By the same judgment the Administrative Court dismissed the applicant ’ s reinstatement claim since his position had ceased to exist.

According to the applicant, his reinstatement claim was dismissed on the Administrative Court ’ s own initiative since no counterclaim had been lodged by the Municipality.

The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law.

On 9 September 2009 the Court of Cassation declared the appeal inadmissible for lack of merit.

B. Relevant domestic law

Law on Civil Service (in force from 9 January 2002)

According to Section 24 § 1(d) , a civil servant shall not have the right to act in vio lation of the principle of political restraint of c ivil s ervants, that is, to use his/her service position in the interests of parties or non ‑ governmental organi s ations , including religious associations, proselyti s e in their fav our or implement other political or religious activities while carr ying out his/her service duties.

According to Section 33 § 1 the grounds for removing a civil servant from his position are: ( j ) failure to maintain the restrictions envisaged in clauses 1 to 3 of article 24 of this law.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains under Article 11 of the Convention that his dismissal was prompted by his political views.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Was the applicant ’ s dismissal from his job and the subsequent refusal to reinstate him in his previous position in violation of the applicant ’ s rights under Article 11 of the Convention?