The key financial crimes that can be attributed to legal entities, as well as their directors and employees (individuals) are provided in Chapter 30 (thefts), Chapter 32 (economic crimes) of Section 10 and Chapter 43 (crimes against the interests of public service) of Section 14 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia. Those crimes are:

1. Fraud (Article 255);
2. Theft of entrusted property (Article 256);
3. Preparing, storing, transporting, delivering, acquiring or selling counterfeit currency, foreign currency, securities, other settlement documents or payment instruments for the purpose of sale (Article 267);
4. Improper use of inside information (Article 268);
5. Price abuse in the securities market (Article 269);
6. Deliberately false advertising (Article 270);
7. Removing goods from the commodity market that fall into the minimum expenditure basket (Article 271);
8. Taking a bribe in the private sector (Article 272);
9. Giving a bribe in the private sector (Article 273);
10. Abusing official powers or influence resulting from them in the private sector (Article 277);
11. Illegal use of commercial, insurance, tax, customs, pension, service or bank secret information or credit history or credit information available in a credit bureau (Article 278);
12. Illegal disclosure of commercial, insurance, tax, customs, pension, service or bank secret information or credit history or credit information available in a credit bureau (Article 279);
13. Illegal entrepreneurial activity (Article 281);
14. Creating, organising or managing a financial pyramid (Article 282);
15. Abuses in public bidding or procurement (Article 283);
16. Anti-competition activity (Article 284);
17. Creating or using a legal entity, its separate division, an institution for the purpose of carrying out illegal activities or concealing illegal activities, or registering as an individual entrepreneur for the same purpose (Article 285);
18. Providing false documents without supplying goods or without providing services, preparing and submitting false documents regarding expenses or income (Article 286);
19. Illegal Activities During Bankruptcy (Article 287);
20. Deliberate bankruptcy (Article 288);
21. Making, keeping, transporting, delivering, acquiring, or using or selling counterfeit excise stamps or stamps for the purpose of sale (Article 289);
22. Failure to pay taxes, duties, or other charges (Article 290);
23. Smuggling of cash and (or) payment instruments (Article 291);
24. Inclusion of false information in declaration of beneficial owners or concealment of information to be submitted (Article 294);
25. Acquisition, sale, or assistance in the sale of property obtained by criminal means (Article 295);
26. Money laundering (Article 296);
27. Taking a bribe (Article 435);
28. Giving a bribe (Article 436);
29. Bribe mediation (Article 437);
30. Giving illegal remuneration to exploit real or perceived influence over an official (Article 439);
31. Receiving property, including money, securities, other payment instruments, rights to property, services or any other advantage under the pretext of receiving a bribe, brokering a bribe or using real or perceived influence for selfish, other personal or group interests (Article 440).

In general, criminal responsibility for all crimes, including crimes of a financial nature, is provided only by the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia.

The provision of financial crimes in the criminal legislation is due to the importance of protecting the finances of individuals and legal entities, the legal system of the financial and economic sphere of the Republic of Armenia, the participants of economic circulation, the economic interests of the society and the state, because they directly encroach on entrepreneurial activity, monetary relations and the financial activity of the state. The articles that provide criminal responsibility for corruption and related crimes are against the interests of public service.

The objective side of financial crimes is manifested mainly by action (illegal business activity, intentional bankruptcy), in some cases by omission (non-payment of the taxes, fees or other payments expressed by not submitting reports). For some crimes, material consequences (small, large and particularly large property damages) are provided as a mandatory feature for the objective side. Moreover, some articles of the Criminal Code contain incentive norms (creating, organising or leading a financial pyramid).

All financial crimes are subjectively characterised by intent.

The subject of the crimes in question can be a sane natural person over the age of 16. The presence of a special entity (unscrupulous use of inside information) is envisaged for some crimes.

In the Republic of Armenia, a legal entity established in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Armenia or established in a foreign country is subject to criminal liability.

A legal entity is subject to criminal liability if:

• the crime was committed by a person who has the authority to influence the activity of the legal entity or the decisions made by it, or with the permission or instigation of such a person by a person representing the legal entity, acting on behalf of the legal entity and acting in the interest of the legal entity,
• the legal entity did not ensure the fulfilment of the duties stipulated by the law regulating its activity or other legal act, which led to the commission of a crime by a person who has the authority to influence the activity of the legal entity or the decisions made by it, a person representing the legal entity or an employee of the legal entity,
• the crime was committed by a person who has the authority to influence the activity of a legal entity or the decisions made by it, or a person representing a legal entity, acting on behalf of a legal entity or through a legal entity (using it).

The criminal liability of a natural person does not exclude the criminal liability of a legal person for the same crime.

Exemption of a natural person from criminal liability is not a basis for exempting a legal person from criminal liability.

In the procedural meaning a legal entity may be held criminally liable, if there is:

1) a legally binding conviction;

2) a legally binding decision not to initiate criminal prosecution on non-rehabilitative grounds or to terminate criminal prosecution

for an individual.

That means the legal entity cannot be held criminally liable unless there is one of the above-mentioned decisions.

The practice of investigating financial crimes shows that public criminal prosecutions are often initiated against the director or employee of a legal entity for non-payment of taxes, duties or other fees, intentional bankruptcy or money laundering.

Investigators of the Investigative Committee of the Republic of Armenia and the Anti-Corruption Committee of the Republic of Armenia initiate criminal proceedings and carry out preliminary investigations within their jurisdiction. Public criminal prosecution against a person is initiated by the decision of the supervising prosecutor based on the facts proving the commission of the crime by them. In addition, the supervising prosecutor initiates a public criminal prosecution both on the basis of the motion of the investigator and on his own initiative.

The investigator is responsible for the comprehensiveness of the preliminary investigation, its normal course, the execution of investigative actions in the order and time prescribed by law, as well as the legality of the coercive measures he uses.

The prosecutor is responsible for the legality of initiation, non-prosecution and termination of criminal prosecution, the legality of pre-trial proceedings, the legality of the use of interim measures by public participants in the proceedings, the raising of the circumstances necessary to defend the public charge in court or initiate a lawsuit for the protection of state interests, as well as the legality of appeal or non-appeal of a judicial act.

Cases related to financial crimes are examined by the courts of first instance of general jurisdiction of the Republic of Armenia and the anti-corruption court of the Republic of Armenia, which is a specialised court.

According to Armenian legislation, the implementation of justice is reserved only to the courts, and there is no provision for the institution of jury.

The judicial acts of the courts of first instance of general jurisdiction of the Republic of Armenia are subject to appeal to the Criminal Court of Appeal of the Republic of Armenia in the order of appeal, and to the Court of Cassation of the Republic of Armenia (Criminal chamber) in the order of cassation.

Judicial acts of the Anti-Corruption Court of the Republic of Armenia are subject to appeal to the Anti-Corruption Court of Appeal of the Republic of Armenia in the order of appeal, and to the Court of Cassation of the Republic of Armenia (Anti-corruption chamber) in the order of cassation.

Investigators of the Investigative Committee of the Republic of Armenia and the Anti-Corruption Committee of the Republic of Armenia initiate criminal proceedings within the limits of their competence, if a proper report on an alleged crime has been received:

1) from a natural person;

2) from a legal entity;

3) from the state or local self-government body or its official in connection with the implementation of its activities;

4) from the body carrying out operative-investigative activity, investigator, prosecutor or judge in connection with exercising his powers.

In each case of receiving a proper report about the crime, the investigator immediately, but not later than within 24 hours, draws up a record of initiating criminal proceedings. After drawing up the report, the investigator immediately begins the preliminary investigation.

With the preliminary investigation carried out by the initiated criminal proceedings, the investigator can perform the necessary evidentiary actions to obtain the necessary documents and other evidence. Within the framework of a specific proceeding, the investigator can also issue an order to the investigative body to perform secret investigative actions. In addition, the investigative body can, on its own initiative, carry out operative-investigative measures in order to obtain data important for the criminal proceedings.

In order to prevent the detection of crimes and to find data necessary for revealing crimes, raids (in Armenian legislation – operational-investigative measures) are regularly carried out by operational-investigative bodies. As a result, criminal proceedings can be initiated in case of obtaining information about crimes. Operational investigative measures are, for example, control purchase, control supply and purchase, examination of items and documents, control of financial transactions, etc.

Interrogation (interview) is an investigative action performed by an investigator. Interrogation has the aim to find out circumstances important for the proceedings by asking questions to the witness, the victim, the expert, the accused or the arrested person.

During the interrogation, the interrogator may be presented with evidence to familiarise himself with it or the data contained in it.

The investigator may also perform confrontation investigative action, that is, simultaneous interrogation of two previously interrogated persons, whose testimonies contain significant contradictions.

The extent of the rights of the interviewee depends on the latter’s procedural status. Everyone has the right to appear before the criminal prosecution authorities together with his lawyer.

The victim and the witness are obliged to testify if they are called for questioning by the investigator. The latter have the right to refuse to testify or provide materials if it is reasonably assumed that they may be used against him or his spouse or a close relative in the future.

The questioned witness and the victim are clarified that they are not obliged to testify about themselves, their spouse or close relatives. The witness and the victim are warned about the duty to answer the questions truthfully, the criminal responsibility for refusing to testify and giving false testimony.

The accused has an absolute right to remain silent or testify, including in the presence of a defence attorney. If the accused expresses a desire to testify, the investigator informs him of the obligation to testify correctly and warns him of the responsibility for giving a false testimony. That fact is certified by the signature of the accused.

Before the interrogation, the investigator verifies the identity of the interviewee, informs him about the proceedings in connection with which he has been invited, and clarifies the rights and obligations arising from his judicial status.

The interrogation is video recorded. In case of video recording of the interrogation, the testimonies, including the questions and answers, as well as other actions performed during the interrogation, are being recorded only by video recording. In the end the investigator makes a short paper description of the interrogation, and it is presented to the participants to be asserted and signed.

The criminal code of the Republic of Armenia that governs financial crimes, has extraterritorial effect. There are some rules that need to be taken into account.

The crime committed outside the territory of the Republic of Armenia can be investigated in the Republic of Armenia under its criminal code if

1. it is committed by citizens of the Republic of Armenia, including persons with dual citizenship, as well as stateless persons permanently residing in the Republic of Armenia, persons residing in the Republic of Armenia with refugee status, persons seeking asylum or having been granted asylum and if the act they committed is considered a crime under the law of the state where it was committed, and if they have not been held criminally liable for that act;
2. it is committed by citizens of the Republic of Armenia, including persons with dual citizenship, as well as stateless persons permanently residing in the Republic of Armenia, persons residing in the Republic of Armenia with refugee status, persons seeking asylum or having been granted asylum and if he/she has committed an act provided for by criminal law in cases defined by international treaties of the Republic of Armenia, regardless of whether the act is considered a crime in the territory of the state where it was committed;
3. it is committed by foreign citizens and stateless persons who do not permanently reside in the Republic of Armenia and who have committed an act provided for by the Criminal Code outside the territory of the Republic of Armenia and are present in the territory of the Republic of Armenia, if the act committed by them is a crime provided for by international treaties of the Republic of Armenia, and if they have not been subject to criminal liability for that act, regardless of whether it is considered a crime in the territory of the state where the crime was committed.
4. it is committed by a person and if the committed act is aimed against the interests of the Republic of Armenia, a citizen of the Republic of Armenia, including a person with dual citizenship, as well as a stateless person permanently residing in the Republic of Armenia, against the rights and freedoms of a person or legal entity residing in the Republic of Armenia as a refugee, seeking asylum or receiving asylum.

Providing international legal assistance and international legal communication in criminal proceedings for all crimes, including financial crimes, is carried out in accordance with the regulations established by the criminal code, criminal procedure code and law on legal assistance in criminal proceedings, in accordance with the international treaties ratified by the state.

These international treaties are:

1. Chisinau Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Matters (adopted in 2002);
2. European Convention on mutual assistance in criminal matters (adopted in 1959);
3. European Convention on Extradition (adopted in 1957);
4. Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime (adopted in 1990);
5. Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and cornification of the proceeds from crime and on the financing of terrorism (adopted in 2005);
6. Civil Law Convention on Corruption (adopted in 1999);
7. Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (adopted in 1999)․

The Constitution of the Republic of Armenia envisages the right to legal assistance. That assumes that the body implementing the procedure is not authorised to prohibit the presence of the lawyer in the procedure performed with the participation of their client (regardless of individual or legal entity).

The defence attorney has the right to meet with his client in a consultative manner (confidential), without hindrance, without restrictions on visits, except for the cases of conducting investigative actions with the participation of the accused.

An attorney cannot be prosecuted, charged criminally, arrested, detained or subjected to other restrictions of rights in connection with the performance of his professional duties, including for the opinion or position expressed in the proceedings and other bodies.

An attorney, a non-attorney working for an attorney, as well as an employee of the Chamber of Advocates do not have the right to disclose the advocate’s secret, except for the following cases:

1. there is the consent of the client;
2. it is necessary for justifying the claims or for his defence in a legal dispute or disciplinary proceeding between him and the client;
3. it is necessary for the implementation of the Law of the Republic of Armenia “On Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing”.

An advocate’s home, vehicle or office, as well as the office of an advocacy organization, may not be searched in connection with the investigation of circumstances related to advocacy activities. It is not permitted to search an advocate while directly performing his professional duties. Any item that can reasonably contain attorney secret cannot be seized and if seized cannot be used.

The public authorities of the Republic of Armenia, as well as the courts, have the right to request, receive and use the personal data of persons of interest in order to collect evidence within the framework of the criminal proceedings initiated in connection with the crime.

1. when there are facts indicating the commission of an alleged crime concerning the individual;
2. when the individual is accused of committing a crime;
3. when there is a reasonable suspicion that the accused regularly communicates directly or can reasonably communicate with the individual in question,
4. as well as against a legal entity when there is a reasonable suspicion that a legal entity’s activity is completely or partially managed, controlled, or directed by the accused.

According to the criminal procedure code, during the performance of operative-investigative actions or evidentiary actions, information containing personal data can be obtained in judicial and extrajudicial means.

Only on the basis of a court decision are carried out:

1. search and seizure in the apartment.
2. the inspection in the apartment that is not the scene of the incident and the subsequent inspection in the apartment that is the scene of the incident;
3. digital search.
4. confiscation of correspondence and other forms of communication;
5. confiscation of documents and objects containing medical, notarial, banking or related secrets;
6. confiscation of digital data contained in electronic devices or media.

Other evidentiary actions are carried out by the decision of the investigator or the approval of the prosecutor. Besides, in case of having data on serious and particularly serious crimes being prepared, the operative-investigative body is entitled to carry out an operative-investigative measure by obtaining data even in the absence of initiated proceedings. Such activities are subject to post factum supervision by the prosecutor or beforehand supervision by the court.

The code of criminal procedure envisages the exception from the general rule stating that collecting, storing or using information or material that constitutes an attorney’s secret is prohibited.

However, it should be noted that the information obtained during the preliminary investigation is considered a preliminary investigation secret and is not subject to publication if:

1. obstruct the normal process of pre-trial investigations;
2. become a reason for committing a crime;
3. endanger the rights or legitimate interests of the participants in the proceedings or other persons;
4. lead to the publication of a secret protected by law (e.g. banking secret).

On the contrary, the judicial examination in the Republic of Armenia is public as a rule, but based on the content of the available information, it is possible to ask the court to conduct the judicial examination confidentially.

However, when data is obtained by illegal measures, the person has the right to appeal against the decision, which may result in recognizing the obtained evidence inadmissible.

In addition, according to the law on operative-investigative activity, everyone has the right to request from the bodies carrying out operational-investigative activities the materials and documents obtained as a result of operational-investigative measures taken against him within four months after the criminal prosecution is not initiated against him under the rehabilitative circumstances of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Armenia, after the termination of the criminal prosecution, after the acquittal of him or after the completion of the proceedings for the confiscation of property of illegal origin. If in the specified cases and within the specified period, as well as within four months after the termination of the criminal proceedings within the framework of which immediate operational-investigative measures were taken, the person does not request the provision of the materials and documents obtained as a result of operational-investigative measures taken against him, then they shall be destroyed within 10 days after the expiration of the specified periods.

The Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia does not envisage criminal liability for the successor legal entity, however, according to the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia, after the merger or acquisition the successor legal entity is the newly created or registered organization, which means that the reorganization will cause succussion of rights and duties including criminal responsibility. Concerning the division (form of reorganization) there is a gap, so it is unclear which legal entity will be criminally liable after the division.

Public criminal prosecution against a person is initiated by the decision of the supervising prosecutor based on the facts proving the commission of the crime by them. During the preliminary investigation, when necessary, evidence is collected in order to have a preliminary view of the alleged crime committed, the investigator may file a motion, or the supervising prosecutor may make a decision on initiating public criminal prosecution against the person on their own initiative.

When making a verdict, the court resolves the following questions in the presented sequence:

1. have the factual circumstances attributed to the accused been proven?
2. has the criminal illegality of that act been proven?
3. has it been proven that the accused committed that act?
4. has it been proven that the accused is guilty of committing the given act?

In case of a negative answer to any of the mentioned questions, the court issues a verdict of acquittal.

In the event of an affirmative answer to all the mentioned questions, the court issues a verdict of conviction, by which it also determines which article, part of the article, or point of the Criminal Code is applicable to the proven act.

A verdict of conviction cannot be based on assumptions and is made only when the accused is proven guilty of the crime during the trial. The guilt of the accused in committing the crime can be considered proven if the court, guided by the presumption of innocence, based on the results of proper proof, reaches a conclusion about the guilt of the accused.

The Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia provides the release from criminal liability as a result of the expiration of the statute of limitations.

A person is released from criminal responsibility if the following periods have passed since the day after the crime was completed:

1. 5 years, in the case of a minor crime;
2. 10 years in the case of a crime of medium severity;
3. 15 years in the case of a serious crime;
4. 20 years in the case of a particularly serious crime.

The Criminal Procedure Code provides non-application of the statute of limitations, which is not applicable in the case of financial crimes.

In addition, the statute of limitations is suspended if the person avoids the investigation. In this case, the statute of limitations starts again from the moment of the person’s arrest or appearance before the criminal investigation body.

In any case, the statute of limitations is calculated from the day following the completion of the crime until the decision to initiate criminal prosecution against the person is made, so avoiding the investigation by the accused cannot lead to the termination of the criminal prosecution on this basis.

Articles defining a number of financial crimes provided by the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia contain incentive norms, that is, a person who has committed a crime is released from criminal liability if he has fully compensated the property damage caused by the crime and the calculated penalties (creating, organising or managing a financial pyramid, illegal entrepreneurial activity, intentional bankruptcy, failure to pay taxes, duties or other charges, etc.).

In the case under discussion, if the property damage caused by the crime and the calculated penalties are fully compensated by the person who committed the crime, the criminal prosecution initiated against the person by the investigator at the preliminary investigation stage, and by the court at the judicial investigation stage, is terminated.

The plea bargain procedure is provided by the Criminal Procedure Code, which applies only after the accused pleads guilty.

In order to apply for the conciliation procedure, the accused submits a motion during the preliminary hearings. After granting the motion to apply for conciliation proceedings, the public prosecutor starts negotiations with the accused and their defence attorney in order to reach an agreement. In the event that the damage caused by the crime has not been compensated, but the victim has not objected to the application of conciliation proceedings, the public prosecutor, with the consent of the victim, involves the victim in the negotiations. The agreement is considered reached from the moment the accused, their defence counsel, the public prosecutor and the victim, in case of participating in the negotiations, sign the protocol of agreement.

A conciliation procedure cannot be applied if:

1. the person is accused of committing a particularly grave crime;
2. one of the several defendants involved in the proceedings’ objects to the application of conciliation proceedings;
3. the accused does not have a defence attorney or submitted the motion without consulting a defence attorney;
4. the public prosecutor objects on legal or factual grounds to the application of conciliation proceedings;
5. it is apparently justified that the damage caused by the crime has not been compensated, and the victim objects against the application of the conciliation procedure.

In general, there is no obligation to disclose a misconduct, however, in case of disclosure it will be counted as mitigating circumstance.

When prosecuting a legal entity or appointing measures of criminal legal intervention (penalty) applied to a legal entity, two circumstances are taken into account, which are of key importance for excluding the criminal responsibility of a legal entity or determining the type and extent of the measure of criminal legal intervention to be assigned to a legal entity. Their content comes down to whether the persons responsible for the activity of the legal entity took the necessary measures to prevent the commission of the crime or to neutralise the consequences of the already committed crime. So, in this context only prevention and neutralization of the consequences will be counted as exclusion from criminal responsibility. There can also be a benefit in case the crime is related to tax evasion and the company finds out itself the misconduct and submits a correction to the competent tax authority. In this case there will not be any consequences.

In addition, a legal entity is not subject to criminal liability if the legal entity’s participants, shareholders, or equity holders took reasonably necessary measures to prevent the commission of a crime, but there was no real opportunity to prevent the crime.

When determining the type and size of the measure of criminal intervention against a legal entity, the nature and degree of danger of the committed crime, the nature and extent of the damage caused by the crime, the causes and conditions contributing to the crime, the measures taken by the legal entity to neutralise the consequences of the crime, the actions of the persons who committed the crime, the legal entity are taken into account. the legitimate interests of bona fide participants, shareholders or shareholders who did not know and could not have known about the crime being committed or committed, the circumstances characterising the legal entity, including its role in the financial market, as well as the conviction.

The criminal liability and the sentence of legal entities and individuals are determined by the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia.

The punishment is appointed on behalf of the state by a court verdict against a person found guilty of a crime. The type and amount of the punishment is determined by the nature and extent of the damage caused by the crime, the method, place, time of the crime, the motives and goals of the crime, the type of intent or carelessness, the mitigating and aggravating circumstances of responsibility and the punishment, as well as the process of resocialization of the criminal and the formation of law-abiding behaviour. and the impact on his family’s living conditions. A custodial sentence may be imposed if the court finds that a more lenient sentence cannot achieve the goals of the sentence.

Concerning the types of sentences, it needs to be mentioned that the sentences for individuals and legal entities are different and are explicitly stipulated by the law.

The Criminal Code envisages the circumstances that are considered as lenient, such as committing the crime for the first time due to a random combination of circumstances, the criminal’s pregnancy at the time of committing a crime or imposing a sentence, the criminal being over 65 years old at the time of committing the crime or imposing the punishment etc. The Code also stipulates the exact measures that may be undertaken as a discount policy. Hence, those measures are not applying the sentence conditionally, parole from serving the sentence, postponing the execution of the sentence for a pregnant woman or a person with a child under the age of 6 in their care, release from the sentence or postponing the sentence due to illness, replacing the sentence with a milder sentence or release from the sentence, release from the sentence due to extraordinary circumstances, release from the punishment due to criminal as a result of the expiry of the statute of limitations. These policies are applied by the court considering the sanction specified in the article in the Special part of the Code.

Even though the regulations concerning the criminal liability of the legal entities have come into force since July 1, 2023, there are still no criminal cases against legal entities, hence there are no actual evaluations.

Legal entities should develop and apply such internal control and/or compliance systems that will enable them to detect the reasons and conditions that give rise to the crime, to prevent the commission of the crime, thereby protecting the interests of the company.

As long as there are no ongoing or finished procedures against legal entities, the penalties stipulated by the code are not applied yet. Still, the Code envisages the penalties that can be applied to the legal entities:

1. Fine,
2. Temporary suspension of the right to engage in a certain type of activity,
3. Compulsory liquidation,
4. The ban on carrying out activities in the territory of the Republic of Armenia.

The following types of penalties are usually applied by the courts for managers or employees of organisations։

Fine: The fine is set as the main punishment for crimes of minor crimes and medium gravity, in the amount of five to fifty times the monthly income of the person who committed the crime.

Public works: Public work is the performance of unpaid work by the convicted person during their free time from studies or work at the place designated by the court and determined by the competent body, which does not endanger their physical or mental health. Public works, with the consent of the convicted person, are set for no more than 4 hours a day for minor crimes and medium gravity crimes, with a duration of 60-270 hours.

Restriction of liberty: The restriction of liberty is to keep the convict under supervision at home without interrupting their studies or work. Restriction of liberty is prescribed for minor crimes and medium gravity crimes for a period of 6 months to 3 years.

The court, imposing a restriction of liberty, prohibits the person who committed the crime from visiting various entertainment or other institutions, organising, participating, or attending certain events or changing the place of residence or being absent from home for certain hours without the consent of the competent authority exercising control over the convicted person. One or more prohibitions may be imposed on the convict․

Short-term imprisonment: Short-term imprisonment is the detention of a convict in a penitentiary institute in strict isolation from society. Short-term imprisonment is assigned to a person who has not previously been sentenced to deprivation of liberty, who has committed minor crimes and medium gravity crimes, for a period of 15 days to 2 months.

Imprisonment: Imprisonment is imposed for a period of 3 months to 20 years. The Criminal Code also provides life imprisonment, but not for financial crimes.

The legal framework of appeals has gone through several structural changes in the context of the new Criminal Procedure Code. In particular, the new regulations are more systematised. Firstly, the new Code regulates the rules of appeals in general. Secondly, the procedure before the Criminal Court of Appeal and the Court of Cassation is stipulated. Thirdly, the new Code stipulates the appeals in frames of pre-judicial stage of proceedings. Lastly, the cases of exceptional appeals are regulated.

Act of the court, as well as act of the public participant of criminal proceedings, such as the e.g. the investigator or the prosecutor, (this frame includes the decisions, actions and omissions by public officials) can be appealed by a private participant in the criminal proceedings, such as e.g. the accused or the defender, as well as by any other person whose legal interests are related to the given criminal proceedings act, in frames of the established procedure within a seven-day period, if no other term of appeal is established by the Code.

The act of the head of the investigative body, of the investigator can be appealed to the supervising prosecutor, the procedural act of the supervising prosecutor can be appealed to the superior prosecutor, the judiciary act may be appealed to a higher court․ In the cases provided by law, the procedural act of the public participant may be appealed directly to the court. Otherwise, a private participant of the criminal procedure in order to appeal an act, action or omission to the court, is firstly obliged to appeal it before the prosecutor.

The main department for the investigation of economic crimes and smuggling has been established within the investigative committee of the Republic of Armenia, consisting of five departments, which is responsible for the investigation of economic crimes throughout the territory of the Republic of Armenia. The establishment of this main department is an indicator of greater concentration on the investigation of economic/financial crimes. In addition, the Anti-corruption committee has been established as a professional body investigating the crimes that are considered as corruption crimes by law (fraud, embezzlement of entrusted property, extortion etc.). The crimes that have been investigated by the anti-corruption committee are subject to the Anti-corruption court (in case of appeal – the Anti-corruption court of appeal and the anti-corruption chamber of the Court of Cassation of the Republic of Armenia). So, there are some special institutional changes that indicate the expected active tackling of financial crimes.

The length of the proceedings usually depends on the severity and the complexity of the crime. For the preliminary investigation stage there are no specific envisaged timeframes, however, since there is a decision on initiating a public criminal prosecution there are timeframes that need to be respected.

In pre-trial proceedings, public criminal prosecution from the moment of its initiation may not last longer than:

1) three months on charges of a minor crime.

2) five months on charges of a medium-gravity crime.

3) eight months on charges of a serious crime.

4) ten months on charges of a particularly serious crime.

In exceptional cases, when the interests of justice require so, the superior prosecutor, upon the motion of the supervising prosecutor, is authorized to extend the terms of public criminal prosecution on charges of a minor or medium-gravity crime by a maximum of one month, and the terms of criminal prosecution on charges of a serious or particularly serious crime by a maximum of two months.

Typically the investigations take 1-3 years depending on the amount of the documentation that needs to be examined.

During the last 5 years there has been a high focus by both the legislative and the executive on corruption offences and money laundering. The focus is mainly expressed by establishment of a new anti-corruption investigative body and an anti-corruption court (first instance, court of appeal and a chamber in the Court of Cassation) specialised bodies for investigating and examining the cases related to these crimes.

According to official data, such financial crimes, which are carried out using modern technical means, as well as money laundering have recently become widespread. The criminal proceedings regarding the registered criminal cases related to non-payment of taxes, duties or other payments by companies are noteworthy.

In the past year there have been initiated lots of cases regarding tax evasion, money laundering and corruption. Some of these cases have reached to the Court of Cassation of the Republic of Armenia where within the framework of its function of ensuring the uniformity of the law, the Court of Cassation has made a number of precedent-setting decisions. For example, within a case regarding money laundering the Court of Cassation stated that the crime of money laundering has an autonomous nature, and liability for it cannot be conditioned by a conviction for a predicate crime, as well as by the fact that the predicate crime has been proven and its criminal-legal features have been fully disclosed. In other words, it is necessary to prove not all the features of a specific crime stipulated by the Criminal Code, but only the features indicating the manifestation of the objective side of the predicate crime. At the same time, it is not necessary for the criminal to realize all the features of the predicate crime. In particular, it is not required that the person realizes that the property was acquired through the commission of a specific crime, but it is sufficient to realize only that the property has a criminal origin. The Court of Cassation stated that in order to establish the criminal origin of the property that is the subject of money laundering, it is not necessary to have a legally binding judicial act on the preceding crime, but the fact of the criminal origin of the property in question can be established regardless of the condition that the preceding crime is established by the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. In this case, it is sufficient to come to a reasonable conclusion, as a result of a comparison of certain data arising from the facts of the case, including indirect evidence, that the property in question has a criminal origin. Otherwise, only the presentation of such factual data is required that would reasonably testify to the criminality of the act preceding the money laundering.

Due to changes and developments in market relations, instead of the previously applicable limit of 10 million drams in the case of a large amount and 20 million drams in the case of a particularly large amount, according to the amendments made to the law, a large amount is considered to be the amount of taxes, duties or other payments exceeding 30 million drams of the Republic of Armenia during one tax year or the amount of taxes, duties or other payments exceeding 45 million drams of the Republic of Armenia during two consecutive tax years, and a particularly large amount is considered to be the amount of taxes, duties or other payments exceeding 50 million drams of the Republic of Armenia during one tax year or the amount of taxes, duties or other payments exceeding 75 million drams of the Republic of Armenia during two consecutive tax years.

In the conditions of establishment of the institution of criminal responsibility of legal entities, several problems arise. First, the measures of influence provided by the Criminal Code for legal entities are also defined in the Code on Administrative Offences, so the criminal responsibility of legal entities shifts from administrative to criminal, making the influence of coercive measures heavier.

In addition, the criminal responsibility of legal entities comes after the natural person is held responsible, so it turns out that the criminal responsibility of a legal person is derived from the responsibility of a natural person, that is, it is not independent.

Referring to the procedural safeguards for legal entities, it should be noted that the new code does not provide the procedural safeguards defined for a natural person, for example, can an employee of a legal entity who has the status of a witness in a case refuse to testify, there is no regulation of this issue, which reduces the possibilities of legal entity efficient protection.

There is also a gap in the law regarding the determination of the proper subject that is subject to criminal liability in case of division of a legal entity, that is, it is not clear which legal entity will be considered the proper subject of criminal liability in case of division.

Though, the criminal responsibility of the legal entities is presumed for all the legal entities, without exceptions, the cases related property damage caused to the state and its’ rehabilitation, are emphasised, which provokes problems concerning the exercise of these legal provisions.

Finally, there is no restriction for the beneficiaries of the legal entity after the forced liquidation from the point of view of establishing another legal entity carrying out the same activity again, which renders the criminal liability of the legal entity meaningless.