YEREVAN—Armenian authorities have escalated their crackdown on government critics, with security forces conducting a raid Tuesday evening at the Yerevan residence of prominent businessman Samvel Karapetyan, hours after he issued public remarks defending the Armenian Apostolic Church and criticizing the government’s stance toward it.
Karapetyan, a Russian-Armenian billionaire and owner of the Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA) and Tashir Group LLC, was not detained during the raid but has since been summoned to court. As of Wednesday, legal proceedings are underway to determine whether he will be arrested. Prosecutors have petitioned the court to apply pre-trial detention as a preventive measure.
The Investigative Committee of Armenia has opened a criminal case under Article 422, Part 2 of the Criminal Code, alleging that Karapetyan made public calls through mass media to usurp state power and illegally assume governmental authority—an accusation stemming from his June 17 interview with News.am, where he stated:
“A small group, having forgotten Armenian history and the millennia-old legacy of the Armenian Church, has attacked both the Church and the Armenian people. I have always stood with the Armenian Church and the Armenian people. If political leaders fail, we will intervene in our own way.”
The criminal case appears to be part of a broader government campaign against Karapetyan, following his break with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan over an escalating rift with the Armenian Apostolic Church. Long regarded as a behind-the-scenes supporter of Pashinyan’s administration, Karapetyan’s sudden opposition has sparked a rapid and multifaceted retaliation.
The crackdown on Karapetyan followed a series of inflammatory statements by PM Pashinyan, who has accused the businessman and senior clergy members of undermining the state. Using rhetoric widely denounced as vulgar and unbecoming of a head of government, Pashinyan has referred to Church leaders and their benefactors with derogatory terms.
An hour after Karapetyan’s interview, Pashinyan wrote on Facebook: “Why have the lewd ‘clergy’ and their lewd ‘benefactors’ become active? No problem; we will deactivate them again—and forever.”
In addition to the legal proceedings, ENA has come under heightened scrutiny. The company was recently issued a 10 million dram administrative fine for “technical and trade violations,” due to a brief power outage at a government event. Pro-government media cited the incident as evidence of ENA’s “irregularities,” further escalating tensions between the business magnate and the state.
In a Facebook post on June 18, Prime Minister Pashinyan publicly called for ENA’s nationalization: “I believe the time has come for ENA to be nationalized,” he wrote. “This will happen swiftly. I urge all ENA employees to continue fulfilling their responsibilities with integrity.”
Speaking at a press conference later in the day, Pashinyan denied that this post was in retaliation for Karapetyan’s recent comments criticizing the government.
“A month ago, I issued a directive to identify how the public could be compensated for the damages caused by ENA,” the prime minister said. “During my recent visits to the regions, I witnessed firsthand the serious disruptions caused by ENA’s mismanagement. It became clear to me that the company had contributed to a nationwide energy crisis.”
Simultaneously, the State Food Safety Inspectorate has launched inspections across 30 branches of the Tashir Pizza restaurant chain, also owned by Karapetyan’s Tashir Group. The inspections, officially attributed to routine regulatory procedures, have been interpreted by some as part of a coordinated pressure campaign.
In a separate development, the government has announced the dismissal of Armen Abazyan, Director of the National Security Service (NSS), without providing a clear explanation. Multiple media reports suggest that Abazyan’s departure is linked to the Karapetyan case, as he refused to lead or authorize NSS involvement in operations targeting the businessman.
Asked to respond to these claims, Pashinyan denied that any insubordination had taken place. “The NSS director could not have disobeyed a directive,” he said, offering no further details.
Inside parliament, Pashinyan instructed his Civil Contract party members to dedicate their floor time to defending the government’s position and countering the Church. MPs delivered coordinated speeches, some with evident discomfort, criticizing clergy and attacking Karapetyan directly.
MP Tigran Parsilyan suggested that certain Church figures had plotted a coup during wartime. MP Vahagn Aleksanyan, meanwhile, accused Karapetyan of using his wealth to interfere in state matters and suggested he “focus on electricity outages” rather than religious affairs.
Karapetyan’s recent comments—and the state’s swift reaction—have provoked widespread concern among international figures, civil society leaders and religious institutions. The Armenian Apostolic Church has received strong support from diaspora leaders, senior clergy abroad and members of the Armenian Public Council, some of whom have condemned the government’s escalating rhetoric and actions.
On June 17, the Armenian Apostolic Church denounced the “apparent politically motivated persecution” and called on the Armenian authorities to “immediately cease these unlawful actions.”
Similarly, the Moscow office of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) expressed its disapproval, calling the government’s actions “unacceptable” and urging Armenian organizations worldwide to condemn the regime’s “anti-national policies.”
Russian officials have also expressed concern, with Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova stating that Russia is closely monitoring developments surrounding Karapetyan.
Russian State Duma Deputy Konstantin Zatulin has expressed strong criticism of the Armenian government. Zatulin, a longtime advocate for Armenian-Russian relations, questioned the basis for the government’s decision to target Karapetyan.
“I cannot imagine what he could have done for the Armenian leadership to decide to infringe upon his freedom,” he said. He further described the move as an attempt to “blackmail” Russian authorities and the Armenian diaspora in Russia.
Zatulin also accused PM Pashinyan of abusing his power, noting that Pashinyan’s interference in the affairs of the Armenian Apostolic Church was indicative of this overreach.
Hoory Minoyan
Latest posts by Hoory Minoyan (see all)
- ‘Victory has no alternative’: Armenian authorities raid church, arrest cleric amid escalating tensions - July 2, 2025
- The Region in Brief - July 2, 2025
- The Region in Brief - June 25, 2025
Pashinyan is well on his way to tyranny.
How embarrassing to see Armenians fighting. With all the enemies we have historically had trying to crush us, is this time to be petty? Let him say what he wants. It’s time for Armenians to support Armenians. Enough!
I guess there is no “freedom of speech” in Armenia. Becoming a dictatorship?
Recent events involving Russian-Armenian businessman Samvel Karapetyan—particularly the criminal investigation initiated following his public remarks on June 17—have sparked domestic and international commentary. While some have characterized these developments as political retaliation, a closer and objective assessment suggests that the Armenian government has acted within its legal mandate and constitutional responsibilities.
The Republic of Armenia, as a sovereign democracy, has a duty to protect constitutional order and safeguard institutions from undue influence or destabilization. Mr. Karapetyan’s public comments—stating that “if political leaders fail, we will intervene in our own way”—cannot be viewed as benign opinion. In the current regional context, where national sovereignty and internal cohesion are under pressure, such language can reasonably be interpreted as encouraging extra-constitutional action.
The government and law enforcement agencies have a legal obligation to investigate any statements that suggest a threat to the democratic process, regardless of the speaker’s status or prior affiliations. Armenia’s Criminal Code, like those in most democracies, prohibits public calls to seize or usurp power by unlawful means. The application of this law is not a matter of repression but a matter of upholding democratic norms.
It is important to recognize that wealth or philanthropic activity does not confer immunity from legal accountability. While Mr. Karapetyan has long held influence in business and political circles, Armenia’s post-2018 political transformation has been driven by a commitment to dismantling impunity and ensuring equal treatment under the law.
The assertion that the legal case against him is politically motivated overlooks the seriousness of his statements and the constitutional duty of the state to respond to potential incitement. Armenia cannot afford a precedent where powerful individuals, under the cover of religious or patriotic rhetoric, make ambiguous but dangerous claims about replacing or overriding democratic institutions.
The recent regulatory actions concerning ENA and the Tashir Group, including fines and inspections, have been portrayed by some as retaliatory. Yet the public record shows that these issues—particularly chronic service disruptions and technical violations—predate Mr. Karapetyan’s interview.
The government’s renewed focus on utility regulation and the possible nationalization of ENA reflect strategic policy debates, not personal vendettas. In fact, nationalization of critical infrastructure is a legitimate policy option debated in many countries, especially when public dissatisfaction with essential services is high.
The suggestion that routine food safety inspections across Tashir Pizza locations are part of a targeted campaign lacks evidence and unfairly undermines the credibility of state regulators performing their standard duties.
The Armenian Apostolic Church headquartered in Etchmiadzin Armenia plays a cherished role in Armenian history and identity. However, the principle of separation of church and state is fundamental in any secular democracy. The government has not targeted the Church as an institution but has rightfully raised concerns about certain figures within the Church engaging in overt political activism, often in alignment with influential private interests.
The government’s response is not anti-religious—it is pro-democratic, seeking to ensure that no institution, regardless of historical stature, oversteps its role in a modern, accountable state.
The developments of recent days are not evidence of a crackdown, but rather of a government acting firmly and lawfully to preserve Armenia’s fragile democratic order, protect public infrastructure, and ensure no individual or group operates above the law.
Criticism and debate are healthy in a democracy—but they must be grounded in facts, not assumptions. Those who invoke national unity and constitutional values must also respect the legal processes that sustain them.
Pashinyan, is that you posting here incognito, to “justify” his arrest?
Sound bites and rhetoric—similar to Armenia’s “friends” in the world
It is only in Armenia that I hear Armenians make such brazen statements, amounting to an ultimatum towards the government. I agree with Hagop.
When it comes to authoritarianism and corruption, the supposed “democrat” and “anti-corruption fighter” Pashinyan, certainly outdid his predecessors Sargsyan and Kocharyan. He became worse than them. At least, these two were not unpatriotic like him. That’s the only positive thing I can say about them.
And those fools who still defend and claim that Pashinyan is a democrat and a patriot, should be ashamed of themselves, but they won’t.