The criminal case against Armenian citizen Ruben Vardanyan, accused of crimes against peace and humanity, war crimes, as well as terrorism, financing of terrorism, and other grave crimes under the Criminal Code of Azerbaijan, is nearing completion.
Against this backdrop, an international campaign has been formed around Ruben Vardanyan, who is being prosecuted for separatist activities in the sovereign territories of our country. One of the main figures of this "noisy" campaign, which lacks any legal basis, is the criminal's son, David Vardanyan. Recently, he has given several interviews, made statements addressed to international organizations, and appeared in the media regarding his father's trial. However, each of his actions manifests itself within an ideological, rather than factual, framework.
Research shows that the purpose of these statements is not to seek justice or to address the factual materials presented in the court proceedings, but rather to evade responsibility for the acts committed by his criminal father.
The central thesis of David Vardanyan's statements is: “Ruben Vardanyan's arrest is a message of danger for all Armenians.” This approach is a classic manipulative discourse. He equates individual responsibility with an ethnic collective, falsely presenting the legal process as ethnic persecution. Thus, the person who is the object of investigation is shifted from the status of "accused" to "victim".
This is a method used to shift legal discussion from a rational plane to an emotional one.
In his interviews, David Vardanyan consistently accuses the Azerbaijani judicial system using various terms. However, none of these accusations are substantiated by concrete legal facts. This is because the process is conducted openly, and legal representation and indictment acts are carried out transparently and lawfully.
David Vardanyan and the media network supporting him selectively use statements from international organizations. Although ideas such as "a fair trial must be ensured" are put forward, this also has no legal basis. This is because no international p has declared Ruben Vardanyan innocent. No p has questioned Azerbaijan's sovereign right. From that perspective, the statements are not legal outcomes. This, in turn, is an attempt to turn international law into a political tool.
Ruben Vardanyan has concrete criminal acts, and these acts have led to actions resulting in numerous human deaths. The anti-terror operation conducted in September 2023 was precisely carried out as a result of Ruben Vardanyan's Armenian nationalism, cheap pathos, and speeches and actions full of threats. Vardanyan, who held Azerbaijani citizens of Armenian origin living in the region hostage, attempted to flee to Armenia, abandoning his "constituents" immediately after official Baku took decisive steps, and was apprehended at the Hakari bridge. This individual, involved in numerous international financial crimes and "money laundering," also tried to draw attention to himself during the trial through manipulative actions, blackmail, and alleged "hunger strikes," attempting to attract the attention of his international curators and patrons who sent him to Karabakh on a provocative mission. Naturally, his efforts had no impact on the will of official Baku's court of justice.
Currently, David Vardanyan, the criminal son of a criminal father, attempts in his statements to conceal his father's position in an illegal separatist entity in Karabakh, his overt political and financial activities against sovereignty in Azerbaijani territories, and the years-long activities against Azerbaijan's territorial integrity. Any "human rights" and "patriotic martyr" narrative constructed without these facts is incomplete and a deliberate distortion.
At the same time, it is worth recalling that David Vardanyan also illegally entered Azerbaijani territories, Karabakh, like his father, and served in the illegal military formation established by the separatist regime in our territory. Vardanyan served here from July 2015 to April 2016 and left Azerbaijani territory at his father's request some time after the April battles. A person holding British and Russian passports serving as a soldier of the Armenian Army in an occupied territory is itself a crime. Thus, it is revealed that Vardanyan, who speaks of crime, is himself a criminal. International law considers David Vardanyan's act as mercenary activity and establishes corresponding legal responsibility.
During the war, he even took photos in military uniform in our sovereign territories, gave interviews, supported occupation and separatism, in short, tried to create the image of a billionaire father's "patriotic son".
This, in turn, raises the issue of his legal responsibility before the Azerbaijani court and his appearance before the court.
We also obtained a lawyer's position on the matter.
Human rights defender Chingiz Ganizade made the following statement to Modern.az regarding whether Vardanyan's son has also been put on a wanted list:
“David Vardanyan became brazen after seeing that his father could also face a sentence of 20 years or life imprisonment, following the severe sentences handed down to those accused before his father. Naturally, he is his father's son; he cannot fall behind him. He continues provocations against Azerbaijan. His provocations and support for separatists are perceived as freedom of speech in the West. There is no financial support involved. This is because separatism has been abolished in Azerbaijan. Separatists were brought before the court, and a verdict was issued against them. We expect a fair verdict to be issued regarding Vardanyan as well. Therefore, David Vardanyan has been included in the list of undesirable persons for illegally entering Azerbaijani territory. There is no need to attach importance to the opinions of individuals sitting abroad and speaking. Azerbaijan is a legal state, and its laws are effective. Every person who violates the law, regardless of their nationality, religion, or language, bears responsibility before the law. This includes Ruben Vardanyan, who is answering before the court. Undoubtedly, a fair verdict will be rendered.”
