ՔՐԵԱԿԱՆ ՀԵՏԱՊՆԴՈՒՄԸ ԴԱԴԱՐԵՑՆԵԼՈՒ ԴԵՄ ԱՌԱՐԿԵԼԸ ԵՎ ԴՐԱ ԻՐԱՎԱԿԱՆ ՀԵՏԵՎԱՆՔՆԵՐԸ

The article examines the legal institution of objecting to the termination of criminal prosecution. The authors analyze the methods by which interested parties express their will regarding the termination of criminal prosecution, distinguishing between positive and negative expressions of will, as well as the differences between the concepts of “consent” and “absence of objection.” Special attention is paid to cases where criminal prosecution is terminated on non-rehabilitative grounds (e.g., death, amnesty, decriminalization). The authors clarify that the legislative formulation “not to object” means that a person’s silence should be regarded as an expression of having no objection to the termination of criminal prosecution, which does not imply agreement with the imputed act. In this context, the legal position of the RA Court of Cassation and the approach of the prosecutor’s office are also analyzed. The article places particular importance on the legal consequences of a motion to terminate criminal prosecution and its potential impact on civil proceedings. The authors present strategies designed to prevent situations where the defendant’s expression of will regarding the termination of criminal prosecution is subsequently used against them in civil proceedings and draw parallels with the “nolo contendere” institution known in American law.