On January 16, 2025, the Administrative Court required the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) to supply a non-governmental organization with details regarding the number of police troops who reported the use of special measures during the June 12, 2024, assembly at the Baghramyan-Demirchyan intersection in Yerevan. The court also demanded information on the types and quantities of special measures employed by each serviceman. The MIA had previously withheld this information, citing an ongoing criminal investigation.

On July 16, 2024, Arax Melkonyan, president of the "Protection of Rights Without Borders" NGO, submitted a written request to the MIA seeking the aforementioned details. In response, the MIA indicated that criminal proceedings had been initiated concerning the specified incidents and advised contacting the investigative body for the relevant information. Viewing this as a refusal to provide information, the NGO filed a lawsuit with the Administrative Court.

In court, it was demonstrated that in previous years, the police had disclosed information about special measures used during assemblies, including the quantity and type of measures, as well as the number of officers who reported their use, regardless of any ongoing criminal proceedings. Copies of several letters were presented as evidence, pertaining to the special measures employed by police during the July 2016 assemblies in Yerevan, along with decisions to initiate and conduct criminal cases related to those events. Consequently, the court concluded that the MIA had not provided a legitimate justification for withholding the requested information.

Furthermore, it was noted that information regarding the type and quantity of special measures used by police troops during the assembly at the Baghramyan-Demirchyan intersection, and the reports submitted by the officers involved, is of public importance. This information pertains to the rights of assembly participants and the functions and legality of the MIA's actions; therefore, the requested information should have been provided.

The MIA attempted to justify its refusal by stating that due to the ongoing criminal proceedings, the information contained data not subject to public disclosure and suggested that the NGO contact the investigative body. However, the Administrative Court found these arguments unconvincing. The court determined that there were sufficient legal and factual grounds to obligate the ministry to provide the requested information, as there were no legislative bases for denying the information or any part of it.

The MIA is also ordered to compensate the "Protection of Rights Without Borders" NGO with 10,000 drams for the previously paid state duty.

The Administrative Court's decision can be appealed to the Administrative Court of Appeal within one month.