On July 1, the Administrative Court, presided over by Judge Varazdat Mikaelyan, upheld the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church's lawsuit against the Ministry of Internal Affairs' Police. Lawyer Ara Zohrabyan announced the ruling on his Facebook page.

According to Zohrabyan, the case concerned Hovhannavank Monastery in Aragatsotn Province. The Church had previously warned police about the risk that defrocked Stepan Asatryan could enter the sanctuary, sacristy, and chancel and conduct religious rites. It requested that police prevent the intrusion and remove the individual in accordance with Armenian government Decision No. 797-N.

Police declined to take the measures required by law, failing to visit the site or carry out the inspection procedures set out in the government decision.

The court concluded that police were required to respond to the Mother See's request by arriving at the scene, reviewing the submitted documents and taking the legal measures necessary to protect property rights. The ruling also states that although churches are open to worshippers, not all areas have the same legal status. The sanctuary, chancel and sacristy are designated exclusively for ecclesiastical service.

The court further noted that Article 18 of Armenia's Constitution recognizes the Armenian Apostolic Church's exclusive mission in the spiritual life of the Armenian people, the development of national culture and the preservation of national identity. It also referred to the Law on Relations Between the Republic of Armenia and the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church, which provides that the Church independently organizes its internal affairs and exercises its canonical authority within the framework established by law.

According to the administrative court, these legal provisions mean that authority over the Church's internal governance, the conduct of religious services, the use of worship areas and the determination of who is entitled to access them rests exclusively with the competent bodies of the Armenian Apostolic Church. The court therefore ruled that the police's inaction was unlawful.