Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian announced plans in June to nationalize ENA just hours after the Moscow-based tycoon was arrested in Yerevan following his strong criticism of the premier’s campaign against the Armenian Apostolic Church. Prosecutors said some of Karapetian’s statements amounted to “a call for the violent overthrow of the government.”
Later the businessman was also charged with large-scale fraud, tax evasion and money laundering.
Karapetian has dismissed the charges as politically motivated.
In July, the Armenian parliament dominated by Pashinian’s Civil Contract party swiftly passed legislation enabling the government to “temporarily” assume management of ENA, paving the way for full nationalization or a change in ownership.
Despite an injunction issued by the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, the Armenian government has proceeded with its takeover of ENA. The injunction ordered authorities in Yerevan to halt the ongoing seizure and refrain from actions such as changing ENA’s top management or revoking the operating license of its Cyprus-registered parent company, which is owned by Karapetian’s Tashir Group.
However, Armenian officials have signaled they will ignore the order unless it is upheld by a domestic court. As a result, they have refused to refused to reverse the appointment of a senior member of the ruling Civil Contract party, Romanos Petrosian, as ENA’s “interim manager.”
Karapetian’s legal team revealed on Tuesday that the billionaire’s family is demanding $500 million in compensation, citing violations of a bilateral investment treaty signed between Armenia and Cyprus 30 years ago. The claim has been submitted to an arbitration tribunal, which will hear the core investment dispute.
In a statement, Karapetian’s lawyers said the government’s actions were “arbitrary, discriminatory, politically motivated, and aimed at depriving [the family] of their ownership rights related to ENA.” They argue the forced transfer of management constitutes illegal expropriation.
Armenian officials have not yet publicly responded to the claim. The Ministry of Justice did not return a request for comment. Attempts to reach Petrosian for comment were also unsuccessful.
Justice Minister Srbuhi Galian previously commented that the government would await the arbitration proceedings. “Of course, the government will present its arguments, and we’ll see how the international arbitrator addresses the substance of the case… and in that sense, we’ll assess the potential risks” she said.
Officials have defended the intervention in ENA, citing widespread public dissatisfaction over the utility’s performance, including frequent power outages allegedly caused by mismanagement – claims that ENA has strongly denied.
During a July 16 press conference, Prime Minister Pashinian downplayed concerns about potential financial repercussions, framing arbitration as a routine part of governmental operations.
“Arbitration is a legal process. Claims are filed against the government or its bodies in domestic courts as well… The government both files and faces arbitration claims. It’s part of the normal course of work, and I don’t believe it has a significant impact on the issue we’re discussing,” Pashinian said.
Government officials have also dismissed concerns that the legal battle could undermine Armenia’s investment climate.