44 LAW-ENFORCEMENT EQUIPMENT IN CENTRAL ASIA AND THE SOUTH CAUCASUS type cartridge with their plastic guiding caps were removed from Gor Kloyan’s, Armen Farmanayan’s corpses and a gas grenade of ‘Cheremukha-7’ type cartridgefrom Tigran Khachatryan’s corpse. Meanwhile, it was already revealed that on 1 March 2008 4 non-commissioned officers of the Police Troops of the Republic of Armenia used ‘KS-23’ type carbines—considered as firearms for special purposes— in Mashtots, Gr. Lusavorich, Leo and Paronyan Streets of Yerevan city. The expert examination carried out at ‘Special Equipment and Communication’ Research and Production Association State Institution of the Ministry of Interior of the Russian Federation revealed that the use of ‘Cheremukha-7’ type cartridges in an open space is not prohibited but firing it directly at a human being is prohibited.113 Following these incidents, prosecution proceedings were launched against four police officers for misusing riot-control equipment. The head of a special parliamentary committee investigation into the police response to the protests called for the criminal prosecution of the police officers involved. According to media reports, he also cited the fact that the Russian manufacturer of the Cheremukha-7 system had clearly stated that it should not be fired at pointblank range.114 Subsequently, a number of programmes appear to have been implemented to more clearly define what law-enforcement equipment may be used and the scenarios where such deployments may be authorized. The USA promised to help to train relevant Armenian security personnel in crowd-control management and Armenian soldiers deployed to Kosovo have received training in dealing with crowd-control situations.115 In 2011 the OSCE published two guidebooks on police conduct, the use of force and negotiation techniques as part of the ongoing police-reform programme in Armenia. The scenarios where such equipment can be used are shown in box 6.1.116 The regulations state that stun guns or spark arrestors may be used in a number of scenarios, mainly during arrest or during public-order situations. As previously stated, the utility of electric-shock devices in public-order situations is highly questionable. The use of devices whose primary purpose is in the application of direct contact electric-shocks should be prohibited in any law-enforcement or corrections situation. Projectile electric-shock devices employing a neuromuscular incapacitation capability should only be deployed by specially trained officers. While it is unclear what types of electric-shock device are currently deployed by Armenian law-enforcement personnel, publicly available images appear to show Russian-manufactured stun batons, as well as a projectile-firing attachment, being displayed as part of a 113 UN Human Rights Committee (note 111). It should be noted that the Armenian Government also claimed that demonstrators and police both used the KS-23 system as well as ‘ball grenades’. 114 Asbarez.com (2009), Armenian Police ‘Mishandled March 2008 Rally’, 23 Jan. 2009, <http://asbarez.com/59990/armenian-police-mishandled-march-2008-rally/>. 115 Barber, C. (2014), Multinational Soldiers Train for Aerial Rapid Response in Kosovo, US Army, 12 Mar. 2014, <http://www.army.mil/article/121864/Multinational_soldiers_train_for_aerial_rapid_ response_in_Kosovo/>. 116 Armenian Police (note 100).