Newsfeed

ArmenTel's subscribers to shortly enjoy IP television

Vahe Hakobyan: Investments must create jobs

Politician: "Republican Party of Armenia deporting Armenians from their motherland"

In corporate strategy for 2014 Araratbank gives special priority to activities of businesswomen

Rostelecom provides a number of educational establishments in Abovyan with free superhigh- speed Internet services starting from March 1

Areximbank-Gazprombank Group to provide customers with free non-chip MasterCards under a campaign for motorists

MasterCard holders among VTB Group's Armenian customers can withdraw cash from VTB Group's ATM network at the same tariffs as at VTB Bank (Armenia)

Orange offers an innovative solution for internet and fixed phone services

Lyova Khachatryan: Prosperous Armenia Party will not demand resignation of Armenian President

Political expert rules out an external factor in Tigran Sargsyan's resignation

Edward Nalbandian and Seyran Ohanyan reappointed

Armenian political expert skeptical about viability of "the union of the four"

Moscow: Fulfillment of "road map" will allow Armenia to join Customs Union and Eurasian Economic Union

Gagik Makaryan: Appointment of Hovik Abrahamyan as Prime Minister is intended to ease political and social tension in Armenia rather than deepen reforms

Tatul Manaseryan: Hovik Abrahamyan is able to find a common language even with the opposition

Naira Zohrabyan: The new premier of Armenia should not continue the programme of his predecessor

Deputy Head of Heritage Party: Appointment of Hovik Abrahamyan as prime minister aims to tie Prosperous Armenia Party's hand and foot

Member of the parliament: Hovik Abrahamyan is a compromising man at the position of Armenia's prime minister

Boris Navasardyan: Appointment of Hovik Abrahamyan as prime minister meets oligarchs' aspirations

Hovik Abrahamyan starts forming the new Cabinet

Stepan Safaryan: Conflict of business-interests of Tsarukyan and Kocharyan is not ruled out in the near future

Moscow: One should draw no parallels between Crimea and Nagorno-Karabakh

Tigran Urikhanyan: Prosperous Armenia Party does not consider joining ruling coalition

Serzh Sargsyan: State budget is inviolable and bribery is forbidden

Sources: Along with prime minister’s post, RPA determined to make some other staff reshuffles – Sharmazanov taking parliament speaker’s position, Haroutiunyan going back to the justice ministry, while Sargsyan to engage in diplomacy

Ruling Party entrusts Hovik Abrahamyan with power of prime minister

Yerevan Brandy Company is number one brandy producer in Armenia and number one exporter, Henri Reynaud says

Sargsyan-Abrahamyan-Tsarukyan meeting underway at Armenian President's palace

Activist of "I'm Against" initiative calls on citizens to make no utility payments until the mechanism automatically transferring pension interest to funds is cancelled

"I'm Against" civic initiative intends to apply to court against State Revenue Committee

Ivan Volynkin: Annual Conference of Russian Compatriots makes an invaluable contribution to development of relations between Armenia and Russia

CJSC "South Caucasus Railway" to participate in the Caucasus Tourism Fair - 2014

Turkish FM: The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee has acted beyond its competence by adopting a hastily and ineptly prepared draft resolution

Converse Bank goes on upgrading its offices

Orange continues making smartphones more available

Regional

Vice-Speaker of Israeli Knesset to Deliver in Tbilisi Lecture on Israeli-Arabic Relations

German Chancellor Invites Garibashvili to Visit her Country

Georgian Foreign Minister to Visit Germany

Georgian Foreign Minister Attends International Conference in Vilnius

President to Have Exclusive Right to Grant Georgian Citizenship

NATO Week in Georgia Starts Today

Discussion of the Azerbaijani-Iranian relations on Culture and Tourism

Chief of General Staff of the RF to visit Baku

Ilham Aliyev will visit NAR

Georgian Premier Starts his Regional Tour

Georgian President to Hold Talks in Poland

Georgian Prime Minister Meets with EU Special Adviser

Erdogan is arriving in Baku

Simplification of the visa regime between the EU and Azerbaijan may occur in the summer

U.S. Embassy: Any allegations that US government representatives are trying to foment a revolution in Azerbaijan are absolutely absurd

Foreign Minister of Afghanistan to Pay Official Visit to Georgia

Georgian Foreign Ministry Makes Strict Statement, Concerning Referendum in the Crimea

President Margvelashvili Meets Georgian Troops, Deployed in Afghanistan

Georgian Premier and Afghan Foreign Minister Discuss Two Countries' Relations

Georgian Premier Holds Official Dinner in Honor of Romanian Prime Minister

Analyst: The USA invested $5 billion to directly support Maidan

Georgian Ambassador to Japan Hands over Credentials to His Imperial Majesty Emperor Akihito of Japan.

Tbilisi Hosts Annual PDP Conference

NATO May Accelerate Georgia's Integration and Grant it MAP because of the Crimea Problem

Georgian Ambassador to Lithuania Addresses Seimas

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister in Baku

Gerhard Schroeder will make a speech in Baku

Putin is unable to persuade the leader of the Crimean Tatars

Georgian Defence Minister Attends NATO Defence Ministerial

Saakashvili is Offered High Post in Kiev

Exclusive

Vahe Hakobyan: Investments must create jobs

Sergey Markedonov: People living in Crimea and Karabakh saw no future for the countries they were attached to

Vahram Avanesyan: It is impossible to achieve serious results by means of standard and framework reforms

Wayne Merry: Situation around Ukraine is a serious alarm that the South Caucasus political nucleus must be seriously revised

Dariusz Prasek: EBRD demands absolute transparency from companies

Sargis Hatspanyan: When it comes to the change of regime in Armenia, the West washes hands of it

Andrey Yepivantsev: Only time may show if we have opened Pandora's box in the Crimea or not

Giorgi Tarkhan-Mouravi: Confrontation around the Crimea will speed up Ukraine's European integration

Ivan Kukhta: Ukraine has received a chance to be totally reset

Vaidotas Verba: Eastern Partnership project is not directed against anybody, it is simply for open opportunities

Vladimir Yevseev: The only way out of the situation in Ukraine for the West is through negotiations with Russia

Edward Sharmazanov: The principle of peoples’ right to self-determination tends to dominate in the world

Gevorg Poghosyan: Armenia is on an explosive-timing device and may explode at any moment

Sergey Grinyayev: Armenia has just to realize its status of an essential partner for Russia

Grigory Tishchenko: Strengthening of Russia’s positions in the South Caucasus will contribute to peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Artak Shakaryan: Armenia and Diaspora should be ready for Turkey’s imitative policy in the matter of Armenian Genocide recognition

Hovhannes Igityan: Only reason why they 'invited' Armenia into the Customs Union was to show Europe who wears the pants in the post-Soviet area

Alexander Voronin: ANELIK has almost 20% of all money transfers in the CIS

World's leading scholars condemn ECHR's judgment justifying Turkish politician denying Armenian Genocide

  • by Tatevik Shahunyan

  • Tuesday, February 18, 14:02

 Over 20 leading scholars and human rights defenders have issued an open letter highlighting  "historical and conceptual inaccuracies" in the European Court's decision on Dogu Perincek v. Switzerland, and called on the government of Switzerland to request a reexamination of the Court's judgment, the Armenian Weekly "Golos Armenii" reports referring to Agos newspaper.

Below is the full text of the letter:  After having read the European Court's decision on Dogu Perincek v. Switzerland (ECHR. 370, 230, 17 December, 2013) we, as concerned genocide scholars, believe it imperative to respond to historical and conceptual inaccuracies that are articulated in the decision, and we believe those inaccuracies have serious ethical and social significance.

We do not take issue with the notion of freedom of expression, something that scholars agree is most often an essential part of open, democratic society. We are, however, concerned about elements of the Court's reasoning that are at odds with the facts about the historical record on the Armenian genocide of 1915 and at odds with an ethical understanding of denialism.

The decision asserts that: 1) "genocide as a precisely defined legal concept was not easy to prove"; 2) "the Court doubted that there could be a general consensus as to the events such as those at issue, given that the historical research was by definition open to discussion and a matter of debate, without necessarily giving rise to a final conclusion or to the assertion of objective and absolute truths"; the court uses the phrase "heated debate" in referring to the current political context surrounding the Armenian genocide.  First, it is the overwhelming conclusion of scholars who study genocide (hundreds of independent scholars, who have no affiliations with governments, and whose work spans many countries and nationalities and the course of decades) that the Ottoman mass killings of Armenians conforms to all the aspects of Article 2 of the U.N. CPPC definition of genocide.

In 1997, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), the major body of scholars who study genocide, passed a resolution unanimously recognizing the Ottoman massacres of Armenians as genocide.  The InternationalCenter for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) prepared an analysis for the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) in 2003, stating that "the Events [of 1915] include all of the elements of the crime of genocide as defined in the Convention (UNCPPCG).

In 2000, 100 leading Holocaust scholars signed a petition in The New York Times affirming the events of 1915 were genocide and urging worldwide recognition. An Open Letter from the IAGS to Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, in June, 2005, enjoined the Turkish government to own up to "the unambiguous historical record on the Armenian genocide." The only three histories of genocide in the 20th century that genocide-studies theorists (such as William Schabas) agree on are the cases of the Armenians in Turkey, in 1915; the Jews in Europe, in 1940-45; and the Tutsis in Rwanda, in 1994. The destruction of the Armenians was central to Raphael Lemkin's creation of the concept of genocide as a crime in international law, and it was Lemkin who coined and first used the term Armenian Genocide in 1944.

The idea put forth by the Court that crimes of genocide may only apply to the events in Rwanda and at Srebrenica because they were tried at the ICC is incomplete. Crimes of genocide have been assessed as historical events by scholars for decades now, and both the crimes committed against the Armenians by the Ottoman Turks in 1915 and those committed against the Jews of Europe by the Nazis in the 1940s were deemed genocide by Lemkin. As legal scholars have noted, crimes of genocide can be tried retroactively, and William Schabas has pointed out that in the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem, in 1961, the word genocide was used retroactively to designate crimes committed against the Jews.

Further, under Article 10, "the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the negation of the crimes of the Holocaust. . . . because the acts that they had called into question had been found by an international court to be clearly established." We would note that the perpetrators of the Holocaust were prosecuted at the Nuremberg Trials (1945-46), not for the crime of genocide, but for "crimes against humanity," even though Raphael Lemkin had previously created the term "genocide." The Armenian case, contrary to the Court's assertion, does have a clear legal basis for its authenticity. First, "crimes against humanity" was the very phrase coined by France, the United Kingdom, and Russia in their 1915 joint declaration in response to the massacres of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turkish government.  After WWI, the Ottoman government convened military tribunals (1919-20) to try 200 high-level members of the military and government for premeditated mass murder of the Armenian population. The ICTJ decision of 2006 also affirms such a legal basis.
The Court also decided, on the basis of Article 17 (prohibition of abuse of rights), that "The rejection of the legal characterization as 'genocide' of the 1915 events was not such as to incite hatred against the Armenian people." Yet the ECtHR states (para 19) that "the negation of the Holocaust is today the principal motor of anti-Semitism." We would note similarly that the denialism of the Armenian genocide in Turkey resulted in the assassination of Armenian Turkish journalist Hrant Dink, and has resulted in violence to others in Turkey.

In referring to the Armenian genocide as "an international lie," Mr. Perencik reveals a level of extremism that belies all sense of judgment. We believe that the Court makes a misstep when it privileges Turkey's denialism (a country with one of the worst records on intellectual freedom and human rights over the past decades) as a "heated debate." As the IAGS has written in an Open Letter on denialism and the Armenian genocide (October, 2006), "scholars who deny the facts of genocide in the face of the overwhelming scholarly evidence are not engaging in historical debate, but have another agenda. In the case of the Armenian Genocide, the agenda is to absolve Turkey of responsibility for the planned extermination of the Armenians-an agenda consistent with every Turkish ruling party since the time of the Genocide in 1915.  Scholars who dispute that what happened to the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire in 1915 constitutes genocide blatantly ignore the overwhelming historical and scholarly evidence." As noted genocide scholar Deborah Lipstadt has written: "Denial of genocide whether that of the Turks against the Armenians, or the Nazis against the Jews is not an act of historical reinterpretation . . . . The deniers aim at convincing innocent third parties that there is another side of the story . . . when there is no other side." We believe that the Court's decision and reasoning contributes to denialism and this has a corrosive impact on efforts for truth and reconciliation, and ethics.

We believe it important that the government of Switzerland request a reexamination of the Court's judgment in this case."

The letter was endorsed by Taner Akcam, Kaloosdian/Mugar Professor, Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Clark University, Israel Charny, Past President International Association of Genocide Scholars; Director, Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide, Jerusalem, Donna-Lee Frieze, Prins Senior Fellow, Center For Jewish History, New York City; Visiting Fellow, Alfred Deakin Research Institute, Deakin University, Melbourne, Wolfgang Gust, Independent Scholar, Director armenocide.com.de Hamburg, Tessa Hofmann, Prof. h.c. Dr. phil, Frie Universitat Berlin, Institute for East European Studies, Mark Levene, 
Reader in Comparative History, University of Southampton, UK, and many other prominent scholars.  To recall, ECHR has justified Perinchek who was fined by the Swiss Court for Arenian Genocide denial.  Earlier, Switzerland recognized the Armenian Genocide and passed a bill criminalizing genocide denial. 

Send to a friend

To (e-mail)


Your name


Message


Comments

View comments (0)
  • READ ALL COMMENTS
  • POST A COMMENT

Be first to comment on this article

* Indicates required fields