Armenian Church Leader Speaks on Suit to Reclaim Seized Property

Rick Gladstone

 

A lawsuit in Turkey filed by the Armenian Church to recover its ancient headquarters, seized a century ago during the Armenian genocide, is the “first legal step” of a goal to reclaim all Armenian property seized by the Turks, a worldwide leader of the church said Monday.

The leader, Aram I, Catholicos of the Holy See of Cilicia, also said that if the Turkish legal authorities rejected the lawsuit, it would “deepen the divide” between Turkey and the 10-million-member Armenian diaspora.

European Court of Human Rights Hears Genocide Denial Case Perinçek vs. Switzerland

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held a Grand Chamber hearing on January 28, 2015 in Strasbourg (France) in the case of Dogu Perincek v. Switzerland. The case stems from a Swiss court verdict that in 2007 fined Perincek, a Turkish ultranationalist activist and chairman of Turkey’s Workers’ Party, over his 2005 statement calling the Armenian Genocide an “international lie.” In appealing to the ECHR, Perincek’s defense argued that the Swiss court violated Perincek’s right to freedom of expression; the court ruled in their favor in December 2013. On March 7, 2014, Switzerland filed an appeal, which led to today’s hearing.
A first-rate legal team, which included renowned human rights lawyers Geoffrey Robertson and Amal Alamuddin Clooney, as well as Armenia’s Prosecutor General Gevorg Kostanyan, represented Armenia at the ECHR.The government of Switzerland has also joined the appeals process, as have two Turkish human rights organizations that have submitted legal briefs in favor of Armenia.

Armenian-Turkish Solidarity Against Hatred: The Perincek Case before the European Court

Payam Akhavan is a Professor of International Law at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and a Visiting Fellow at Oxford University.  He was previously a UN prosecutor at The Hague and has served as counsel in leading cases before international courts and tribunals.  He spoke to CivilNet about his representation of a coalition of Armenian and Turkish NGOs that have intervened in the Perincek case, heard by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg on January 28, 2015.  Dogu Perincek, an ultra-nationalist Turkish politician and member of the Talat Pasha Committee, had been convicted in Switzerland for incitement to discrimination for having called the Armenian Genocide an “international lie”.  Before the European Court, he succeeded in arguing that his freedom of expression had been violated, and that he was not promoting hatred, because he was only questioning the legal classification of the events of 1915, which he did not deny.  After a campaign by Armenian and Turkish NGOs, the Swiss government was persuaded to appeal the case to the Grand Chamber of the European Court, to try and reverse this flawed decision.

Perincek vs. Switzerland: Freedom of Expression Distorted

 Mihran Dabag

In a Dec. 17, 2013 judgment on the case of Perincek vs. Switzerland, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) denounced the conviction of Turkish nationalist Dogu Perincek by the Swiss courts.

In 2005, during several events in Switzerland, Perincek had described the genocide of the Armenians as an “international lie,” thereby violating Swiss anti-racism legislation (Article 261 of the Swiss Penal Code). However, the ECHR viewed the remarks as protected by the fundamental right to freedom of expression, which it deemed was breached by the judgment of the Swiss courts. It would appear that the goal associated with this specific expression of opinion and the political context in which it occurred played no role.

Immanuel Kant once pointed out that “opinion is a consciously insufficient judgment.” And thus the following question begs to be asked: What is the political agenda behind a consciously “insufficient judgment” of false historical factual assertions in the case of human rights and international law violations?

Waiting for Perincek

Vartan Matiossian

On March 11, 2014, Switzerland appealed the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the case Perincek v. Switzerland (27510/08), which had set a very troubling and controversial precedent of freedom of expression. On December 17, 2013, the ruling had overturned the conviction of Turkish politician Doğu Perinçek in 2007 by a Swiss police court, upheld by two other courts, for stating that the Armenian genocide was an “international lie” in a number of conferences held in Switzerland in 2005. We are still waiting for the response to the appeal from the Great Chamber of the ECHR.

Turkey Dares to Speak of "Freedom of Expression"

The Turkish Foreign Ministry issued a statement in response to Switzerland’s decision earlier this week to appeal a European Court of Human Rights ruling that concluded that the denial of the Armenian genocide is not a crime and is protected under freedom of speech principles.

Switzerland Appeals the Ruling of the European Court of Human Rights

The government of Switzerland announced on Tuesday, March 11, 2014 that it will appeal a December 17, 2013 decision by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) overturning the conviction of Dogu Perinçek for denying the Armenian genocide. Many Armenian organizations around the world had met Swiss diplomats urging their government to appeal the ECHR ruling.

Scholars Speak Up against European Court Inaccurate Decision

An open letter to Simonetta Sommaruga, head of the Federal Department of Justice and Police of Switzerland, bearing the signature of 37 "concerned genocide scholars" based in Europe and North America, has highlighted  "historical and conceptual inaccuracies" in the European Court’s decision on Dogu Perinçek v. Switzerland, and called on the government of Switzerland to request a reexamination of the Court’s judgment.
Below is the full text of the letter, released on Feb. 14. The Turkish version of the letter appeared the same day in the website of the "Agos" weekly.

Petition Asks Switzerland to Appeal Genocide Denial Verdict

In the struggle against Turkish denial of the Armenian Genocide, the Coordination Council of Armenian Organizations of France (CCAF) has launched a petition asking Switzerland to appeal the most recent judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which found that the ultra-nationalist Dogu Perinçek, president of the Workers’ Party of Turkey, could not be condemned for saying publicly in Geneva in 2007 that the “so-called Armenian genocide is an international lie.”

The full petition can be read and signed at Change.org.

Together Against the Denial of the Armenian Genocide

Translated by Vartan Matiossian

The undersigned persons and associations express their deepest concern and outrage following the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights published on December 17, 2013 in the case of Doğu Perinçek against Switzerland (1). This ruling not only stipulates that denying the Armenian genocide is not a crime, but goes further and disputes a "general consensus on the events like the ones that are treated here," namely, the Armenian genocide.

Swiss Genocide Denial Law Violates Freedom of Expression, Says European Court of Human Rights

William A. Schabas

 

The controversial Swiss genocide denial law has been held by the European Court of Human Rights to violate the protection of freedom of expression enshrined in article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The case concerned prosecution by Swiss courts of Doğu Perinçek, a Turkish national who had described the Armenian genocide as an "international lie." Two members of the seven-judge Chamber dissented. The Swiss government can apply for leave for the matter to be reconsidered by the 17-judge Grand Chamber.

Strasbourg, 17th December 2013: A Black Day for Genocide Prevention, a Feast Day For Genocide Deniers

Tessa Hofmann

Yesterday’s publication of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on the complaint by the Turkish nationalist Doğu Perinçek came as a shock and as a surprise. My personal relationship to the claimant dates back into the year 2000, when I became a victim of a slander campaign by Turkish media, started by Perinçek and his obscure party paper “Aydinlik,” and spread by Turkey’s largest daily, “Hürriyet.” The occasion was a petition by several Germany based human rights NGOs to the German parliament, requesting the German lawmakers’ official recognition of the crimes, committed against the Ottoman Christian population and the Armenians in particular as genocide according to the UN Convention of 1948. In his revelations, Perinçek had tried to depict me as a leading German agent with NATO connections, whose special mission was the destabilization of Turkey by inflaming interethnic hatred. Towards this goal I had, according to “Aydinlik/Hürriyet,” allegedly freed the scholar Taner Akçam from his prison in Turkey in armed action and brainwashed poor Taner, until he became a propagandist of the “Armenian lies”, as Perinçek put it. In two subsequent court trials here in Germany I could at least fight the repetition of such slander by “Hürriyet.” 

Armenian Genocide Denial is Not a Crime, Says the European Court of Human Rights

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled Dec. 17 that denial of the 1915 mass killings of Armenians as genocide falls under freedom of expression, following an appeal from a Turkish politician to his conviction in Switzerland, reported the Hurriyet Daily News.

Turkish Workers’ Party (İP) Chairman Dogu Perincek, who had described the Armenian genocide as an “international lie,” had complained that Swiss courts had breached his freedom of expression, based on Article 10 covering freedom of expression.

European Court of Human Rights: Turkey Cannot Criminalize Genocide Recognition

The European Court of Human Rights unanimously ruled on October 25, 2011 that the recognition of the Armenian Genocide cannot be criminalized in Turkey. The verdict stemmed from a case brought to the court by noted scholar Taner Akcam.

In the case Taner Akcam vs. Turkey, the court ruled that Turkey’s ongoing criminal prosecution of scholarship on the Armenian Genocide issue constituted a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

What is Turkey Returning to the Armenians?

Raffi Bedrossyan

 

The Turkish government recently announced that real estate assets confiscated by the State, which once belonged to Armenian, Greek, and Jewish charitable foundations, would be returned to the rightful owners, and that the government would pay compensation for any confiscated property that has since been sold to third parties. This is definitely a long overdue positive step in the right direction by the Turkish government, when compared with decades long injustice and discrimination of the past Turkish governments against its non-Muslim citizens. While this decree was hailed by the EU, Turkish media as well as the minority charitable foundations in Turkey, it was met by the Armenian Diaspora as an insufficient gesture at best, a cynical political trick at worst. Perhaps the following facts can help put the issue in context.