3 years ago the Head of the Department of Constitutional Law in ESY, Council President of “Center for Constitutional Rights”, Doctor of Law, Professor Gevorg Danielyan publicly emphasized that the fact of Armenian Genocide was first recorded in the 1919-1921 in a few dozen convictions of Turkish court which should have a critical value in our foreign policy and international organizations, parliaments and courts for Armenian Genocide recognition and condemnation of the idea. We found it appropriate to ask a few questions to determine future developments.
-Mr. Danielyan, years ago you were sure that your view will sooner or later bring international recognition and condemnation of the Armenian Genocide and will become the basis of developments in the direction of our country’s foreign policy and the one of the determinant factors.
What is the reaction?
-Concerning this case I haven`t made a mistake, for the first officially response was in 2015, on January 25, the president made a declaration on the 100th anniversary of Armenian Genocide «considering the actions taken by Turkish Military courts in1919-1921 which were against « legal and human laws» as proofs for the occurrence of severe action.
Read also
This position is responsible, so that the work based on these facts is actually entering a new phase. Additionally, the 100th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide does not end with the events of the crime of international recognition and condemnation of the entire process, it will continue to be so long as the government will be forced to accept its country’s courts officially approved facts according the genocide, but also as a result to compensate the vast amount of material and moral damages. To deny the Armenian genocide is nothing more than a grave moral outrage against not only the Armenian people, but also against humanity.
-Your opponents argue that the verdicts cannot be of any legal basis for the establishment of the Armenian Genocide as the term «genocide» is not used.
-«Holocaust» term was not used in Nuremberg trial either, moreover, for the same reasons as mentioned in Turkish sentences.
Note that the word «genocide» was first enshrined by Jewish Lemke initiated only in 1948 on «Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Convention». The important thing in this case is that the courts are certified as evidence that spell up to the crime of genocide features, including many high-ranking Turkish state and party leaders were to make certain plans solely on ethnic characteristics for developing and implementing programs aimed at eradicating. Accused of affairs within the material will not be required to address specific questions in depth, just note that at this stage it is not a condemnation of specific individuals for genocide, but the events of the exact legal assessment of the Armenian Genocide definitely an international crime against humanity, we cannot but affect the delicate side to another. The Turkish government denies the deaths of many people, as well as the displacement of large numbers of people in result of which many people died. Turkish government motivates it by a local tournament, when Armenians taking advantage of the situation tried to attack civilians, on the other hand the Turkish government tried to save Armenians by displacements of population, trying to keep away from the threat of military action. Unfortunately, nothing prevents the vivid imagination of the Turkish government to express itself in the public works throughout fable «cherished» function, but the only responsible for the facts and legal assessment is the Court of justice, rather than short-sighted policy of the executive or legislative power. In fact, for the same reasoning the French Constitutional Council adopted a law on February 28 in 2012, a law was concerning the denial of the Armenian Genocide, stressed that concrete action is also considered a crime. I think it was necessary at this stage to discuss the Turkish courts these sentences. – What is the reason for the Turkish government ignores their «home» court judgments.
First, the Turkish authorities have been trying to circumvent the existence of such judgments, and as a best trick, consider a study of archival documents to historians by forming a joint commission to study the idea. Unfortunately, from time to time, some short-sighted politicians are also positive in relation to this idea, the first time a willingness to be involved in it was forced to disappoint, the Turkish government has clearly stated that the the documents were stolen by unknown persons. And sometimes semi opinion appears that some hooligans could have robbed them. But I wouldn’t say that the verdicts do not bother the Turkish authorities at all. First, in 1923 special amnesty was announced on March 31, the prisoners for aforementioned charges were released (many of them are even heroes), and in the early 1930’s all the judges who issued the verdicts were subjected to the death penalty
– Do you hope after the new declaration of the president of the Republic, the problem will become more systematic and determined? What you think?
I think the existence of the issue of judicial review in the legal document itself guarantees that preference will be given not to personal research, but to the structural radical solutions, it is also appropriate for professional centers, which would have been able to carry out a systematic and persistent research and look forward to a complete scientific conclusions.
Prepared by RUZAN MINASIAN
