After the judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on “Perinçek v. Switzerland”, it is widely discussed the issue which of the side the judgment benefits: Turkey or Armenia. Deputy Minister of Justice of Armenia, Deputy of the RA Government’s Plenipotentiary Representative to the ECHR, Arman Tatoyan noted that the judgment of the upper chamber of the European Court in the sense that the issue of the Armenian Genocide it is not decided within the powers of the European Court is more ponderous.
To the question of, in this case, how it happened that both sides are satisfied with the judgment, Mr. Tatoyan replied, “Perinçek was convicted in that country. From his point of view, it is normal, but for Turkey, this is generally a non-acceptable decision. Turkey was also in favor for this case and it is involved for solving a more global problem that the Court would state that there was no genocide at all and it was not a genocide. But the Court did just the opposite.”
Peto Demirchyan, the media relations officer for Europe’s Armenian National Committee, drew attention to the following circumstance of the decision, “The Grand Chamber of the Court overturned the decision of the Lower Chamber that the Armenian Genocide was to be discussed within this framework. There is an important point on the fact that Article 301 that is widely used in the legislation of Turkey has no longer a place in the European legislation.”
Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
