Human rights activist Siranuysh Sahakyan clarified that if the UN court upholds the motion of Armenia, Azerbaijan must comply with the demands of Armenia and submit information and evidence confirming the implementation of those actions to the UN court on a regular basis. “By announcing that some exhibits in Trophy Park have been removed, the Azerbaijani side is only organizing a defense to show that there is no violation and there is no need for the court to be involved,” Siranuysh Sahakyan, the co-founder of the Legal Way NGO, told Aravot.
She also deals with the cases of Armenian prisoners of war filed with the ECHR. The human rights activist explained, “First of all, there is no decision. To say that as a result of this process a decision was made to force Azerbaijan to close the trophy park, there is no such thing. This process is ongoing, and only a decision can be expected in the coming month.” According to her, this is an Azerbaijani plot to try and mislead the international community as they showed after the April 2016 war that the language is allegedly still maintained and Armenians are still living there. They do the same for Christians in terms of protection of religious rights. For example, by distributing roles to fake people, they present and try to distort the reality for the international community. Siranuysh Sahakyan warned that in a short time, Azerbaijan may return the exhibits taken from the trophy park. “This statement should be considered at the moment as a tactic to organize the defense, which is not verifiable. It is not necessarily the reality, and those exhibits may be returned soon.”
According to her, the initiation of an Armenia-Azerbaijan case in the international court is a very important development, but at the same time, she urged Armenians not to lose their vigilance as there is also a case against Armenia filed by Azerbaijan in the Hague. Stating that the evidence of hatred towards Armenians is too great, Siranuysh Sahakyan noted that at least for her, it will not be a victory if the international court recognizes that Azeris pursue anti-Armenian policies and Armenians pursue anti-Azerbaijani policies. Aravot reminded her that contradicting the claims of the Armenian side that Azerbaijan should return the Armenian prisoners of war, the representatives of the Azerbaijani side claimed that they were war criminals.
Read also
Siranuysh Sahakyan responded, “This is the only Azerbaijan’s defense. It has an obligation to release prisoners of war immediately. International humanitarian law provides for one legal basis of delay- if those persons have been involved in serious war crimes and other international crimes. But there is a significant argument. Crossing the border illegally is not a war crime nor an international crime. And international humanitarian law does not allow a captive to be convicted of any crime, but only in the case of crimes related to the rules and methods of warfare. In this case, it is not attributed to a war crime. Capture only after the end of the war does not deprive a person of their captivity because if it is the result of a conflict, the person is under the control of the enemy, they lay down their arms, and are involved in the conflict, it is clear that they have international prisoner status. There are many other cases where people in that situation have been considered prisoners of war.” According to Siranuysh Sahakyan, Azerbaijan pursues an arbitrary policy. She clarified, “If they were really not prisoners of war, there must be a reasonable explanation as to why only 38 out of 62 were left and the rest were returned. However, there is a group that has not been brought before a court at all. How can boys whose actions are described as the same have a different legal qualification? Here we reveal the political tendency.”
In response to our clarification of if the Hague makes a decision in a month and a half and applies an interim measure, what will it impose on Azerbaijan, Siranuysh Sahakyan answered, “It is considered a legally binding decision, and since the ECHR did not satisfy the demand for the release of prisoners of war on the grounds that it is beyond its jurisdiction, by the UN decision we will have the first legally binding document that will require and impose a legal obligation towards Azerbaijan to return the prisoners of war. So far, we have political statements that are not secured by coercion, and in this case the legal requirements are secured by coercion, and the pressure on Azerbaijan under the auspices of the UN will increase here as well. I think the institutions or states that are trying to be cautious will start acting in a credible way because it will already be a UN decision.”
Siranuysh Sahakyan also clarified that if the UN court satisfies Armenia’s demand, Azerbaijan, if we are referring to prisoners of war, should return the POWs in cooperation with the Red Cross or another state, close the trophy park, protect the Armenian cultural heritage, allow Armenians to visit those monuments, as well as provide information and evidence regarding the implementation of those activities to the UN Court on a regular basis.
Tatev Harutyunyan
