ECHR cites human rights to justify shameful ruling on Genocide

December 21, 2013 - 14:20 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net - The ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) suggesting the Armenian Genocide denial is not a crime is nothing but shameful. At the time when in some states the Genocide denial is punishable by law, the ECHR is pretending to care about human rights.

Turkish Workers’ Party (İP) Chairman Dogu Perincek, whose complaint has been satisfied, already remarked that the Armenian Cause is basically resolved in Turkey. However it’s unclear why the whole Turkey should be associated with a single politician, accused of complicity with Ergenekon, on top of things.

Perincek seems to be reveling in the ECHR ruling. “When we planned to refer the issue to ECHR, Turkish authorities and main oppositionists were trying to persuade us against the step, lest it creates additional problems. But we promised our people to solve the Armenian Cause and it’s been done - thanks to the power of the Turkish nation and skillful policy-making,” Aydinlik quoted Perincek as saying.

However, what came as the biggest surprise here was Yerevan’s position, expressed by Justice Minister Hrayr Tovmasyan:

“ECHR’s ruling doesn’t cover acknowledgement or denial of the Armenian Genocide, but rather previous instances of Turkey-related decisions. The fact that 2 out of 7 judges voted against the ruling suggests the decision was unequivocal, drawing parallels between the Genocide and Holocaust,” the official said promising to instruct his deputy to further study the details of the ruling.

The Minister’s statement needs no comments, yet it’s quite possible for a number of Perinceks to apply to international human rights organizations before 2015. The key point here is not the fact that Perincek was justified by the court, but rather, that a precedent was created. "Freedom of speech" comes in handy in showing off the impartiality of a ruling. Armenia needs to brace up for such "processes" and show a timely and adequate response instead of "instructing deputies."

Much as it may wish, ECHR can’t replace the 1921 Berlin trial or Raphael Lemkin’s testimony in 1944. So let’s hope that Perincek’s joy about the victory over Armenians was premature.