It is noteworthy that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is holding simultaneous hearings on two rival lawsuits filed by Armenians and Azerbaijanis. Is this a mere coincidence or an attempt by the ECHR to intervene in a thorny dispute that political leaders have failed to resolve for over 25 years?
This week, ECHR is hearing the case of “Sargsyan vs. Azerbaijan,” dealing with Minas Sargsyan’s complaint against the Republic of Azerbaijan, in which he claims that he was forced to flee his Gulistan home in the Shahumyan region after his property was destroyed by Azeri armed forces in June 1992. The Sargsyan case was first filed with ECHR on Aug. 11, 2006. Interestingly, the Court held hearings on both the Armenian and Azerbaijani complaints on the same day: It heard the “Chiragov and Others vs. Armenia” case in the morning of Sept. 15, 2010, and later that afternoon, the “Sargsyan vs. Azerbaijan” case.
In a preliminary decision on Dec. 14, 2011, ECHR found Sargsyan’s complaint to be partly admissible. The Court rejected Azerbaijan’s contention that the case should be dismissed because it covered events prior to Azerbaijan’s ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights in 2002. Unfortunately, applicant Minas Sargsyan passed away in 2009, but his two children are continuing the complaint. ECHR will further probe the merits of the Sargsyan case during its Feb. 5, 2014 hearing.
Two weeks earlier, ECHR heard the rival case of “Chiragov and Others vs. Armenia,” in which six Azerbaijani Kurds claim that they’ve been unable to return to their homes and properties in the Lachin district since May 17, 1992, when they were forced to flee because of the Karabagh (Artsakh) War.
The Azeri complaint against Armenia was first filed with ECHR on April 6, 2005. In a preliminary decision on Dec. 14, 2011, ECHR agreed to take up the case, finding that the ongoing negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan did not preclude the Court from dealing with this contentious situation. ECHR held a subsequent hearing on Jan. 22, 2014, to consider the following questions:
1) Does Armenia exercise effective control over the territory of Artsakh?
2) Do the six Azeri citizens possess sufficient documentation proving their identity and ownership of the claimed properties?
3) Should the Azeri applicants have exhausted all domestic remedies (an ECHR requirement) by applying first to the Artsakh courts (prior to filing a complaint with ECHR), considering the further complication that Artsakh is not a recognized state?
Here are some thoughts about ECHR’s crucial role in these two conflicting cases:
1) Both complaints were filed with ECHR almost 10 years ago and cover alleged human rights violations that occurred over two decades earlier. Since the Armenian applicant and one of the six Azeris had died in the intervening years, neither one will ever see the justice they had sought from the European Court. As the popular saying goes, “Justice delayed is justice denied!”
2) ECHR’s obvious effort to take simultaneous action on these two separate yet opposing cases indicates that the Court might be trying to resolve not only these two complaints, but also lay the groundwork for the resolution of the Artsakh conflict, at least the refugees’ right to return to their homes.
ECHR’s even-handed treatment of Armenian and Azerbaijani applicants thus far would lead one to believe that the Court will eventually rule in favor of both cases, opening the door to thousands of additional complaints from refugees on both sides who suffered a similar fate during the Artsakh War. Since all member countries of the European Council are obliged to comply with ECHR’s decisions, the Court may order that these refugees be allowed to return to their native homes, thereby imposing a partial humanitarian solution on an intractable conflict that the leaders of both countries and international mediators have been unable to resolve for more than 25 years!
Harut Sassounian
The ECHR’s decision, which I believe will be objective and impartial, unfortunately won’t make too much of a difference unless both sides are committed to peace and reconciliation. As far as peace, to me, Azerbaijan is more of the problem. As for reconciliation and positive peace building, I don’t think either side is ready nor too willing. I think too many bridges have been burned.
If the 6 Azeri Kurds are allowed to come back to Artsakh, then that will open the doors for all Azeri’s to come back. Also, Armenian’s whom lived in Baku & Sumgait whom lost all their properity and the Genocide perpertrated by the Azerbaijan Government of the Armenians whom lived must also be compensated. The European Courts must understand what the Soviets under Stalin did to the Armenian People by taking away their lands and reducing her territories. Those territories that Stalin took away must be restored to the Armenian People. They include Nakhichevan & Artsakh, Javakh in Georgia, Kars & Ardahan which were given to the Turks. It seems the Nations of the world have put aside what the Armenian Nation has gone thru down thru the centuries.