Verbind je met ons

Azerbeidzjan

Interview: Azerbeidzjaanse minister van Buitenlandse Zaken – het oordeel van het EHRM zou ook als leidraad moeten dienen voor de medevoorzitters van de OVSE-MG

DELEN:

gepubliceerd

on

cb256db67e55796718812d1a16c5a3eb"First and foremost, ECHR effectively put an end to Armenia’s persistent denial of its responsibility for the unlawful occupation of and military presence in the territories of Azerbaijan”

Baku. Malahat Najafova – APA. Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken van Azerbeidzjan Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Elmar Mammadyarov (foto) geeft een interview aan APA Informatiebureau 

 – On 16 June 2015, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) announced its judgment (Merits) on the case of Chiragov and others v. Armenia. At the outset, could you please provide some general background information on this case?

 – As you know, the case that you are referring to originated in an application against the Republic of Armenia lodged with the ECHR on 6 April 2005 by six Azerbaijani nationals, who were forcibly expelled from the occupied Lachin district of Azerbaijan during the Armenian aggression. In essence, the applicants submitted to the Court that they were prevented from returning to their homes in the Lachin district and were thus unable to enjoy their properties located there due to continuing occupation of the district of Lachin by the armed forces of Armenia. They submitted that this amounted to continuing violations of their property rights, guaranteed under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 8 of the Convention that protects the right to respect for private and family life. They also submitted that there was a violation of Article 13 of the Convention in that no effective remedy was available in respect of the above complaints. Finally, with a view to all complaints set out above, they complained that they were subjected to discrimination by virtue of ethnic origin and religious affiliation in violation of Article 14 of the Convention.

– What the general conclusion the Court has arrived at?

 – The Court ruled in favor of the applicants, recognizing continuing violations by Armenia of a number of their rights under the Convention. However, the importance of this ruling by an authoritative international court as this one goes beyond that.

Wat is in het licht van de Republiek Azerbeidzjan de voornaamste betekenis van dit arrest van het EHRM?

advertentie

– The judgment of the Court is indeed significant from a number of angles. First and foremost, ECHR effectively put an end to Armenia’s persistent denial of its responsibility for the unlawful occupation of and military presence in the territories of Azerbaijan. As is known, since the beginning of Armenian aggression and in the course of the Court’s proceedings in this case, in its usual attempts to mislead the international community and distort the root causes and essence of the conflict, the Republic of Armenia alleged that its jurisdiction did not extend to the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding territories; that it did not and could not have effective control of or exercise any public power on those territories; that it had not participated in the military conflict in question; that it had not taken part in the seizure of the Lachin district and in any later military actions; and that it did not have any military presence in Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding territories.

Om het volledige interview te lezen, klik hier.
Om in de originele taal te lezen, klik hier.

Deel dit artikel:

EU Reporter publiceert artikelen uit verschillende externe bronnen die een breed scala aan standpunten uitdrukken. De standpunten die in deze artikelen worden ingenomen, zijn niet noodzakelijk die van EU Reporter.

Trending