The Case Safarov Discussed At Pace – Ii [Translation]

THE CASE SAFAROV DISCUSSED AT PACE – II [TRANSLATION]

Posted on: 09-10-2012

Info Collectif VAN – – The thirty-fifth session
of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)
has the sinister “Safarov Case” to the agenda of the discussions
of Thursday, October 4, 2012 to 15 h 30 h. The opportunity for
parliamentarians to present their interpretation of facts very
serious that violate the most fundamental European values. Some
were clear and unambiguous in their denunciation of Azerbaijan,
others have seen fit to put on the same plane victims and murderers
by saying that “the two parties in conflict believe they are free
to flout the law!” However, in this case, Armenia has violated no
law because it was not even consulted for the transfer of the ax
murderer Ramil Safarov, Hungary to Azerbaijan. Interventions most
“jouissives” Azeri parliamentarians are those who use this forum to
bludgeon PACE anti-Armenian propaganda of the primary, not hesitating
to resent the acquittal by a German court in 1921, the young Soghomon
Tehlirian, an Armenian survivor of the 1915 genocide, which had run
Talaat Pasha, the “Hitler” Turkish leak in Berlin … “I would like
to ask some questions. How can you justify that German courts have
released a killer who murdered Armenian a Turk in Berlin?” Was indeed
questioned Mr. Huseynov (Azerbaijan). We thank the brave parliamentary
institution of the European ridiculing the country he represents and
also assume clearly the complicity of nationalism and Turkish-Azeri
denial. His Turkish colleague, Ahmet KutalmiÅ~_ TÃ¼rkeÅ~_, has lent a
hand in cynicism and bad faith to justify the heinous crime of Ramil
Safarov and his grace by the dictator of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev:
“From 1973 to 1987, Armenian terrorist organizations have committed
– including France – 170 attacks, which killed 31 Turkish diplomats
killed 39 civilians and injured more than 500. Yet we never heard any
Armenian – official parliamentary or citizen – condemn these murders
of Turkish diplomats. Instead, they were glorified and rewarded. ”
Damned! These organizations – probably a bit distracted – do not
have to hear the excuses of modern Turkey for 1.5 million victims of
the Armenian genocide in 1915, for the total eradication of a people
and its culture of their ancestral lands Anatolia. They had to take
note against the glorification of criminals including Young Turks in
Turkey today: Talaat Pasha, the “Hitler” Turkish his Mausoleum on the
Hill of Liberty in Istanbul, schools and avenues bearing his name in
Turkey and successive Turkish governments practice a denial of State
outrageous nationally and internationally.

They even interfere in the internal politics of France, the United
States, to block any legislation recognizing the Armenian genocide
denial or condemning.

Key interventions to PACE debate on Safarov Case

Azerbaijan’s actions justify such crimes. Unacceptable behavior in
this country has an impact on the whole region. For its part, Armenia
said she did not want war, but she was ready to fight if necessary
and to win the fight.

For my part I hope that reconciliation is possible. I admire the
gesture of our President, who invited the two delegations to make
things happen, but this is not enough. I therefore request that you
organize a high-level meeting on the conflict in an attempt to move
towards a solution. Only these two countries will not succeed. The
Council of Europe should assume its responsibilities.

THE PRESIDENT – Thank you Mr. Zourabian.

Mr. ZOURABIAN (Armenia) * – Even though I belong to the Armenian
delegation, I would like the issue before us is extracted from the hot
discussions between my country and Azerbaijan on moral and historical
responsibility each other in the Nagorno-Karabakh. I do not wish to
discuss here the question whether the glorification of a murderer,
regardless of the nation in which he was convicted, may be considered
acceptable behavior. I did not ask further whether the fact that
negotiations are stalled to justify brutal violence. Indeed, all the
answers to these questions are obvious to the majority of those who
are listening.

However, what is at stake today is the destiny of our peoples and
of the Nagorno-Karabakh is the future of peace in the South Caucasus
and the stability of the whole of the region.

In May 1994, a cease-fire has been established between the parties
to the Nagorno-Karbakh. Since then, negotiations within the Minsk
Group of the OSCE tried to find a lasting solution to the conflict
to bring peace to the Armenians and Azerbaijanis. These negotiations
are difficult and sometimes frustrating. Nevertheless, it is the only
solution to a destructive regional war on a large scale.

Realistically, the act of Azerbaijan and, to a lesser extent,
Hungary was basically an extradition, a release, a glorification
of murder, which dealt a serious blow to the negotiation process,
undermining the prospect building trust between the parties in the
near future. There are too many crises, tensions in the region:
Syria, Iraq, the positions taken by Iran. In this context, it should
do everything possible to preserve a delicate negotiation process and
that to solve the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh. That is the priority
of the international community!

As the main opposition in the country, we asked the Armenian
National Assembly before the Armenian government does not provide a
response to aggressive actions destructive of Azerbaijan, it is the
international community to react strongly. It should send a clear
message to the leaders of the region leaders can not get what they
want by fanning nationalist sentiment on the contrary, they should
contribute to resolving the conflict in a peaceful way. Any action
to the contrary would only fuel tensions in the South Caucasus and
undermine a cease-fire and fragile peace negotiations difficult.

THE PRESIDENT – Mr. Beneyto, registered in the debate, being absent
from the chamber, the floor is now Mrs. Gafarova.

Ms. Gafarova (Azerbaijan) – We speak of the transfer of Ramil Safarov.

It is a judicial proceeding. At no time, the legal conditions have
been violated. These legal mechanisms exist and the transfer does
not constitute a violation of law.

I return to events raised by my colleagues. In April 2001, an Armenian
terrorist, who had been sentenced to prison for committing a bombing
at Orly, was transferred to Armenia even though he was not a citizen
of Armenia. Senior Armenian officials have met at the airport hero.

Armenia was a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council
of Europe and yet nobody in this House has not responded nor has it
discussed here. Azerbaijan is critical today, why we remained silent
at that time?

Today we are discussing the case of an Azerbaijani citizen who has
already served eight years in prison and was pardoned, certainly,
but not cleared. If we talk about the case Safarov, should also
mention the reasons kill, but real crime that has its origin in the
situation of occupation. You have to put this case in the context of
the Nagorno-Karabakh. Members of the family Safarov killed before his
eyes. We acknowledge his crime, but he has not been convicted for it?

If we discuss the case Safarov, why not mention the murder of
Azerbaijanis in Armenia because we seem to forget that many crimes were
committed during the occupation of Azerbaijani lands by Armenians? Why
do not we talk about the President Sarkisyan said that he was at
the time of Khojaly these massacres? The occupation of Azerbaijani
territory is illegal and the Security Council was confirmed in 1993.

THE PRESIDENT – Thank you Mr. Salles.

Mr HALL (France) * – Colleagues, liberation and the glorification
of Mr. Ramil Safarov raised, rightly, very strong protests. Welcome
a hero a man who has committed a heinous act unworthy of a member
country of the Council of Europe.

I will not dwell on the facts, but the premeditation and brutality
of this crime are aggravating circumstances. Motivation, hatred of
Armenians and the total lack of remorse as Mr. Safarov.

This is why grace and promotion granted to Mr. Safarov by the President
of Azerbaijan after his extradition and on his return to his country
affect even more with our values, respect basic the life of another,
whatever.

A third member of our Assembly is involved: one where the massacre
occurred and who authorized the extradition to Azerbaijan Hungary. For
this case also raises the question of the application of the European
Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, a convention of the
Council of Europe.

Of course, a purely technical point of view, the convention has been
followed to the letter. Of course, Article 12 provides that States may
exercise their right of grace. But the condemnation of Ramil Safarov
imposed by a Hungarian judge had unanimously against it in Azerbaijan
Armenia had asked Hungary not to extradite the murderer. So why did
this decision was taken so quickly, without warning the Armenian?

Beyond the text and legal procedures, there is also the spirit of the
Convention: it’s main purpose is to promote the social reintegration of
persons sentenced to a foreigner deprived of his liberty as a result of
a criminal offense his sentence in his home country. Yes, his sentence!

The seriousness of the act – remember that Mr. Margaryan was slain
16 ax in his sleep – justified the severity of the sentence, life
imprisonment for a man responsible for his actions recognized by
experts, including Azerbaijan, the status of relations between Armenia
and Azerbaijan, all these elements should have led Hungary to greater
caution and restraint in the application of the Convention.

The attitude of Azerbaijan is itself unacceptable and must be
condemned. By releasing this man, this country has once again
removed any prospect of peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh
and questioned the Minsk process. Turning it into a national hero,
this country, member of the Council of Europe, brought shame to
our institution.

It is therefore necessary that Azerbaijan takes its responsibilities
and fulfill its commitments: to do this, Ramil Safarov must return
to prison and serve his sentence.

I turn now to my Azerbaijani colleagues to tell them that they are not
arguments that we have heard this afternoon, this is propaganda! The
confusion with the Nagorno-Karabakh was totally unbearable. Statements
by the representatives of your delegation this afternoon disgrace
in this place, which is the temple of human rights in Europe. If
Azerbaijan persists in this attitude, this case will remain an
indelible stain, this country will one day either delete. In the
meantime, I wonder about the legitimacy of Azerbaijan to serve on
the Council of Europe.

THE PRESIDENT – Thank you to Mr. Nagy Gaudi, the last speaker in
this debate.

Mr. GAUDI NAGY (Hungary) – I feel sorry for the victims of this
conflict all of which have special relations with Hungary – Armenian
Azerbaijani like. But I feel that we do here, that the tip of the
iceberg. Let’s not fall into the trap of “double standards”!

International organizations must mobilize to try to resolve the
conflict and address the convention of the Council of Europe Convention
on the transfer of prisoners.

The question is simple: the authorities of a country they can or not,
provide the grace of his doomed? From a legal point of view, this
principle is indisputable. But in our case, we must have a global
view of things, including the Nagorno-Karabakh. We must ensure that
Armenians and Azerbaijanis can live in harmony, in compliance with
European standards. He is not here to castigate Hungary, Armenia and
Azerbaijan! It is clear that the frozen conflicts must be resolved
on the basis of the principle of self-determination.

Could recall other crimes, such as the Irish who murdered Hungarian
children and has never been convicted! There are problems everywhere,
do not assemble these cruel acts hairpin political purposes.

THE PRESIDENT – The list of speakers.

Mr Chope would you intervene?

Mr. CHOPE (UK) * – Mr President, I did not expect to speak again.

I just want to thank all those and all those who spoke. If this
Chamber was able to hold a civilized debate on an issue as emotional,
this is already a good example to follow. I hope we will not have to
manage this type of incident in the future.

THE PRESIDENT – I remind you that the outcome of the current debate,
the Assembly is not required to vote. This debate has nevertheless
allowed an exchange of views between the interesting members of the
Assembly. Your conclusion, Mr. Stein, is actually the one that can be
drawn from this debate. The Board may, at a later stage, propose that
the subject matter may be referred to the committee responsible for
the report, and it is, I think, was suggested by Anne Brasseur. The
Board will discuss this possibility certainly tomorrow morning.