In recent weeks, it was reported in various Azerbaijani media outlets that Azerbaijan submitted an official complaint against Armenia to the European Court on Human Rights. They claim that there is evidence that 3,890 Azerbaijani civilians went missing during the Karabakh war and Armenia has not taken any measures to investigate the fate of these individuals. They also argue that Armenia indiscriminately shelled Azerbaijani towns and villages with cluster munitions, phosphorus bombs and long-range missiles, which killed 93 civilians and maimed 423 others.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
The official complaint also accuses Armenia of denying Azerbaijani refugees the right to reclaim their homes, after 30 years of Armenia occupying the territory in violation of four UN Security Council resolutions. During this period, various Azerbaijani sources noted that trees were uprooted, cultural heritage sites and religious sites were desecrated, and homes were demolished. Azerbaijan claims that efforts to destroy the area intensified in the period leading up to Azerbaijan reclaiming parts of Karabakh. Since then, Armenia has also submitted their own petition. Yet the question remains, how will the European Court on Human Rights rule?
Council of Europe Secretary-General Marija Pejcinovic Buric stated recently that the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Social Charter comprise "the soul of modern Europe." She noted that compliance with the European Court on Human Rights is not a "kind request" but a "binding requirement," when discussing the court's demand for Turkey to release Osman Kavala, who was arrested for allegedly orchestrating the Gezi Park Protests.
However, this same court that is rough on Turkish authorities also last year ruled in favor of BDS activists in France, claiming that the French government did not have the right to charge BDS supporters with "incitement to commit economic discrimination." The European Court on Human Rights forced the French government to pay compensation to 11 BDS activists, claiming that the French government violated their "freedom of speech."
More recently, the European Court of Justice ruled that Belgium has the right to bar kosher and halal slaughtering, which is a clear violation of "freedom of religion," as many Muslims and Jews view slaughtering an animal after stunning it to be religiously forbidden. Prominent anti-Semitism scholar Manfred Gerstenfeld called this ruling "an affront to Muslims and Jews across Europe." However, so far, the European Court on Human Rights has had nothing to say about it.
Nitzana Darshan-Leitner, president of Shurat HaDin, said, "I think the European Court for Justice, which has the ideology of the European governments has a bias towards Israel. Therefore, the court reflects this tendency. It reflects hypocrisy, as there are other countries that violate human rights that they are doing nothing about. They jump to seize the opportunity to attack Israel."
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
However, Darshan-Leitner does not believe that the fact Azerbaijan is a strategic ally of the State of Israel will necessarily make the European Court on Human Rights biased against them: "Every country does its own calculations when it comes to its relationship with Israel when it comes to its own legal system. The same for the ICC, the European Court of Justice and the European Court on Human Rights."
Nevertheless, an Azerbaijani government official noted that he is concerned about the matter. The European Center for Law and Justice found that 22 out of the 100 justices that served in the European Court on Human Rights between 2009 and 2019 had strong links with far-left wing NGOs, such as the George Soros' Open Society Foundation, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, etc. In 80 cases cited by the European Parliament, these judges ruled based upon the whims of their previous employers.
According to the European Parliament, "This is a very serious situation because it calls into question the independence of the rule of law and the impartiality of judges. Moreover, it contravenes the rules that the ECHR imposes on the states in this regard."
All the NGOs cited above have an anti-Israel bias. While Human Rights Watch has been impartial in its coverage of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, both the Open Society Foundation and Amnesty International have written reports generally slanting towards the Armenian side.
Mendi Safadi, who heads the Safadi Center for International Diplomacy, Research, Public Relations and Human Rights, noted that the European Union and other important members of the international community have ignored what happened in the Karabakh region over the years to the point that many people today do not know who was the source of this conflict.
"The time has come for justice to be restored in this conflict and for the international community to enforce a fair agreement, and to return sovereignty to the control of the region's owners. As long as the region lacks absolute sovereignty, the conflict will continue to cause tensions and human rights violations," he said."
Rachel Avraham is a political analyst working at the Safadi Center for International Diplomacy, Research, Public Relations and Human Rights. She is the author of "Women and Jihad: Debating Palestinian Female Suicide Bombings in the American, Israeli and Arab Media."