168․amthe international law specialist Ara Ghazaryanin a conversation with the ECHR, he referred to the examination of interstate and individual complaints at the ECHR. In this context, the specialist also emphasized the issue of the right of return of the population of Nagorno Karabakh, as well as talking about the imaginary Azerbaijani rhetoric about “300 thousand Azerbaijanis”, Azerbaijani aspirations and the inadequate response of the Armenian side in many issues.

Ara Ghazaryan’s professional observations are below․

• Yes, there is an obligation to waive interstate complaints bilaterally in various instances, but this will not prevent individuals from filing complaints as long as these two states do not have instruments in place to prevent, detect, or investigate such violations.

• In the “Peace Treaty” project, which was published, there is no mechanism of return, there is no mechanism to investigate the committed criminal acts. As long as all the means of legal protection are missing there, citizens can apply to the international court. However, they should not wait too long, because there is also a criterion for judicial admission.

• Work is being done almost every day in the direction of sending complaints regarding the property rights and the right of return of persons forcibly displaced from Artsakh.

• We have 9 judgments against Azerbaijan, 8 of which are at the execution stage. Azerbaijan does not declare that it will not comply, but it constantly maneuvers for various reasons, delays and tries to connect it with the “peace agreement”, but I mentioned that there are no mechanisms in the peace agreement. We have 22 judgments in cases of 2016 and from 2022 until now about 1000 applications, which were submitted on the basis of the property rights and right of return of people forcibly displaced from Artsakh.

• If we talk about 1,000 complaints, then approximately 3-4,000 people have applied, but we have to ensure the initiation of these judicial processes in the direction of the rights of 120,000 people. In other words, at least several tens of thousands of applications, based on property rights, still need to be sent. Can you imagine the resources we are talking about that have not been done yet, which I don’t know if we will manage to do or not?

• The important thing is that the case is registered, and it is an individual, legal process that must be done, and here, of course, we need resources, workers, specialists to be able to take these cases completely to the European Court, because the European Court will not wait forever.

• Now I also want to appeal to the people of Artsakh: don’t delay, apply to the European Court even through us, don’t think that you can do it in 2, 3, 4 years. time is running out, please be sure to stand up for your rights and even if you are told it is a long process, yes, it is true, still apply, even for your children.

• The response is not adequate because Azerbaijan presents a pseudo idea under the theory. When the president just decides 300,000 a priori. when, where, how did you decide on 300,000? Isn’t it determined by processes, a whole process that takes years? Maybe 1,000 people can barely gather in Azerbaijan or 10,000 people to consider Armenia their homeland. I am not against their return, if they really consider Armenia their homeland, are ready to accept citizenship, are ready to accept all cultural heritage, etc., etc. But those people do not speak in Azerbaijan. only the representatives of the public authorities, who are implementing some pseudo initiative, speak. The Armenian authorities do not respond to this. Private groups are forced to respond, but what we say does not receive such a wide response, because we can only speak through legal processes, and I, by and large, do not deal with publicity.

• Return should be an individual process. each person needs an individual procedure, for example, in the 80s and 90s, it was regulated by civil law relations. for the most part, the citizens themselves agreed on a horizontal plane, there was even an exchange of houses.

• The mechanisms should be fixed in the annexes of the peace treaty. only 6-7 applications can be about the return. We don’t have all this. that’s why to say just like that: let’s return 300,000, very good, where are those 300,000, when did they apply, where did they apply, did they really leave property or are they adventurers, etc.?

• The issue of the return of native Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh cannot, in principle, constrain the RA authorities, because they were citizens of the Republic of Armenia, the residents of Artsakh are ethnic Armenians, and Armenia accepted them all, that is, took them under its protection, which means that they should also be engaged in their legal protection, and not only, let’s say, social benefits, etc., etc. In that sense, it is understandable again, Armenia’s response is inadequate.

• If Azerbaijan raises the right of return, the Armenian government should also raise the issue, but I don’t seem to have heard about the Armenian government raising the right of return, and the right of return has many components in it, starting with property rights, or if there is no property, compensation, compensation should also be made for moral, not only material damage, including organizing mutual visits. It is a complex series of measures that must be regulated, and for regulation, a normative base is needed, which these two states have not created.

• Armenia, by and large, is a victim, although Azerbaijan always tries to play the role of a victim, yes, we have lost territories, we have forcibly displaced people.

Zaruhi Dilanyan

—