The term “return of Azerbaijanis” should never be used and the “West Azerbaijan” occupation program should never be equated with the right of return of Artsakh Armenians.

You know that I persistently speak, write and fight against the use of wrong Azerbaijani terms, at the same time I call for a very direct political assessment of the threats coming from Azerbaijan. If the territory of our country is described with a term that has not existed in history for four years, it is declared a “new national goal”, huge money and resources are put on it, it is introduced into the education system, it means that it has become a problem of our national security for a long time, but we have not given it such an assessment yet.

Anyway, during the pre-election stage, I saw several times that the head of the “Wings of Unity” movement, Arman Tatoyan, said that the topic is closed for Azerbaijanis on international law platforms, there is no such right, it is about any “return” to the territory of the Republic of Armenia. This caught my attention. During a recent research, I turned to the former HRD, asking him to tell me on what basis that claim was made. Based on the materials provided to me by Tatoyan, it turned out that today there is no such international instance where Azerbaijanis can raise the issue of their alleged right to “return”. This issue is directly related to time limits, the record and response of which is best reflected by two of the most authoritative international judicial instances.

Thus, in the “Samadov v. Armenia” case of the ECtHR, the court was inadmissible to recognize the claim of the Azerbaijani applicant living in Karvachar against Armenia. The court noted that Armenia joined the ECHR in 2002, while the applicant filed the complaint in 2008, never justifying why he waited more than 15 years from the time of the alleged violation, and six years after Armenia’s accession, and just filed the complaint. The court considered these periods too long from the point of view of applying for legal protection. It is noteworthy that this decision was made by the members of the Chamber in 2021. It is no secret that Azerbaijan raised the issue of protecting the property rights of Azerbaijanis who left Artsakh and Armenia in the 1990s in the same interstate complaint filed against Armenia in 2021. However, with the decision of the ECHR in the “Samadov” case, the fate of those demands of Azerbaijan was predicted. they will be recognized as inadmissible on the basis of late submission.

More important is the judgment of the International Court of Justice dated 12.11.2024, by which the court recorded that it does not have jurisdiction to examine the claims presented by Azerbaijan, which refer to the period between 1993 and 1996, including the claims regarding the alleged deportations of Azerbaijanis.

Thus, it is obvious that in any case, no Azerbaijani can currently raise questions related to ownership or the right of return. Any such attempt will fail, taking into account the positions of two prestigious international courts.

Unlike Azerbaijanis, Artsakh Armenians continue to have the right to present such a claim, which has been established by international courts. I will address this topic in a separate post. And the meaning of this post is that when you are guided by the facts and a professional approach, you understand that all the cards are there to define this topic clearly as an invasion, this has nothing to do with “the right of return of Azerbaijanis”. And the one who compares this invasion plan with the right of return of Artsakh people is directly advocating in favor of Azerbaijan, “normalizing” Azerbaijani aggression.

Azerbaijanologist Tatev Hayrapetyan

—