ACCORDING TO STEPAN DANIELYAN, ANY RELIGION CAN BE CRITICIZED, BUT THERE SHOULD BE A CERTAIN LIMIT
January 13 2015
“It is difficult to give a definite assessment. Naturally, any form
of terrorism should be convicted and severely punished”, so responded
Director of “Partnership for Democracy” Center Stepan Danielyan,
in response to the question of Aravot.am as to how he will assess
the incident against Charlie Hebdo satirical weekly in Paris, and
whether it was a move against freedom of expression. Referring to the
limits of freedom of expression, Mr. Danielyan said, “If we estimate
only the issue of limits of freedom of expression without focusing on
the original fact of terrorism, which, I repeat, is a convicted and
unacceptable deed, then the right to freedom of expression is already
restricted by the law. For instance, the Criminal Code prohibits and
punishes preaching religious and racial hatred, interracial enmity,
call for war, people’s humiliation and so on. Whether the weekly
has gone beyond the limits or not, it is already a matter of legal
dispute. Some caricatures do really go beyond the limits and not
only in terms of Islam but other religions and not just in terms of
religions.” Mr. Danielyan sees a delicacy in this matter. “The French
claim that caricatures are involved in their cultural traditions,
and France is one of the most popular countries in the world, but the
French have already started to realize, and this case will help to
better realize that France is no longer a homogenous country. There
are millions of Muslims living here who have a different culture,
with which, willy-nilly, they have to take into account. This is the
reality. And it refers not only to France, but also Spain, Italy,
Sweden, Belgium and so on. This is a new situation, which implies
compromising with this phenomenon, I say again, willy-nilly.” To the
question of how he treats the caricatures on religion subjects, Mr.
Danielyan responded, “This is a complex matter. There are similar
cases at the European Court of Human Rights, which creates precedents,
but much depends on the interpretation of the law, in which political
and social situations are also taken into account. This case will
have its impact on the development of regulatory approaches. The
European science has much talked about the Islam, especially in the
19th and 20th centuries, there were many critical books and studies,
but none of the authors was subjected to terror, perhaps, the tone and
the intention of mere insulting is significant.” According to Stepan
Danielyan, any religion can be criticized, even present well-grounded
accusations, however, apparently, there should be a limit. To our next
question of whether there is a threat to Armenian media, especially
when there are so many caricatures published in our newspapers, Mr.
Danielyan replied, “There have always been terrorisms against
journalists in Armenia, though not so bloody. It is not always that
the journalists were correct, but lynching should be excluded, there
are courts for such cases, which, on the other hand, do not deserve
the trust by the majority of the public. It is also a serious problem.
Evidently, there are publications breaking all standards for specific
religious matters, but they continue their activities with no
punishment. That is our reality, too.”
Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
Read more at:
http://en.aravot.am/2015/01/13/168386/