Author: Kanayan Tamar

FRENCH COURT CANCELS ‘GENOCIDE’ DENIAL BILL

Hurriyet Daily News
Feb 28 2012
Turkey

France’s Constitutional Council has struck down a government-backed law
criminalizing denials of the 1915 events as genocide on the grounds
that it contradicts the French constitution in a move that looks set
to ward off a deepening crisis in Turkish-French ties.

Ankara expressed its satisfaction with the law and said this would
remove hurdles standing in the way of the improvement of relations
between the two countries.

The council’s decision was posted on the official website late
yesterday after a month-long examination of the much discussed law.

“The council considered the law unconstitutional,” read the press
statement made by the council, which based its verdict on the relevant
articles of the “1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the
Citizen,” the fundamental document of the French Revolution. It said
the law was not in line with the declaration’s 6th and 11the articles,
which highlight freedom of expression and thought, one of the main
pillars of the democracy.

“Therefore the Constitutional Council has declared the
unconstitutionality of Article 1 of the law and consequently Article 2,
which is not separable,” it said.

There were comments that the court’s decision would also put the
validity of a 2001 law recognizing Armenian genocide claims into a
legal discussion. However, the council’s decision said this did not
affect the 2001 law as it was not asked to make an assessment on
that legislation.

“We hope those who want to make politics over history will have a
lesson from this verdict,” Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told
reporters in a statement after the release of the verdict. “This is
a very positive decision. I thank the members of the council for the
respectful decision. It will set a precedent as well,” he added.”This
will be exemplary,” Davutoglu told journalists yesterday evening. “It
is an important step regarding [the prevention] of small calculations
gaining legal ground. We hope that those who seek political aims over
the histories of societies get a legal lesson.”

The decision allows the creation of an environment in which all
historical issues can be freely discussed in accordance with freedom
of expression, Davutoglu added. “Thus, it is a positive contribution
regarding Turkish-Armenian ties.”

The law, introduced by French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s party was
first approved by Parliament on Dec. 22 and then by the French Senate
on Jan. 23. The measure set a punishment of up to one year in prison
and a fine of 45,000 euros for those who deny or outrageously minimize
the killings.

With the high court decision, the law is null and void and the entire
legislative process will have to begin from the very beginning.

The adoption of the law in Parliament and the Senate drew Ankara’s
strong reactions with a package of sanctions against France. Its
eight-article sanctions were focused on banning French military using
Turkish airspace and territorial waters, cutting some political ties
with indirect threats to boycott French goods.

Apart from diplomatic initiatives, Turkey also mobilized large French
companies which had significant investments in Turkey to urge French
lawmakers to take the law to the council. A sum of 142 lawmakers
and senators appealed to the court in late January after the Senate
approved it. In a move to give time for collecting signatures for
taking the law to court, Sarkozy did not rush to sign the law which
would have put the law into effect.

SARKOZY ORDERS DRAFTING OF NEW ARMENIAN GENOCIDE LAW

Expatica France

Feb 28 2012

President Nicolas Sarkozy ordered his government to draft a new law
punishing denial of the Armenian genocide Tuesday after France’s top
court struck down a previous bill.

France’s Constitutional Court earlier Tuesday ruled that the law,
backed by Sarkozy, was unconstitutional as it infringed on freedom
of expression.

In a statement, Sarkozy’s office said: “He has ordered the government
to prepare a new draft, taking into account the Constitutional
Council’s decision.”

Sarkozy noted “the great disappointment and profound sadness of all
those who welcomed with hope and gratitude the adoption of this law
aimed at providing protection against revisionism.”

Genocide denial “is intolerable and so must be punished,” the statement
said, adding that Sarkozy would soon be meeting with representatives
of the Armenian community in France.

MP OF NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF FRANCE VALERIE BOYER TO CONTINUE HER FIGHT

ARMENPRESS
FEBRUARY 29, 2012
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 29, ARMENPRESS: The decision of the Constitutional
Council of France was a great disappointment not only for French
Armenians but French people fighting for human rights as well, MP from
the National Assembly of France Valerie Boyer wrote in her statement.

“Like any decision of the Constitutional Council, this one as well is
based on the comment of the Constitution but even if it is impossible
to appeal this decision, it must be considered very disputable,”
Boyer said, stressing that many Constitution experts consider this
bill constitutional but unfortunately their voice was not heard.

The French MP also stresses that the inequality France displays toward
the Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide is inadmissible.

In her opinion the Constitution is being commented with discrimination,
thus a new bill should be drafted like President Sarkozy has
assigned. “This legislative process is very crucial for our country
and I am proud that I have participated in it in spite of pressures
I have been subjected to,” Boyer stressed.

The MP said the decision of the Constitutional Council is another
impediment which will force to focus efforts for continuing the fight.

“The pressures of a foreign state harm the greatness of France. As
to me, I will continue the fight till the end,” Valerie Boyer stressed.

POGROMS OF ARMENIANS IN SUMGAIT IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY

ARMENPRESS
FEBRUARY 29, 2012
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 29, ARMENPRESS: Sumgait pogroms have remained in
past but Turkey and Azerbaijan continues such like policy till now,
co-author of the “Common Genocide: Sumgait, February 1988” film Marina
Grigoryan told the reporters today.

MP, another co-author of the film Larisa Alaverdyan said it is
necessary to give appropriate assessment to what happened in Sumgait
and present the legal consequences of it to the international
community. Alaverdyan noted that she is not going to reject her
statement put into circulation in the NA on recognizing all the
activities of Azerbaijan as genocide and subject that country to
responsibility. “Sumgait is a crime not only against Azerbaijani
Armenians or all Armenians, it is a crime against the whole humanity,”
the MP said. She said one cannot keep silence and wait till the truth
appears. Moreover, the false information spreads more rapidly.

Marina Grigoryan rated high Diaspora’s participation in the solution
of the issue. The potential of the Diaspora must also be used in
confronting the challenges.

Grigoryan offered to apply to the European Court of Human Rights on
behalf of the victims of Sumgait.

Within the framework of “Common Genocide” project starting from
November 2009 already four documentary films have been presented. Soon
another film will be presented about the forcible displacement of 27
Armenian-populated villages of Artsakh.

RUTHLESS AND MINDLESS VOTING
HAKOB BADALYAN

Story from Lragir.am News:

Published: 11:03:42 – 29/02/2012

On February 29, the consideration of the draft law on 100%
proportional representation will be discussed in the parliament. The
Republican Party is against it, which means the OYP is against too.

Heritage and ARF Dashnaktsutyun support the bill, and a different
position of theirs would be strange because they are the authors of
the draft.

Gagik Tsarukyan lets the party members free in their choice and each
member should vote in accord with their conscience and mind, as member
of the parliamentary group of the party Naira Zohrabyan stated.

So, we find out there are also cases when the MPs don’t vote in accord
with their conscience and mind but under the pressure of someone else.

In other words, the party leader instructs the party members to vote
this or another way.

This situation is present not only within the BHP but also in all
other political forces of Armenia, especially those governmental. For
example, the Republican Party does not differ at all in this sense and
takes each step as Serzh Sargsyan says.

But in these cases, we cannot be sure that the MPs vote against their
conscience and mind. After all, MPs are also possible to have no
conscience or mind.

In general, the situation looks like a paradox when it is stated that
the leader of a party lets free the MPs to vote in accord with their
conscience and mind. Does it mean that if the party leaders want they
can force MPs a ruthless and mindless voting?

The issue on the lack of democracy within the parties is a priority in
terms of the lack of development of the system in Armenia, one of the
major vices of the political system when the parties fighting for the
establishment of democracy in the country, have not created democratic
mechanisms inside their own parties, and having a different opinion
means betrayal.

While, the party is a union of people with common values and ideas,
and not a sample forcing the same opinion to everyone and once out,
one will be punished.

The mechanisms of internal party democracy are seen among the
political unions in Armenia as attempts to intervene in the internal
affairs of the party. In other words, if there is no strong fist and
common behavior, the party can be destroyed from outside.

The same approach is present also in relation to the democracy of the
country when it is perceived as global treachery and a measure to
intervene in internal affairs of the country. In this context too, the
false idea on national unity is forced when any ideas on democracy and
rights are immediately assessed as an encroachment on the national
unity.

This situation in the parties and in the country makes clear the
prevalent thinking of the greater part of the Armenian parties
rendered them attaches of the Armenian ruling criminal-oligarchic
system even if these parties dwell on democracy, freedom of speech and
civil freedoms.

‘PUTIN’S ELECTION TO DO GOOD TO KARABAKH SETTLEMENT’

News.Az
Wed 29 February 2012 11:19 GMT | 11:19 Local Time

News.Az interviews member of the Russian Academy of Political Science,
doctor of political science, professor Andrei Baranov.

Do you think that Vladimir Putin will continue the active mediation
role in Karabakh settlement, which was played by Dmitriy Medvedev,
in case he returns to presidency in Russia?

I suppose that the newly elected president of Russia, whoever is
elected, will continue and intensify the mediation of our country in
Karabakh settlement. Russia is strategically interested in overcoming
forced conflicts-the heritage of the USSR collapse, in stability on
its southern borders, cardinal intensification of economic, transport
and cultural ties with the South Caucasus countries. The candidate
to Russian president Vladimir Putin has a stable popularity among
voters, judging from sociological data. If he wins the elections,
the personal experience of foreign policy activity gained in the
2000’s will help settle the conflict.

What role did Dmitriy Medvedev play as a Russian president in terms
of making achievements in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict?

As is known, Dmitriy Medvedev organized the tenth meeting of the heads
of Azerbaijan and Armenia in January of this year. This meeting can
be rated as moderate positive. In their joint statement of 23 January
of this year, the heads of all the three states, voiced readiness to
accelerate the agreement on main principles of the Karabakh conflict.

All participants to the negotiations admitted that an achievement has
been made in coordination of these main principles. The mediation of
Russia, United States and France, as the Minsk Group co-chairs was
assessed positively.

All the same, the political scientists and journalists of the
countries involved in the conflict give skeptical assessments to the
proposed measures of settlement. The potential of public diplomacy
in accelerating the fair resolution of the conflict is also assessed
skeptically in both Azerbaijan and Armenia. In addition, Medvedev’s
term is close to completion and the reduced activeness of diplomatic
efforts before inauguration of the new head of the Russian state is
quite natural.

In a declaration passed by results of the meeting in Sochi, the sides
fixed common understanding that further progress requires renouncing
of maximalist positions. Will Azerbaijan and Armenia further be able
to renounce their maximalist positions to achieve progress in the
conflict settlement?

Azerbaijan and Armenia are not ready today to soften their maximalist
positions to achieve serious breakthrough in the conflict settlement.

I would risk to suppose that the main motive of the obstinacy of
the sides is equal: the fear that the opponent will get guaranteed
advantage for its success: military, diplomatic, demographic and
others, which means it will apply force in a unilateral way. That
is the solution depends on the guarantees of the observance of the
contradictory interests of the parties, while no such guarantees have
been created.

It is necessary to have the rational approach the gross weight of the
Karabakh conflict in the overall geopolitics of the Greater Middle
East. A number of region, interconnected in the logic of communicating
vessels appear in the macroregion. Azerbaijan and Armenia are seemingly
waiting for the outcome of the escalation of military preparations
against Iran, the result of the November presidential elections in
the United States. If the United States and NATO establish their
geopolitical domination in the South Caucasus, Azerbaijan and Armenia
will have to make their positions closer though the example of Cyprus
shows that even EU membership did not result in the fair resolution
of the conflict.

What can be the implications and threats of the new war around Karabakh
conflict primarily for Russia, which is a direct neighbor?

Possible escalation of the Karabakh conflict and its return to
military actions would have sharp negative implications for Russia. In
particular, migration to Russia, including illegal, from the conflict
area may rise. The confrontation line would attract mercenaries and
terrorists, while turning into a ‘black hole’ of spreading violence.

The peacekeeping efforts of the OSCE and mediating countries would
be discredited. Frozen secessionist conflicts in the post-Soviet
space would be reanimated under the influence of the Karabakh ‘case’,
probably in Transdniestria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Crimea, western
part of Macedonia and Northern Kosovo.

Thus, the multipartite negotiation process with unbiased international
arbitrage remains the best method of solving the Karabakh conflict.

NEWSPAPER: ORINATS YERKIR IS LOSING MEMBERS

arminfo
Wednesday, February 29, 14:49

Businessman Misak Sargsyan has broken away from the Orinats Yerkir
party.

According to the Haykakan Zhamanak newspaper, Sargsyan, who owns the
Top Motors and Real Motors companies, first said that he did it because
of health problems but then admitted that it simply was not his place.

Earlier Orinats Yerkir expelled MP Gagik Bagdasaryan because of his
reluctance to do what the party said.

REPEAL OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE LAW RESULT OF TURKISH LOBBY’S PRESSURE – HAY DAT REP

Tert.am
29.02.12

Repeal of the law criminalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide by
the Constitutional Council of France was the result of the Turkish
lobby’s overt pressure.

“There is not any other explanation,” Hrach Varzhapetyan, Head of the
Hay Dat (Armenian Cause) office in France, said in an interview with
the Yerkir Media TV channel.

The Armenian community in France will not give up. “This law is of
paramount importance for all of us. We are ready to start the process
anew,” he said. Varzhapetyan announced his intention to initiate a
process of putting another bill on the French parliament’s agenda. He
noted that President Nicolas Sarkozy remains committed to his pledges:
discontent with the Constitutional Council’s ruling he ordered a new
bill to be drafted.

TURKISH PRESSURES, THREAT WON IN THIS ROUND – ARMENIAN POLITICIAN

news.am
February 29, 2012 | 12:50

YEREVAN. – It is not the end of the world that France’s Constitutional
Council deemed unconstitutional the bill that criminalizes the
denial of genocides-including the Armenian Genocide-, the opposition
ARF Dashnaktsutyun Party’s Political Affairs Bureau and Armenian
Cause Office Chief Giro Manoyan stated during a press conference
on Wednesday.

In his words, the Turkish pressures and threat-and to some extent, the
bribes, too-won in this round, which does not bring honor to France.

As per Manoyan, the French Armenian community already has announced
that everything does not end with this, since the activities will
commence with a new force so that the aforesaid bill is adopted.

TER PETROSSIAN N’EXCLUT PAS UNE COOPERATION AVEC ARMENIE PROSPERE
Gari

armenews.com
mardi 28 fevrier 2012

Si le parti Armenie prospère (BHK) de l’homme d’affaires Gaguik
Tsaroukian, semble avoir pacifie ses relations avec ses partenaires
de la coalition gouvernement, et au premier chef avec le Parti
republicain (HHK) du president Serge Sarkissian, a l’approche des
elections legislatives, le Congrès national armenien (HAK) n’a pas
renonce a l’idee d’une collaboration avec le parti au pouvoir.

Lundi 27 fevrier, Levon ter Petrossian, le leader de ce bloc de
formations d’opposition non parlementaires, a une fois encore tendu
la mains au parti de G. Tsaroukian, en laissant entendre que dans le
principe, il etait toujours dispose a cooperer avec le deuxième parti
de la coalition gouvernementale pour les prochaines legisaltives, en
mai. “Dans l’etat actuel des choses, et a en juger aux declarations
de ses leaders, le Parti Armenie prospere (BHK), est favorable a la
confrontation politique” a indique Arman Musinian, le porte parole
du HAK en ajoutant que “si Armenie prospère demontre dans les mois a
venir et le jour de l’election qu’il tient reellement a des elections
justes et libres, alors je pense qu’il y aura une large place a
la cooperation”.

Levon Ter Petrosian avait publiquement exprime sa disposition a
mettre en ~uvre une telle cooperation en novembre 2011en depit des
speculations sur les liens etroits unissant G. Tsaroukian a l’ancien
president Robert Kocharian, ennemi jure du HAK, dont on avait alors
suggere qu’il pourrait le soutenir au cas où il briguerait un autre
mandat en 2013.

S’exprimant lors d’une manifestation a Erevan, Ter Petrosian avait
declare que cela “pourrait radicalement changer l’equilibre des forces
politiques” dans le pays a l’approche du scrutin de mai 2012, et ”
servir de base a une coalition plus large des forces d’opposition”.

Ter Petrossian avait alors souligne les tensions croissantes entre
le BHK et le HHK, en appelant dans le meme temps G. Tsarukian a
“prendre clairement ses distances” avec Kotcharian.

Le BHK n’avait pas repondu a cette offre impromptue de Ter Petrossian,
les resposnsables du parti justifiant leur silence par le fait qu’ils
n’avaient recu aucune proposition officielle du HAk en vue d’une
cooperation et moins encore d’une alliance. Mais Musinian a reitere
l’offre de Ter Petrossian deux semaines après le ralliement remarque
au BHK de l’ancien ministre des affaires etrangères de R. Kotcharian,
Vartan Oskanian. Ce dernier avait alors invoque la necessite d’une
“reelle competition” entre le BHK et le HHK de S. Sarkissian. M.

Musinian a reaffirme que le president et son parti seront la “cible”
principale de l’alliance conduite par Ter Petrossian dans la campagne
electorale a venir. Et dans cette perspective, le BHK est activement
courtise.