Tweet
LATIF HUSEYNOV: "CLAIMS OF KARABAKH ARMENIANS FOR SELF-DETERMINATION ARE LEGALLY UNFOUNDED"
Today.Az
http://www.today.az/news /politics/44946.html
May 13 2008
Azerbaijan
Day.Az interview with Latif Huseynov, chief of department of
constitutional legislation of Azerbaijan's Milli Medjlis, member of
Consultative Committee of the UN Council of Human Rights.
-How would you comment on the announcement of speaker of Armenian
parliament Tigran Torosyan in Day.Az interview that "the right
of Karabakh for self-determination, including, independence, is
blameless"? Do the principles of territorial integrity and national
right for self-determination clash in the Karabakh problem?
-No, everything is clear in this issue. In this case, Armenians
have no right for self-determination. If as a basic postulate,
we take that Armenians as a people are beneficiaries of the right
for self-determination, then another issue, but in this case, the
basic postulate is incorrect, and we can not consider Armenians as
a subject of the right for self-determination. This means that this
minority, residing in Azerbaijan, has due rights and Azerbaijani
government should ensure their rights, like to any other minorities,
and minorities can only self-determine within a single state and as
part of the population.
Claims of any national minority for self-determination violates
similar rights of the remaining population, separation of any part
of the population deprives the majority of their rights.
This means that the basic postulate is incorrect in this issue,
therefore, everything is clear for lawyers.
-Is the fact that Armenians have already self-determined within
Armenia taken into account?
-No, I do not use this as an argument. Armenians, residing in
Azerbaijan, are a part of the population of the country, they
are a minority, due to linguistic, religious and other subjective
characteristics. And in line with it we already ensure their rights
of minorities.
-I would like to touch upon the reformation of the Azerbaijani
legislation. Presidential elections are coming and authorities discuss
reformation of the electoral legislation with the experts of the
Venice Commission. When will the next round of bilateral talks be held?
-In the principle, the exchange of views between them are not just
talks. Our cooperation may proceed in other format. Official talks
between representatives of the Venice Commission and Azerbaijani
government take place, when the sides achieve any definite results,
while the cooperation between us is developing in the continuous
work regime.
-Will the amended electoral code be adopted during the spring session
of the parliament?
-Yes, it will.
-Will it consider recommendations of some local and foreign
organizations to review the composition of the election commissions
on the parity basis?
-This issue is not discussed and no one intends to change the
composition of the election commissions.
-Will the law "On Freedom of Assembly", planned to be adopted during
the current parliamentary session, also change?
-Changes will take place. I can only say that the draft, presented by
the Venice Commission, has been approved. The final judgment reads
the following: "If the said draft law is submitted and adopted in
Milli Medjlis in this form, it will meet all international standards.
-Opposition often accuses our law-makers of blind copying of standard
acts, adopted by other countries, instead of working out the laws
independently, considering the national features. What would you
respond to it?
-Of course, I do not agree with it. This is a completely unfounded
opinion. Primarily, such putting of the question should not imply
that Azerbaijani legislation will not meet our realities or that
these laws would be bad and would not be implemented. This position
is erroneous. I can list many examples from the developed countries,
for example, from the legislative practice of Japan, when laws and
even the Constitution of the country were written by others, in this
case-Americans.
There are some standards and better practice and good examples
and these examples should be taken into account no matter whether
they are reflected in the international documents or are used by
other countries. Naturally, national realities should be taken into
account if they are of critical importance for the implementation of
a law. For example, if they are connected with the mentality, history
and traditions. Let's take the law "On electric signature". I think
this law should be copied as it is the law on innovations, on new
technologies. Here the copied law in case of normal implementation
could be successful.
It is quite another matter in the case of the law "On prevention of
domestic violence". Naturally, this law should take into account
Azerbaijani realities, as this issue is closely connected with
mentality and traditions of the Azerbaijani people.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Today.Az
http://www.today.az/news /politics/44946.html
May 13 2008
Azerbaijan
Day.Az interview with Latif Huseynov, chief of department of
constitutional legislation of Azerbaijan's Milli Medjlis, member of
Consultative Committee of the UN Council of Human Rights.
-How would you comment on the announcement of speaker of Armenian
parliament Tigran Torosyan in Day.Az interview that "the right
of Karabakh for self-determination, including, independence, is
blameless"? Do the principles of territorial integrity and national
right for self-determination clash in the Karabakh problem?
-No, everything is clear in this issue. In this case, Armenians
have no right for self-determination. If as a basic postulate,
we take that Armenians as a people are beneficiaries of the right
for self-determination, then another issue, but in this case, the
basic postulate is incorrect, and we can not consider Armenians as
a subject of the right for self-determination. This means that this
minority, residing in Azerbaijan, has due rights and Azerbaijani
government should ensure their rights, like to any other minorities,
and minorities can only self-determine within a single state and as
part of the population.
Claims of any national minority for self-determination violates
similar rights of the remaining population, separation of any part
of the population deprives the majority of their rights.
This means that the basic postulate is incorrect in this issue,
therefore, everything is clear for lawyers.
-Is the fact that Armenians have already self-determined within
Armenia taken into account?
-No, I do not use this as an argument. Armenians, residing in
Azerbaijan, are a part of the population of the country, they
are a minority, due to linguistic, religious and other subjective
characteristics. And in line with it we already ensure their rights
of minorities.
-I would like to touch upon the reformation of the Azerbaijani
legislation. Presidential elections are coming and authorities discuss
reformation of the electoral legislation with the experts of the
Venice Commission. When will the next round of bilateral talks be held?
-In the principle, the exchange of views between them are not just
talks. Our cooperation may proceed in other format. Official talks
between representatives of the Venice Commission and Azerbaijani
government take place, when the sides achieve any definite results,
while the cooperation between us is developing in the continuous
work regime.
-Will the amended electoral code be adopted during the spring session
of the parliament?
-Yes, it will.
-Will it consider recommendations of some local and foreign
organizations to review the composition of the election commissions
on the parity basis?
-This issue is not discussed and no one intends to change the
composition of the election commissions.
-Will the law "On Freedom of Assembly", planned to be adopted during
the current parliamentary session, also change?
-Changes will take place. I can only say that the draft, presented by
the Venice Commission, has been approved. The final judgment reads
the following: "If the said draft law is submitted and adopted in
Milli Medjlis in this form, it will meet all international standards.
-Opposition often accuses our law-makers of blind copying of standard
acts, adopted by other countries, instead of working out the laws
independently, considering the national features. What would you
respond to it?
-Of course, I do not agree with it. This is a completely unfounded
opinion. Primarily, such putting of the question should not imply
that Azerbaijani legislation will not meet our realities or that
these laws would be bad and would not be implemented. This position
is erroneous. I can list many examples from the developed countries,
for example, from the legislative practice of Japan, when laws and
even the Constitution of the country were written by others, in this
case-Americans.
There are some standards and better practice and good examples
and these examples should be taken into account no matter whether
they are reflected in the international documents or are used by
other countries. Naturally, national realities should be taken into
account if they are of critical importance for the implementation of
a law. For example, if they are connected with the mentality, history
and traditions. Let's take the law "On electric signature". I think
this law should be copied as it is the law on innovations, on new
technologies. Here the copied law in case of normal implementation
could be successful.
It is quite another matter in the case of the law "On prevention of
domestic violence". Naturally, this law should take into account
Azerbaijani realities, as this issue is closely connected with
mentality and traditions of the Azerbaijani people.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress