Tweet
LAWYERS TACKLE GENOCIDE WITHIN FRAMEWORK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
Armenian Weekly
Mon, Jul 18 2011
MINNEAPOLIS, Minn.-The University of St. Thomas School of Law, as
part of its "unique mission of integrating faith and reason in the
search for truth through a focus on morality and social justice,"
co-organized an international conference, in partnership with the
International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (a
division of the Zoryan Institute), to examine "The Armenian Genocide
within the Framework of National and International Law." The conference
took place on Feb. 5, 2010 in Minneapolis, in conjunction with the
Cafesjian Family Foundation and the Ohanessian Endowment Fund for
Justice and Peace Studies of the Minneapolis Foundation.
Prof. Dadrian John M. Sandy, the editor-in-chief of the Journal of
Law and Public Policy of the University of St. Thomas, stated, "When
I first heard about the Armenian Genocide from a fellow passenger on
a flight to Los Angeles, and learned the enormity of it, I was shocked
that I had not come across this major historical event in my education
up to that time. I embarked on research on this subject, and the more I
learned, the more astonished I became that this was not taught as part
of American history in World War I, and the more I felt there was a
great deal still to be researched, especially from a legal perspective.
Thus, the idea of holding a conference for the purpose of preparing
a special issue of the university's Journal of Law and Public Policy
came to be."
Prof. Robert J. Delahunty of the law school, who served as moderator,
reaffirmed the university's position that the conference proceeds from
the understanding that the Armenian Genocide is an established fact.
One of the reasons for this position is that the International
Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), the world's foremost body of
researchers in the field of genocide studies, has unanimously affirmed
that "it is indisputable that the Armenian Genocide is proven history."
Mark L. Movsesian, professor of contract law at St. John's University,
described how the reform movement (Tanzimat)-intended to provide
equality for the non-Muslim minorities in the Ottoman Empire in the
19th century-failed. This was because the ruling elite and society at
large could not accept it. The resentment was twofold: a) the reforms
broke the covenant between the superior protector group, Muslims, and
the subservient, protected groups, the non-Muslims; and b) they felt
the reforms were imposed by the European Powers and were considered
outside interference. This helped make possible the mass violence of
the Hamidian Massacres, in which some 200,000 Armenians were killed.
It can also be seen as a precursor to the genocide because the mass
killings went unpunished.
Prof. Vahakn N. Dadrian, the director of genocide research at the
Zoryan Institute, and an expert in history and international law,
described the significance of the Allied Powers' declaration on
May 24, 1915 that they would hold personally responsible for "these
new crimes of Turkey against humanity and civilization." This set a
precedent in the development of international law on crimes against
humanity. He then described how the national law of the Ottoman Empire,
particularly the Military Tribunals, dealt with the Armenian mass
killings by prosecuting those crimes immediately after World Wa I.
William A. Schabas, the director of the Irish Centre for Human Rights
at the National University of Ireland, Galway, and currently president
of the IAGS, addressed the subject of "The Retroactive Applicability
of the UN Genocide Convention to the Armenian Genocide." He affirmed
that what happened to the Armenians in 1915 can properly be termed
genocide, and that the actions of the Ottoman government constituted
the crime of genocide. Prosecution for this crime under the UN Genocide
Convention is not likely, however, as there are no longer individuals
alive to prosecute. However, given that the Turkish state is the
inheritor of the Ottoman Empire, it could be possible to prosecute
the Turkish state for crimes against humanity.
Geoffrey Robertson, QC, one of Britain's leading human rights lawyers,
submitted a video recording of his speech, "Politics, Government, and
the Armenian Genocide in the United Kingdom." Robertson discussed in
particular his expose of how the British Foreign Office suppressed
information and misled parliament on the truth of the Armenian
Genocide, affecting British foreign policy greatly and resulting in
Britain's current stance of not recognizing the genocide, but merely
calling it a tragedy. This position is at odds with the position of
the British government at the time of the Armenian Genocide, when
they called it a crime against humanity and civilization. Robertson's
research into this discrepancy shows that the current position of
the British government is driven by political and commercial interests.
Eren Keskin, an award-winning Turkish human rights attorney,
participated by telephone from Turkey. She spoke forcefully about the
Armenian Genocide and the importance of Turkey's apologizing for it.
She explained the militaristic foundation of the Turkish Republic
and the continuity of the military mindset of 1915 and that of the
Turkish state today. This militaristic mindset causes the Turkish
state to suppress dissent and punish what it considers insults to
"Turkishness." Keskin spoke movingly about the threats and abuse she
has endured personally as an advocate for human rights in Turkey.
Mark C. Fleming is a partner in the Boston office of Wilmer Cutler
Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP. He prepared an amicus curiae brief on the
appeal in the Griswold v. Driscoll case, in which the Massachusetts
Board of Education was being sued, based on the First Amendment, to
allow "contra-genocide" materials on a list of suggested educational
resources for teaching the Armenian Genocide. Initially the case was
dismissed and Massachusetts was free to list the resources of its
choosing, but the case is now under appeal.
Roger W. Smith, Professor Emeritus of Government at the College
of William and Mary, spoke on the legal and philosophical aspects
of laws penalizing genocide denial. While genocide denial is
dangerous and continues the victimization of the target group, he
said, preventing free speech in such cases has its own, serious and
negative consequences.
Ziya Meral, a Turkish researcher, writer, and Ph.D. candidate in
political science at Cambridge University, as discussant for the
conference, masterfully commented on numerous issues that were raised
by the other speakers. He spoke about the need for the people of Turkey
to accept the reality of the Armenian Genocide and said that only
Turkish society have the power to change Turkey's policy of denial.
The papers from this conference will be published in the summer issue
of the university's Journal of Law and Public Policy. Through this
publication, it is hoped that awareness among policymakers will be
raised to strengthen the legal framework, so that all cases of genocide
are treated with justice and that politics or economic interest do
not obstruct the application of the law nationally or internationally.
The International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies
(a division of the Zoryan Institute) is dedicated to the study and
dissemination of knowledge regarding the phenomenon of genocide in
all of its aspects to create an awareness of it as an ongoing scourge
and promote the necessity of preventing it.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Armenian Weekly
Mon, Jul 18 2011
MINNEAPOLIS, Minn.-The University of St. Thomas School of Law, as
part of its "unique mission of integrating faith and reason in the
search for truth through a focus on morality and social justice,"
co-organized an international conference, in partnership with the
International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (a
division of the Zoryan Institute), to examine "The Armenian Genocide
within the Framework of National and International Law." The conference
took place on Feb. 5, 2010 in Minneapolis, in conjunction with the
Cafesjian Family Foundation and the Ohanessian Endowment Fund for
Justice and Peace Studies of the Minneapolis Foundation.
Prof. Dadrian John M. Sandy, the editor-in-chief of the Journal of
Law and Public Policy of the University of St. Thomas, stated, "When
I first heard about the Armenian Genocide from a fellow passenger on
a flight to Los Angeles, and learned the enormity of it, I was shocked
that I had not come across this major historical event in my education
up to that time. I embarked on research on this subject, and the more I
learned, the more astonished I became that this was not taught as part
of American history in World War I, and the more I felt there was a
great deal still to be researched, especially from a legal perspective.
Thus, the idea of holding a conference for the purpose of preparing
a special issue of the university's Journal of Law and Public Policy
came to be."
Prof. Robert J. Delahunty of the law school, who served as moderator,
reaffirmed the university's position that the conference proceeds from
the understanding that the Armenian Genocide is an established fact.
One of the reasons for this position is that the International
Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), the world's foremost body of
researchers in the field of genocide studies, has unanimously affirmed
that "it is indisputable that the Armenian Genocide is proven history."
Mark L. Movsesian, professor of contract law at St. John's University,
described how the reform movement (Tanzimat)-intended to provide
equality for the non-Muslim minorities in the Ottoman Empire in the
19th century-failed. This was because the ruling elite and society at
large could not accept it. The resentment was twofold: a) the reforms
broke the covenant between the superior protector group, Muslims, and
the subservient, protected groups, the non-Muslims; and b) they felt
the reforms were imposed by the European Powers and were considered
outside interference. This helped make possible the mass violence of
the Hamidian Massacres, in which some 200,000 Armenians were killed.
It can also be seen as a precursor to the genocide because the mass
killings went unpunished.
Prof. Vahakn N. Dadrian, the director of genocide research at the
Zoryan Institute, and an expert in history and international law,
described the significance of the Allied Powers' declaration on
May 24, 1915 that they would hold personally responsible for "these
new crimes of Turkey against humanity and civilization." This set a
precedent in the development of international law on crimes against
humanity. He then described how the national law of the Ottoman Empire,
particularly the Military Tribunals, dealt with the Armenian mass
killings by prosecuting those crimes immediately after World Wa I.
William A. Schabas, the director of the Irish Centre for Human Rights
at the National University of Ireland, Galway, and currently president
of the IAGS, addressed the subject of "The Retroactive Applicability
of the UN Genocide Convention to the Armenian Genocide." He affirmed
that what happened to the Armenians in 1915 can properly be termed
genocide, and that the actions of the Ottoman government constituted
the crime of genocide. Prosecution for this crime under the UN Genocide
Convention is not likely, however, as there are no longer individuals
alive to prosecute. However, given that the Turkish state is the
inheritor of the Ottoman Empire, it could be possible to prosecute
the Turkish state for crimes against humanity.
Geoffrey Robertson, QC, one of Britain's leading human rights lawyers,
submitted a video recording of his speech, "Politics, Government, and
the Armenian Genocide in the United Kingdom." Robertson discussed in
particular his expose of how the British Foreign Office suppressed
information and misled parliament on the truth of the Armenian
Genocide, affecting British foreign policy greatly and resulting in
Britain's current stance of not recognizing the genocide, but merely
calling it a tragedy. This position is at odds with the position of
the British government at the time of the Armenian Genocide, when
they called it a crime against humanity and civilization. Robertson's
research into this discrepancy shows that the current position of
the British government is driven by political and commercial interests.
Eren Keskin, an award-winning Turkish human rights attorney,
participated by telephone from Turkey. She spoke forcefully about the
Armenian Genocide and the importance of Turkey's apologizing for it.
She explained the militaristic foundation of the Turkish Republic
and the continuity of the military mindset of 1915 and that of the
Turkish state today. This militaristic mindset causes the Turkish
state to suppress dissent and punish what it considers insults to
"Turkishness." Keskin spoke movingly about the threats and abuse she
has endured personally as an advocate for human rights in Turkey.
Mark C. Fleming is a partner in the Boston office of Wilmer Cutler
Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP. He prepared an amicus curiae brief on the
appeal in the Griswold v. Driscoll case, in which the Massachusetts
Board of Education was being sued, based on the First Amendment, to
allow "contra-genocide" materials on a list of suggested educational
resources for teaching the Armenian Genocide. Initially the case was
dismissed and Massachusetts was free to list the resources of its
choosing, but the case is now under appeal.
Roger W. Smith, Professor Emeritus of Government at the College
of William and Mary, spoke on the legal and philosophical aspects
of laws penalizing genocide denial. While genocide denial is
dangerous and continues the victimization of the target group, he
said, preventing free speech in such cases has its own, serious and
negative consequences.
Ziya Meral, a Turkish researcher, writer, and Ph.D. candidate in
political science at Cambridge University, as discussant for the
conference, masterfully commented on numerous issues that were raised
by the other speakers. He spoke about the need for the people of Turkey
to accept the reality of the Armenian Genocide and said that only
Turkish society have the power to change Turkey's policy of denial.
The papers from this conference will be published in the summer issue
of the university's Journal of Law and Public Policy. Through this
publication, it is hoped that awareness among policymakers will be
raised to strengthen the legal framework, so that all cases of genocide
are treated with justice and that politics or economic interest do
not obstruct the application of the law nationally or internationally.
The International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies
(a division of the Zoryan Institute) is dedicated to the study and
dissemination of knowledge regarding the phenomenon of genocide in
all of its aspects to create an awareness of it as an ongoing scourge
and promote the necessity of preventing it.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress