Tweet
ARMENIANS PRESS FOR COURT RULING AGAINST TURKEY IN US
Today's Zaman, Turkey
Sept 9 2011
US Armenians, pressing for a court decision against Turkey for
violating the property rights of Ottoman Armenians during World War
I, have complained that the Turkish government has ignored a lawsuit
brought against Turkey in a Los Angeles court.
Plaintiffs argue that Turkey seized land belonging to their relatives
when its owners fled Anatolia during what Armenians call a genocide
campaign. The land in the southern province of Adana, which is now
occupied by the İncirlik Air Base used by the US military, was
then sold without the permission of the Armenian owners, according
to the lawyers of the plaintiffs. The complaints target Turkey and
two Turkish banks, the Central Bank of Turkey and Ziraat Bank.
Turkey had 60 day to answer the complaint, which expired on Aug. 19,
2011, but it has so far refused to answer. Lawyers for the plaintiffs
announced that on Sept. 6 the Turkish government is in default for
ignoring the lawsuit.
The default notice was entered on Sept. 1, 2011. The Central Bank of
Turkey and Ziraat Bank, on the other hand, requested and were given
an extension to respond to the complaints by Sept. 19.
"The US Department of State had sent a diplomatic note to Ankara
warning that the country is bound by law to defend itself against
the lawsuit," said Vartkes Yeghiayan of the Yeghiayan Law Firm,
one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs.
Lawyers claim by refusing to respond Turkey risks having the court rule
against it in absentia and add that damages could be as high as $100
million. Lawyer Gunay Evinch, who is representing the two banks in the
case, said on Friday that Turkey's refusal to respond to the Armenian
complaints indicates that Turkey sees it as a matter of sovereignty.
"Apparently, Turkey is refusing to appear before the court to
prevent another country from judging its history, in protection of
its sovereignty," lawyer Evinch was quoted by the Anatolia news agency.
Evinch also noted that the handling of such a fragile case by a state
court is controversial because this indicates that Washington has
given up its rights to shape foreign policy to a state court.
From: Baghdasarian
Today's Zaman, Turkey
Sept 9 2011
US Armenians, pressing for a court decision against Turkey for
violating the property rights of Ottoman Armenians during World War
I, have complained that the Turkish government has ignored a lawsuit
brought against Turkey in a Los Angeles court.
Plaintiffs argue that Turkey seized land belonging to their relatives
when its owners fled Anatolia during what Armenians call a genocide
campaign. The land in the southern province of Adana, which is now
occupied by the İncirlik Air Base used by the US military, was
then sold without the permission of the Armenian owners, according
to the lawyers of the plaintiffs. The complaints target Turkey and
two Turkish banks, the Central Bank of Turkey and Ziraat Bank.
Turkey had 60 day to answer the complaint, which expired on Aug. 19,
2011, but it has so far refused to answer. Lawyers for the plaintiffs
announced that on Sept. 6 the Turkish government is in default for
ignoring the lawsuit.
The default notice was entered on Sept. 1, 2011. The Central Bank of
Turkey and Ziraat Bank, on the other hand, requested and were given
an extension to respond to the complaints by Sept. 19.
"The US Department of State had sent a diplomatic note to Ankara
warning that the country is bound by law to defend itself against
the lawsuit," said Vartkes Yeghiayan of the Yeghiayan Law Firm,
one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs.
Lawyers claim by refusing to respond Turkey risks having the court rule
against it in absentia and add that damages could be as high as $100
million. Lawyer Gunay Evinch, who is representing the two banks in the
case, said on Friday that Turkey's refusal to respond to the Armenian
complaints indicates that Turkey sees it as a matter of sovereignty.
"Apparently, Turkey is refusing to appear before the court to
prevent another country from judging its history, in protection of
its sovereignty," lawyer Evinch was quoted by the Anatolia news agency.
Evinch also noted that the handling of such a fragile case by a state
court is controversial because this indicates that Washington has
given up its rights to shape foreign policy to a state court.
From: Baghdasarian