Tweet
ASHOT MELIKYAN. "EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS SHOULD BE MORE CONSIDERATE"
December 19 2013
On December 17, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) arrived
at a decision that the denial of the Armenian Genocide in 1915 is
consistent with the principle of the right to freedom of expression.
Aravot.am learned about is from "Hurriyet" daily news, which also
stated that the decision was achieved based on the application of
Dogu Perincek, Chairman of the Turkish "Workers' Party", and that it
is not final, and within three months the parties can appeal to the
ECHR Grand palace. In the conversation with Aravot.am, Ashot Melikyan,
Chairman of Committee to Protect Freedom of Expression, referring
to the ECHR decision, said the following, "There are different
manifestations of freedom of expression in different countries. For
example, rumors were going on in France about the adoption of the
bill on genocide denial, which is criminally punishable. But, there
are European countries, no matter what position they express, there
should be no restrictions there. Here, it is worth mentioning the
fact of caricatures of Muhammad in Denmark. People there consider
that the freedom of expression allows doing all these things. As
for the issue of our history, I think that Turkey, first, then the
European institutions should be more considerate and understand that
it is about a tragic past of one entire nation. And, if a nation is
giving meaning to every word in a very painful issue for it, then
human ethics requires making very careful expressions and decisions,
especially that the European Council and the European institutions in
their numerous documents and the European Convention state in which
case the freedom of expression may have reasonable restrictions to some
extent." Ashot Melikyan thinks that the European Court should have
heeded to this fact. He is convinced that the denial of genocide can
be considered as a manifestation of freedom of expression, but, as he
said, "There are a lot of historical facts, corroborated by evidences
of many eyewitnesses, so these documents are already the basis that
the denial is an irresponsible move, an irresponsible expression. When
the court provides legal enforcement and makes a reference to the
freedom of expression, I think, it's so not justified. There are many
provisions in a number of documents of the Council of Europe against
racism and other types of discrimination, and the European Court must
also take the provisions of these documents into account. It is very
good that this decision is not final, and there is an opportunity
to appeal. I think that the Republic of Armenia and other countries
realize that freedom of expression is one of the most important rights,
but there are a lot of important restrictions, which should be heeded."
Eva HAKOBYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2013/12/19/163092/
From: A. Papazian
December 19 2013
On December 17, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) arrived
at a decision that the denial of the Armenian Genocide in 1915 is
consistent with the principle of the right to freedom of expression.
Aravot.am learned about is from "Hurriyet" daily news, which also
stated that the decision was achieved based on the application of
Dogu Perincek, Chairman of the Turkish "Workers' Party", and that it
is not final, and within three months the parties can appeal to the
ECHR Grand palace. In the conversation with Aravot.am, Ashot Melikyan,
Chairman of Committee to Protect Freedom of Expression, referring
to the ECHR decision, said the following, "There are different
manifestations of freedom of expression in different countries. For
example, rumors were going on in France about the adoption of the
bill on genocide denial, which is criminally punishable. But, there
are European countries, no matter what position they express, there
should be no restrictions there. Here, it is worth mentioning the
fact of caricatures of Muhammad in Denmark. People there consider
that the freedom of expression allows doing all these things. As
for the issue of our history, I think that Turkey, first, then the
European institutions should be more considerate and understand that
it is about a tragic past of one entire nation. And, if a nation is
giving meaning to every word in a very painful issue for it, then
human ethics requires making very careful expressions and decisions,
especially that the European Council and the European institutions in
their numerous documents and the European Convention state in which
case the freedom of expression may have reasonable restrictions to some
extent." Ashot Melikyan thinks that the European Court should have
heeded to this fact. He is convinced that the denial of genocide can
be considered as a manifestation of freedom of expression, but, as he
said, "There are a lot of historical facts, corroborated by evidences
of many eyewitnesses, so these documents are already the basis that
the denial is an irresponsible move, an irresponsible expression. When
the court provides legal enforcement and makes a reference to the
freedom of expression, I think, it's so not justified. There are many
provisions in a number of documents of the Council of Europe against
racism and other types of discrimination, and the European Court must
also take the provisions of these documents into account. It is very
good that this decision is not final, and there is an opportunity
to appeal. I think that the Republic of Armenia and other countries
realize that freedom of expression is one of the most important rights,
but there are a lot of important restrictions, which should be heeded."
Eva HAKOBYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2013/12/19/163092/
From: A. Papazian