Tweet
Journal of Turkish Weekly
December 28, 2012 Friday
USAK Hosted Conference Titled "Legal Methods for Turkey in Confuting
Armenian Claims"
Turkey
Turkey, Dec. 28 -- International Strategic Research Organization
(USAK) organized a conference titled "Legal Methods for Turkey in
Confuting Armenian Claims" on 27 December 2012 at USAK House, with
Retired Ambassador and MP (in 22nd and 23rd terms) Mr. ?ukru Elekda?
as the keynote speaker. Ambassadors and other diplomats from the
Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, think-tank representatives,
academics, and several media members participated in the conference.
?ukru Elekda? began his speech by expressing that allegations
regarding a so-called "genocide" find significant coverage not only on
the political agenda of Armenia but within foreign policy agendas of
many other countries. He said the issue is played as a strong leverage
in countering Turkey, with Turkey's relations with the US and France
targeted at the outset. It was also underpinned that the increase in
the number of states which recognize the so-called genocide would
smooth the way for other third parties to think of the relevant
allegations as if they are "historically verified facts". Mr. Elekda?
added that the main obstacles in front of Turkey in carrying its legal
arguments onto international platforms consist of domestic political
reservations and prejudiced attitudes on the part of international
institutions in approaching Turkey. He also articulated that he made
the same presentation in Republican Peoples' Party (CHP) caucus and
received positive feedback from the opposition. Furthermore, official
governmental agencies received Mr. Elekda?'s points favorably in
overall, despite a certain number of reservations.
Mr. Elekda? indicated that the main obstacle was posed by the relevant
EU framework decision which shook Turkey-EU relations to its very
foundations. He underlined that the framework decision process was
transformed into an initiative targeting Turkey by 2007 and led
European parliaments to ratify Armenian claims regarding the events of
1915. He also stated that Turkey needs to have strong evidence to
abrogate the framework decision, and elaborated on his opinions
regarding how to rebut allegations of a so-called genocide through
legal means.
"It is just the right time to take legal action to resolve the
Armenian issue which has been afflicting with Turkey for a while in
the international arena", said Mr. Elekda?. He reminded that the
French parliament's decision on 12 October 2006 to legislate a law
which considers denying Armenian allegations of genocide a crime was
by the virtue of the same parliament's decision on recognizing
Armenian "genocide" on 29 January 2001. However, he mentioned that
since the Constitutional Council of France evaluated lately the legal
arrangement not as essentially normative at all, therefore the council
put forth that it is inappropriate to enact such a law; Turkey has an
upper hand now in order for the cancellation of the law which dates to
2001. In addition, Mr. Elekda? pointed to the decision made by the
International Court of Justice on 26 February 2007 which he thinks
"would add to ameliorate and clarify jurisprudence regarding the
concept and acts of genocide" as an example of recent developments
supporting Turkey's legal position.
The key factor in classifying an act of mass violence as genocide is
"political intention", according to Mr. Elekda?. He then scrutinized
the cases of "Radislav Krstic" and "Goran Jelistic", regarding
ex-Yugoslavia, for investigating the subject elaborately. In
situations when the particular intention does not appear to be
genocide, the term "crime against humanity" is used; he added. He also
made remarks with respect to how courts can reveal the particular
intention behind similar acts if genocidal attempt is covert.
After all, Mr. Elekda? suggested that Turkey has to prepare a legal
strategy, fix relevant historical evidence in support of its
counter-claims, and organize a round-table meeting in Turkey with the
participation of an esteemed team of foreign international lawyers,
political scientists and historians together with Turkish diplomats,
academics and experts urgently. At the end of the presentation by the
Retired Ambassador, a discussion session took place for an hour.
December 28, 2012 Friday
USAK Hosted Conference Titled "Legal Methods for Turkey in Confuting
Armenian Claims"
Turkey
Turkey, Dec. 28 -- International Strategic Research Organization
(USAK) organized a conference titled "Legal Methods for Turkey in
Confuting Armenian Claims" on 27 December 2012 at USAK House, with
Retired Ambassador and MP (in 22nd and 23rd terms) Mr. ?ukru Elekda?
as the keynote speaker. Ambassadors and other diplomats from the
Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, think-tank representatives,
academics, and several media members participated in the conference.
?ukru Elekda? began his speech by expressing that allegations
regarding a so-called "genocide" find significant coverage not only on
the political agenda of Armenia but within foreign policy agendas of
many other countries. He said the issue is played as a strong leverage
in countering Turkey, with Turkey's relations with the US and France
targeted at the outset. It was also underpinned that the increase in
the number of states which recognize the so-called genocide would
smooth the way for other third parties to think of the relevant
allegations as if they are "historically verified facts". Mr. Elekda?
added that the main obstacles in front of Turkey in carrying its legal
arguments onto international platforms consist of domestic political
reservations and prejudiced attitudes on the part of international
institutions in approaching Turkey. He also articulated that he made
the same presentation in Republican Peoples' Party (CHP) caucus and
received positive feedback from the opposition. Furthermore, official
governmental agencies received Mr. Elekda?'s points favorably in
overall, despite a certain number of reservations.
Mr. Elekda? indicated that the main obstacle was posed by the relevant
EU framework decision which shook Turkey-EU relations to its very
foundations. He underlined that the framework decision process was
transformed into an initiative targeting Turkey by 2007 and led
European parliaments to ratify Armenian claims regarding the events of
1915. He also stated that Turkey needs to have strong evidence to
abrogate the framework decision, and elaborated on his opinions
regarding how to rebut allegations of a so-called genocide through
legal means.
"It is just the right time to take legal action to resolve the
Armenian issue which has been afflicting with Turkey for a while in
the international arena", said Mr. Elekda?. He reminded that the
French parliament's decision on 12 October 2006 to legislate a law
which considers denying Armenian allegations of genocide a crime was
by the virtue of the same parliament's decision on recognizing
Armenian "genocide" on 29 January 2001. However, he mentioned that
since the Constitutional Council of France evaluated lately the legal
arrangement not as essentially normative at all, therefore the council
put forth that it is inappropriate to enact such a law; Turkey has an
upper hand now in order for the cancellation of the law which dates to
2001. In addition, Mr. Elekda? pointed to the decision made by the
International Court of Justice on 26 February 2007 which he thinks
"would add to ameliorate and clarify jurisprudence regarding the
concept and acts of genocide" as an example of recent developments
supporting Turkey's legal position.
The key factor in classifying an act of mass violence as genocide is
"political intention", according to Mr. Elekda?. He then scrutinized
the cases of "Radislav Krstic" and "Goran Jelistic", regarding
ex-Yugoslavia, for investigating the subject elaborately. In
situations when the particular intention does not appear to be
genocide, the term "crime against humanity" is used; he added. He also
made remarks with respect to how courts can reveal the particular
intention behind similar acts if genocidal attempt is covert.
After all, Mr. Elekda? suggested that Turkey has to prepare a legal
strategy, fix relevant historical evidence in support of its
counter-claims, and organize a round-table meeting in Turkey with the
participation of an esteemed team of foreign international lawyers,
political scientists and historians together with Turkish diplomats,
academics and experts urgently. At the end of the presentation by the
Retired Ambassador, a discussion session took place for an hour.