Tweet
SWITZERLAND APPEALS EUROPEAN HUMAN RIGHTS COURT RULING
Legal Monitor Worldwide
March 12, 2014 Wednesday
The government of Switzerland announced Tuesday that it will appeal
a December 17, 2013 decision by the European Court of Human Rights
overturning the conviction of Dogu Perincek for denying the Armenian
Genocide, Asbarez reports.
The decision was made by Switzerland's Federal Office of Justice, which
is asking the ECHR Grand Chamber to review the ruling to clarify the
scope available to Swiss authorities in applying the Swiss Criminal
Code to combat racism. Switzerland created this penal provision,
which entered into force in 1995, to close loopholes in its criminal
law and enable the country to accede to the UN Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
"We welcome the Swiss Government's decision to request that the
December 17 decision of the European Court of Human Rights be referred
to the Grand Chamber for review. By this decision Switzerland is
attempting to defend its own legislation, while at the same time
is adhering to the expectation of all Armenians to appeal the ECHR
December 17 ruling, in order to create the opportunity to rectify the
contentious assertions about the Armenian Genocide in that ruling. Of
course, this process has several more stages to pass, first of which
would be the decision by the Grand Chamber on whether or not to
accept the referral," said a statement on the Armenian Revolutionary
Federation Political Affairs office.
This is an issue which requires pan-national consensus and the
necessity to push for the rectification of the contentious assertions
about the Armenian Genocide in the ECHR ruling," added the ARF
statement.
Under the provisions of the Swiss law, in 2007, Turkish citizen Dogu
Perincek was convicted for denying the Armenian Genocide. Failing to
win two appeals against the judgment, Perincek appealed the ECHR,
which on Dec. 17 ruled that the Swiss courts' rulings violated the
appellant's right to freedom of expression.
The ECHR ruling stated that "the free exercise of the right to openly
discuss questions of a sensitive and controversial nature is one of
the fundamental aspects of freedom of expression and distinguishes
a tolerant and pluralistic democratic society from a totalitarian or
dictatorial regime."
The original case emerged from Perincek's participation in a number
of conferences in Switzerland in 2005, during which he publicly denied
that the Ottoman Empire had perpetrated the crime of genocide against
the Armenian people in 1915.
The Lausanne Police Court found Perincek guilty of racial
discrimination on March 9, 2007, based on the Swiss Criminal Code.
After a complaint filed by the Switzerland-Armenia Association on
July 15, 2005, the court found that Perincek's motives were of a
"racist tendency" and did not contribute to the historical debate.
"The Court underlined that the free exercise of the right to openly
discuss questions of a sensitive and controversial nature was one of
the fundamental aspects of freedom of expression and distinguished
a tolerant and pluralistic democratic society from a totalitarian or
dictatorial regime," said the official ECHR press release at the time.
"The Court also pointed out that it was not called upon to rule on the
legal characterization of the Armenian genocide. The existence of a
'genocide,' which was a precisely defined legal concept, was not easy
to prove. The Court doubted that there could be a general consensus
as to events such as those at issue, given that historical research
was by definition open to discussion and a matter of debate, without
necessarily giving rise to final conclusions or to the assertion of
objective and absolute truths," added the ECHR release.
"Lastly, the Court observed that those States which had officially
recognized the Armenian genocide had not found it necessary to enact
laws imposing criminal sanctions on individuals questioning the
official view, being mindful that one of the main goals of freedom of
expression was to protect minority views capable of contributing to a
debate on questions of general interest which were not fully settled,"
explained the ECHR.
Since the ECHR ruling, many leading Armenian organizations around the
world, including the Armenian National Committee offices in Europe,
South America, Australia and elsewhere met with Swiss diplomats
urging the Swiss government to appeal the ECHR ruling.© 2014 Legal
Monitor Worldwide.
Legal Monitor Worldwide
March 12, 2014 Wednesday
The government of Switzerland announced Tuesday that it will appeal
a December 17, 2013 decision by the European Court of Human Rights
overturning the conviction of Dogu Perincek for denying the Armenian
Genocide, Asbarez reports.
The decision was made by Switzerland's Federal Office of Justice, which
is asking the ECHR Grand Chamber to review the ruling to clarify the
scope available to Swiss authorities in applying the Swiss Criminal
Code to combat racism. Switzerland created this penal provision,
which entered into force in 1995, to close loopholes in its criminal
law and enable the country to accede to the UN Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
"We welcome the Swiss Government's decision to request that the
December 17 decision of the European Court of Human Rights be referred
to the Grand Chamber for review. By this decision Switzerland is
attempting to defend its own legislation, while at the same time
is adhering to the expectation of all Armenians to appeal the ECHR
December 17 ruling, in order to create the opportunity to rectify the
contentious assertions about the Armenian Genocide in that ruling. Of
course, this process has several more stages to pass, first of which
would be the decision by the Grand Chamber on whether or not to
accept the referral," said a statement on the Armenian Revolutionary
Federation Political Affairs office.
This is an issue which requires pan-national consensus and the
necessity to push for the rectification of the contentious assertions
about the Armenian Genocide in the ECHR ruling," added the ARF
statement.
Under the provisions of the Swiss law, in 2007, Turkish citizen Dogu
Perincek was convicted for denying the Armenian Genocide. Failing to
win two appeals against the judgment, Perincek appealed the ECHR,
which on Dec. 17 ruled that the Swiss courts' rulings violated the
appellant's right to freedom of expression.
The ECHR ruling stated that "the free exercise of the right to openly
discuss questions of a sensitive and controversial nature is one of
the fundamental aspects of freedom of expression and distinguishes
a tolerant and pluralistic democratic society from a totalitarian or
dictatorial regime."
The original case emerged from Perincek's participation in a number
of conferences in Switzerland in 2005, during which he publicly denied
that the Ottoman Empire had perpetrated the crime of genocide against
the Armenian people in 1915.
The Lausanne Police Court found Perincek guilty of racial
discrimination on March 9, 2007, based on the Swiss Criminal Code.
After a complaint filed by the Switzerland-Armenia Association on
July 15, 2005, the court found that Perincek's motives were of a
"racist tendency" and did not contribute to the historical debate.
"The Court underlined that the free exercise of the right to openly
discuss questions of a sensitive and controversial nature was one of
the fundamental aspects of freedom of expression and distinguished
a tolerant and pluralistic democratic society from a totalitarian or
dictatorial regime," said the official ECHR press release at the time.
"The Court also pointed out that it was not called upon to rule on the
legal characterization of the Armenian genocide. The existence of a
'genocide,' which was a precisely defined legal concept, was not easy
to prove. The Court doubted that there could be a general consensus
as to events such as those at issue, given that historical research
was by definition open to discussion and a matter of debate, without
necessarily giving rise to final conclusions or to the assertion of
objective and absolute truths," added the ECHR release.
"Lastly, the Court observed that those States which had officially
recognized the Armenian genocide had not found it necessary to enact
laws imposing criminal sanctions on individuals questioning the
official view, being mindful that one of the main goals of freedom of
expression was to protect minority views capable of contributing to a
debate on questions of general interest which were not fully settled,"
explained the ECHR.
Since the ECHR ruling, many leading Armenian organizations around the
world, including the Armenian National Committee offices in Europe,
South America, Australia and elsewhere met with Swiss diplomats
urging the Swiss government to appeal the ECHR ruling.© 2014 Legal
Monitor Worldwide.