BERNE—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 Perinçek for denying the Armenian Genocide.
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 Doğu Perinçek 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.
It would have been important for this article to note that genocide scholars from around the world
sent an open letter to the Swiss government asking that they appeal the case–and that letter made major points about the decision–those scholarly opinions represent a neutral, global perspective.
Bravo to the Swiss government!
I wonder wheather this case was an Strategy to Bring it on and Prove Legally, that, what happened to Armenians between 1914 to 1923 in the Ottoman Empire Turkey, and rule on the legal characterisation of the Armenian genocide, In This Court; while United States, British, France and Germany sitting on the evidences.
We need to learn from the Jewish people to be united and stop backstabbing each other. Armenians should value higher education and it is sad how few Armenians are getting Phd’s or getting law degrees and practicing international law where issues of the Armenian Genocide could be addressed. Why is it that many Armenian lawyers are only interested in easy cases to make money rather than serving the community. Look at how many Jewish scientists, engineers and lawyers there are out there in the world. Their culture promotes higher education and that is why they are able to get into top political and academic positions shaping political policies. It seems that the Russian-Armenians in particular are more interested in driving flashy Mercedes Benz cars.