ERMENİ “SOYKIRIMI”: TARİHSEL BİR GERÇEK DEĞİL, SİYASİ BİR MASAL

Öz

Ermeni Diasporası tarafından bir siyasi kampanya olarak yürütülensözde Ermeni soykırımının tanınması yolundaki gayretler, dünyayı tarihselgerçeklerin ve hukuksal kavramların siyasi “meşrulaştırma” yoluylatanınabileceği hususunda ikna etmek için her yola başvurmuştur. Nitekimdünyadaki farklı devletlerin kurumları tarafından yapılan tanımalar bu türhareketlerin meşruiyeti ve bunların ne gibi sonuçları olabileceği sorularınıgündeme getirmiştir. Bu makale, konuyu Perinçek-İsviçre davası üzerindendeğerlendirecek ve sözde Ermeni soykırımının tarihsel bir gerçeklik değil,ancak siyasi bir masal olarak kabul edilebileceği tezini uluslararası hukukanalizi çerçevesinde savunacaktır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• soykırım, tanıma, hukuk, suç, AİHM, Ermenistan,Azerbaycan, İsviçre, Türkiye

-

Öz

The recognition of so-called Armenian “genocide” as a politicalcampaign of the Armenian Diaspora have went to great lengths to try andconvince the world that there is a possibility to recognize historical factsand legal notions through the political “legalization” if one shall try hardenough. Indeed some of the recognitions made by the state institutions ofdifferent countries around the world have raised a question of the legalityand implications of such actions. This article will look at the issue from theperspective of the case Perincek vs Switzerland and argue that theArmenian “genocide” can be considered not as a historical fact but as apolitical mythology through the analysis of international law

Anahtar Kelimeler

• genocide, legality, recognition, law, crimes, ECHR, Armenia,Azerbaijan, Switzerland, Turkey

Kaynakça

1. “The Armenian Genocide 1915-1923.” Armenian Church. http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/armenian-heritage/armenian-genocide/ remembering/.
2. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi, 10.2., 43. ve 44. Maddeler. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf.
3. Case Law of International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. II. Paragraf. Intent to destroy in whole or in part.
4. İsviçre Ceza Kanunu, 261. Madde. “Criminal conviction for denial that the atrocities perpetrated against the
5. Armenian people in 1915 and years after constituted genocide was unjustified.” (17 Aralık 2013). EHCR Registrar, Press Release.
6. “French Council Finds Bill Penalizing Denial Unconstitutional.” (2012). Armenian Weekly. http://www.armenianweekly.com/2012/02/28/frenchcouncil-finds-bill-penalizing-genocide-denial-unconstitutional/.
7. Makili-Aliyev, Kamal (2008). Enforcement of International Law in NagornoKarabakh Conflict. Tbilisi: Universal.
8. Mehdiyev, Elchin (2014). “Special tribunal should be created for prosecution of Khojaly genocide perpetrators”. Trend. http://en.trend.az/news/karabakh/2246324.html.

9. Mehtiyev, Elkhan (2006). “Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict: Prague Process and Current Status of Negotiations”. http://anl.az/el/q/qarabag_6/q-13.html;
10. “Perinçek: Switzerland requests referral to Grand Chamber” (2014). Federal Office of Justice. Press Release. http://www.ejpd.admin.ch/content/ejpd/en/home/dokumentation/mi/2014/re f_2014-03-11.html.
11. Smith, Ray (15 Şubat 2014). “European Ruling Ignites Freedom Debate.” IPS. http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/02/european-ruling-ignites-freedom-debate/ “Turkish anger as Swiss appeal Perinçek decision”, (14 Mart 2014). swissinfo.ch. http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/turkish-anger-as-swiss-appealperin%C3%A7ek-decision/38167380. 120 Dr. Farhad MAMMADOV Ermeni Araştırmaları 2014, Sayı 48
12. “We welcome Swiss government decision of Perinçek case – Armenian President”, (14 Mart 2014). News.am. http://news.am/eng/news/198982.html.
13. Weed, Matthew C. (10 Mart 2011). International Criminal Court and the Rome Statute: 2010 Review Conference, CRS Report for Congress. http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41682.pdf.