Experts scrutinizing ways of obliging Armenia to pay compensation to Azerbaijan Azerbaijani, Kazakh political analysts’ views for Caliber.Az

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upheld the claim in the case “Hovhannisyan and Karapetyan v. Armenia” on October 18 in connection with the crimes committed in Azerbaijan’s territory previously occupied by Armenia. The subject of the lawsuit was the incident with the above-mentioned soldiers of the Armenian army and four of their colleagues in Karabakh in summer 2010, when they were all found dead with gunshot wounds.

Relatives of Hovhannisyan and Karapetyan, who filed the lawsuit, state that both young Armenians were drafted into the army in 2008 and 2009 and were sent to serve in a military unit in “NKR” (the so-called “Nagorno-Karabakh republic” used in quotation marks in the ECHR ruling).

The relatives are sure that their sons became victims of hazing. They were subjected to torture, beaten and killed while serving in Karabakh by their own colleagues. The Armenian authorities did not thoroughly investigate the incident to identify and punish all those responsible, including senior commanders.

The ECHR recognised violations of the applicants’ rights under Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the Strasbourg Court decided to pay each applicant 30,000 euros ($31,000) as compensation. The ECHR’s decision is very important because Armenia’s occupation of Azerbaijani territories has been confirmed again as this shows that Armenia sent its citizens to military service in the occupied region of a neighbouring country.

Moreover, the ECHR ruling includes a reference to another decision of the Strasbourg court concerning the case “Chiragov and others v. Armenia”, where Armenia was found responsible for the expulsion of a group of people from their native lands in Azerbaijan’s Lachin District and the deprivation of their property.

Azerbaijan can use such precedents to its advantage to achieve condemnation of Armenia at the international level for the long-term occupation of Azerbaijani lands, as well as the huge humanitarian and economic damage inflicted on Azerbaijani people, Azerbaijan, its nature, villages and cities.

How effective can such Baku’s claims be in the ECHR to recognise Armenia’s crimes during the years of occupation of Azerbaijani lands? How should the evidence base be prepared? Azerbaijani and Kazakh experts answer Caliber.Az journalist’s questions.

Azerbaijani political analyst MP Rasim Musabayov has expressed his opinion on this issue.

How should Armenia be called to responsibility for damage caused to the property of citizens, state infrastructure (railroads, power networks, premises, cultural sites, etc.) on the basis of these decisions of the ECHR and other irrefutable facts beginning from the period of Armenia’s occupation of the Azerbaijani territories?

It is high time to think about it.

“If Arayik Harutyunyan and other arrested Armenian separatists testify that the orders to strike Azerbaijan’s Ganja, Barda, Tartar and other settlements and facilities were given by the Armenian General Staff rather than by the separatists themselves, then Azerbaijan’s claims will be more significant. In any case, claims demanding compensation for the caused damage must be filed,” the political analyst noted.

Kazakh expert Atbek Aitmatov also shares Musabayov’s opinion.

“The ECHR’s above-mentioned decision can facilitate the process for filing a case against Armenia in international courts by providing documents and irrefutable evidence confirming Armenian crimes,” Aitmatov said.

“Of course, the victims in the case ‘Hovhannisyan and Karapetyan v. Armenia’ are Armenian servicemen, but the documents include concrete evidence that incriminates Armenia in the long-term occupation of Azerbaijani territories, which makes it possible to build tactics of accusation on this and similar cases. On the one hand, the occupation of the Azerbaijani territory by Armenia is a proven fact, but the more such cases are, the more documents are for the work of judges and the analysis of Armenia’s crimes. It is always beneficial to have much evidence,” the Kazakh expert noted.

“Of course, one of the most important pieces of evidence is also the Constitution of Armenia itself, in which Azerbaijan’s Karabakh has been indicated as part of Armenia. Therefore, until the Constitution of Armenia is changed and the reference to the Declaration of Independence is removed from it, there is no sense to state that Armenia has no territorial claims against Azerbaijan and these words are hypocritical,” Aitmatov said.

The Kazakh political analyst stressed that it is necessary to be prepared for long-term litigation with Armenia in international courts.

“That is, there is no need to directly connect this process with Baku’s policy towards Yerevan even if the relations between the countries slightly improve. By the way, it is possible that Azerbaijan’s fair and multi-billion-dollar claims will force Yerevan to change its rhetoric because it is clear that this could turn out to be worse than any international sanctions for Armenians, because if Yerevan is fully held accountable for the long-term occupation of the Azerbaijani territories, Armenia’s budget will simply run out and the country will turn into a bankrupt.

“Until Armenian politicians fully appreciate this danger, revanchism in Armenia will flourish. Armenia will continue insulting and threatening Baku. Armenian society has not thought yet that if Armenia has to pay indemnity to Azerbaijan, then every Armenian public servant may be left without salary. Therefore, in this sense, Baku should remain as pragmatic as possible and continue working in this direction, collecting evidence. It is possible that obstinate Yerevan would beg Baku to conduct a dialogue on this issue. Such a lawsuit will become an important political tool for putting pressure on Armenia and repentance for all its deeds,” the Kazakh political analyst said.