The European Court of Human Rights case against Perinçek in Switzerland after reading the decision, we are anxious researchers working on genocide in the decision, said some of the historical and conceptual errors we are obligated to provide a response to. These errors seriously believe that the moral and social importance.

Friday 14 February 2014

A worried genocide researchers

OPEN LETTER

Madame le Conseil Fédérale

Simonetta Sommaruga

Cheff Fédérale du Département de justice et police (DFJP)

Palais Fédérale ouest

CH-3003 Berne

European Human Rights Court Perinçek in Switzerland its lawsuit against the decision of the (AİHM. 370, 230, Dec. 17, 2013) After reading, we genocide working on anxious researchers in the decision, said some historical and conceptual errors a response to the obligation to provide We are. These errors seriously believe that the moral and social importance.

We are not questioning the concept of freedom of expression in this letter; these concepts, the researchers acknowledged, as is a necessary condition for an open and democratic society. However, the Court’s reasoning on the historical evidence of the 1915 Armenian Genocide, as well as the ethical insights of rejectionism due to conflict are concerned.

The resolution reads as follows: 1) “Genocide, as a legal term exactly as defined, to prove it is not easy”, 2) “The Court of historical research, by definition, and open to debate and also the topic of discussion is why, with a final decision has to be able or objective and the absolute right to gain access to it is not necessary, taking into account currently at issue in the instant case, as in such matters consensus suspect that this is the Court, “heated debate” expression using the Armenian genocide for the current political environment refers.

First, genocide researchers working on (any government bond, without and work in many countries, nations and decades covering hundreds of independent researchers) conclusive judgment are that the Ottoman Armenians mass murder with having killed the BM.CPPC 2 The definition of genocide as defined in Article meets all respects.

In 1997, they created the genocide of the researchers working on the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), by unanimous vote of the Ottoman massacres of Armenians as genocide they took out a decision stating that they knew. International Transitional Justice Center (ICTJ), the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) in 2003 to prepare the analysis, “[1915] Events Genocide Prevention and Punishment Agreement (UNCPPCG) as defined crime of genocide all requirements are” is called.

In 2000, 100 leading researchers of the Holocaust, by the New York Times issued a joint statement stating that the genocide in 1915, asked him worldwide recognition of the genocide. IAGS in June 2005, in an open letter to Erdogan Prime Minister of Turkey, the Turkish government’s “historical data documenting the Armenian genocide” They wanted to accept. Holocaust-studies theorists (such as William Schabas) have reached a consensus on their three genocide of the Armenians in Turkey, in 1915, Jews in Europe, 1940-45, and Tutsis in Rwanda, 1994. The massacre of the Armenians, Raphael Lemkin’s definition of genocide under international law creating criminal and pioneered the first time in 1944, Lemkin used the term Armenian Genocide.

Set forth by the court, the crime of genocide in Rwanda and Srebrenica just because they are attributable to the International Criminal Court (ICC) were tried, the idea is defective. Crimes of genocide by the researchers for decades are evaluated in the context of historical events. Moreover, in 1915 the Ottoman Turks against Armenians in 1940 as well as the crimes committed by the Nazis against the Jews of Europe, has been described as genocide by Lemkin. Legal experts said, as they may be prosecuted as crimes of genocide backward. William Schabas, the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem in 1961, in the case of crimes committed against Jews retrospectively used to indicate that the word genocide has attracted attention.

Moreover, under Article 10’s, “no doubt this case the Court deny the Holocaust of the offense is to keep separate from the case … because the case in question the international court clearly been proved. “Specify we want, Raphael Lemkin’s” genocide “word previously created, despite the fact of the Holocaust perpetrators Nuremberg Courts (1945-46), of genocide, but” crimes against humanity from committing “were tried. Although the court’s decision, as to the authenticity of the Armenian cause has no legal basis. First, France, the United Kingdom and Russia, the massacre of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in the face of government in 1915, issued a joint declaration “crimes against humanity” is the term used. After the First World War, the Armenian population of the Ottoman government, to designing and collectively, on a charge of murdering 200 senior military and civilian officials were tried in military courts (1919-20). 2006 ICTJ such a legal basis for the decision is confirmed.

The court also Article 17 (substances that prevent the abuse of rights) based on “law of the events of 1915 as ‘genocide’ to reject defined, does not cause hatred against Armenians” has taken a decision. However, the Court says (para 19): “of the Jewish Holocaust denial, anti-Semitism is the primary cause.” We wish to emphasize that, in the same manner of the Armenian Genocide in Turkey to deny the Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was assassinated by Turkey and other Armenians has resulted in violence.

Armenian genocide “an international lie”, saying Mr. Perinchek reveal the level of aggressiveness with common sense is a contradiction. Court in Turkey (freedom of expression and human rights in recent years in one of the worst countries) inkârcılık, “heated debate” praised by favoring the believe that a misstep. ıags’n the disbelief and the Armenian genocide overwrite the open letter as it says (October 2006), “the avoidance of doubt strong enough despite scientific evidence of genocide reject researchers and academics historically participated in a debate they do not, they have a different purpose geared up. Intended about the Armenian Genocide, Turkey extermination of the Armenians in a planned way to recover from responsibility – and that genocide in Turkey since 1915 all of the ruling party has been steadily purposes. That befell the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire in 1915, the researchers reject, will leave no doubt of the exact date and blatantly ignore the scientific evidence. ”

Well-known genocide researcher Deborah Lipstadt wrote: “In denying the genocide, the Turkish Armenian Genocide or the Nazi Holocaust denial, historical re-interpret is not (…) Unbelievers purpose of the third party of the story is another aspect became more convinced that is to (…), it is not another direction. “We rejectionism of the court decision and the reasons for the decision and that the facts that support, consensus and believe that morality is devastating effects on.

Hüküment of Switzerland, the Court’s decision on this case, we believe that the re-examination request.

Sincerely,

Taner Akcam, who Kaloosdi / Mugar Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies Center, Clark University

Margaret Lavinia Anderson, Professor of History, University of California – Berkeley

Joyce Apsel, Faculty of Social Sciences, New York University, former President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars

Yair Auron, Sociology, Political Science and Communication Department, The Open University of Israel

Peter Balakian, Donald M. Social Sciences and Constance H. Rebar Professor, Colgate University

Annette Becker, Professor of History, University of Paris Ouest Nanterre La Defense; senior member, Institut Universitaire de France

Matthias Björnlund, Archive Historian, Copenhagen, Danish Institute for Study Abroad (DIS)

Donald Bloxham, Professor of Modern History, University of Edinburgh

Cathy Caruth, Frank HT Rhodes Professor of Humane Letters, Cornell University

Frank Chalk, Professor of History, Chairman, Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies in Montreal

Israel Charny, former President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, President, Institute for Genocide and the Holocaust, Jerusalem

Deborah Dwork, Rose Professor of History; Strasse Jewish Holocaust and Genocide Studies Center President, Clark University

Helen Fein, Independent Researcher, former executive member of the Institute for Holocaust Studies (New York)

Marcelo Flores, Professor of Comparative History; President, European Convention on Human Rights and Genocide Studies Administration, University of Siena

Donna-Lee Frieze, Prins Senior Fellow, Jewish History Center, New York City;

Visiting Lecturer, Alfred Deakin Research Institute, Deakin University, Melbourne.

Wolfgang Gust, Independent Researcher, Director Armenocide., Hamburg

Herbert Hirsch, Professor of Political Science, Virginia Commonwealth University; editor, Genocide Studies International

Marianne Hirsch, William Trent Peterfield English Literature and Professor of Comparative Literature, Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies Institute Professor, Columbia University

Tessa Hofmann, Prof.. Dr hc. phil, Frida Universitat Berlin, East European Research Institute

Richard Hovanissian, Emeritus Professor, University of California, Armenian and Near Eastern History, Los Angeles, Chapman University and Visiting Lecturer at the University of California, Irvine

Hans-Lukas Kieser, Professor of Modern History, University of Zurich

Mark Levene, Comparative History Lecturer, University of Southampton, UK

Robert Jay Lifton, MD, Distinguished emeritusprofes, The City University of New York

Deborah Lipstadt, Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish History and Holocaust Studies, the Emory University

Wendy Lower, John K. Roth Professor of History, Claremont McKenna College

Robert Melson, Emeritus Professor, Purdue University, former President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars

Donald E. Miller, Professor of Theology, Chairman, Theology and City Cultural Center, University of Southern California

A. Dirk Moses, Professor of Global and Colonial History, European University, Florence, Editor in Chief of Journal of Genocide Research

James R. Russell, Mashtots Professor of Armenian Studies, Harvard University

Roger W. Smith, Emeritus Professor of Government, College of William and Mary; former President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars

Leo Spitzer, CT Vernon, Professor Emeritus of History, Dartmouth College

Gregory Stanton, Genocide Studies and Prevention Research Professor, George Mason University, former President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars

Henry C. Theriault, Professor of Philosophy, Worcester State University, Chief Editor, Genocide Studies and Prevention (Genocide Studies and Prevention)

Eric D. Weitz, Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences and Professor of History, The City College of New York / Graduate Center

Source: Agos