Azeri daily says UN biased in Armenian property rights reporting
Azadliq, Baku
08 Jan 05
An Azerbaijani independent daily has said that a report recently
produced by an UN body on the violation of property rights of
Armenians and other ethnic minorities in Azerbaijan is aimed at the
country’s oil income. Commenting on the ECOSOC report that Azerbaijan
should pay Armenians an indemnity, Azadliq said that the report was
“one-sided” as it said nothing about the property rights of
Azerbaijanis who had been forced to leave Armenia. The following is
the text of the information and resource centre on Azerbaijan’s oil
industry report by Azerbaijani newspaper Azadliq on 08 January
headlined “An indemnity for Armenians from the oil fund means?..”,
subheaded “The UN expert body refers to the lack of an independent
judicial system in Azerbaijan and the high level of corruption”;
subheadings have been inserted editorially:
Some time ago the UN released a report expressing its concern over
certain property in Azerbaijan claimed to belong to Armenians. It
would be naive to think that this was just talk since the report had
been drawn up by an influential enough organization. The report which
was released on behalf of the Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) called
on the Azerbaijani authorities to respect the Armenian property
rights.
Azerbaijan asked to pay indemnity
The most dangerous point in the report for our country was a
recommendation that it pay indemnity to the Armenians who had left
Azerbaijan. The aforementioned committee expressed concern about the
illegal seizure of property which once belonged to the Armenians and
other ethnic minorities in Azerbaijan by refugees and displaced
persons. The document said the Azerbaijani authorities should pay
indemnity to the Armenians and other ethnic minorities whose
apartments had been illegally seized by the Azerbaijani refugees or
provide alternative accommodation for them. Undoubtedly, this document
should not be dismissed as unimportant and the wait-and-see position
of the Azerbaijani leadership might finally lead to a similar demand
to indemnify the Armenians. If Azerbaijan have not had any financial
sources, then perhaps there would have been no grounds for such a
concern. Those “who are taking care” of the Armenians have
opportunities to influence Azerbaijan to commit itself to paying
indemnity to the Armenians and fulfil it. We are talking about the
funds of the State Oil Fund of the Azerbaijani Republic (SOFAR), a
major portion of which is in foreign banks. Most probably, “the lovers
of Armenia” who succeeded in achieving the adoption of such a document
by the UN General Assembly had Azerbaijan’s oil income precisely in
mind. In all probability, the ECOSOC will already mention in its
future reports the SOFAR means as a source of indemnity if the
Azerbaijani authorities fail to undermine the Armenian effort in this
sphere. Because Azerbaijan has no other sources of paying for such
indemnities. A country as poor as Azerbaijan naturally cannot use its
state budget to pay indemnity. At the same time, neither the ECOSOC
nor the international financial institutions will agree with this. As
noted, Azerbaijan’s oil income has been targeted.
UN stance on property rights of Armenians “one-sided”
Another interesting point is that an influential UN expert body such
as ECOSOC has raised the issue in a rather one-sided manner. For
reasons unknown, the report expresses concern about the property of
the Armenians who left Azerbaijan, but not that of the Azerbaijanis
who left Armenia. Meanwhile, would not that be logical to address a
similar recommendation to the Armenian government in connection with
the Azerbaijani property. You may think that the preparation of such a
report was possible thanks to Armenia’s special efforts and therefore,
the rights of Azerbaijanis have not been taken into account. However,
interestingly enough the foreign media writes that the UN experts put
more effort into the drawing up and adoption of the report than
Armenia itself. This we can explain by two reasons: first, unlike
Armenia, Azerbaijan has financial sources – the oil fund – to pay
indemnity and second, the foreigners think that corruption in the
country will sooner or later swallow the oil funds and think it is
acceptable to use the funds more “effectively”, that is to pay
indemnity. The second aspect can be seen more clearly in the report.
Azerbaijan urged to create independent judicial system and step up
anticorruption fight
The ECOSOC document reads that Azerbaijan has no independent judicial
system and corruption is continuing to expand. The committee thinks
that an independent judicial system is necessary to protect the human
rights, including the economic, social and cultural rights. The ECOSOC
also called on the Azerbaijani authorities to take steps to ensure the
judicial system works independently. The ECOSOC which is concerned
about the level of corruption in Azerbaijan also calls on the
country’s leadership to step up its anti-corruption drive. Evidently,
the recommendation to pay Armenians an indemnity and the demand to
step up the fight against corruption are being voiced
simultaneously. This means that the aforementioned UN committee might
make some new indemnity demands if the Azerbaijani authorities fail to
ensure the independent work of the judicial system and start to fight
against corruption in earnest.
It seems that the Azerbaijani people are not seriously concerned about
the issue of indemnity. The fact that the country’s population do not
pin hopes on the oil income gives us grounds to think so. If it goes
this way, the number of those who strongly desire a piece of SOFAR’s
funds will increase. It is an old habit of ours to look for answers
after the incident.