"ARARAT" VS. "CAUCASUS"
tics/2009/12/3/dataran
Dec 3, 2009
Politics
"Alexander Iskandaryan had to agree with the information that he was
releasing; otherwise, why would he spread that information?" advocate
of the "Ararat" center Artur Grigoryan asked surprisingly.
Today Judge of the Kentron and Nork-Marash districts’ first instance
court, Karine Petrosyan, presided the hearing of the "Ararat" center’s
appeal against the "Caucasus Institute" Foundation.
The plaintiff demands the court to oblige the "Caucasus Institute"
to deny the release of the fact of Armenian Genocide, prohibit the
use of the term "Genocide" and compensation for damages.
Let us recall that in 2008, the "Caucasus Institute" released the book
entitled "Neighborhood in the Caucasus: Turkey and the South Caucasus"
where, among other articles was the article by Turk Aybars Gurgulu
entitled "Turkey-Armenia Relations: Eternal labyrinth?" in which the
writer, according to the plaintiff, denies the Armenian Genocide.
Director of the "Ararat" center Armen Ayvazyan claims that editor of
the book, Alexander Iskandaryan, also denies that fact.
Present at court were Armen Ayvazyan from the plaintiff’s side, his
advocate Artur Grigoryan, and Vahagn Grigoryan who is the advocate for
Alexander Iskandaryan. Despite the open-door trial, video recording
was prohibited because the defendant was against it.
Besides objecting that, he did not wish to respond to any questions
after the trial. The latter petitioned the court to quash the case
because the "use" of the term doesn’t presuppose a situation that
will be subject to the court examination.
The plaintiff brought up objections in relation to that. "This is
a case because it relates to the honor and dignity of the Armenian
nation."
The judge went to the consultation room to take the decision on an act
regarding the petition and the session was postponed for tomorrow at
4 p.m. In other words, tomorrow it will be clear if the appeal will
be examined or not.
After the session
Alexander Iskandaryan told "A1+" that he was surprised that he was
charged with forgetting about the genocide. In his book, he states
that he is not responsible for what was published in his book. How
grounded is the appeal? In response, Artur Grigoryan said: "A person
can commit very serious financial machinations, but put up a sign and
say that he is not responsible for that. That doesn’t free the person
from responsibility. If he reserves that he is not responsible for
that article, then that still doesn’t mean that he is not responsible
from the angle of legislation."
Armen Ayvazyan said that if his claim was upheld, the denial of
Armenian Genocide in Armenia would be part of law and practice with
many consequences. If it is not upheld, that will mean that there
can be any article or speech denying the Armenian Genocide in Armenia.