Azerbaijani MFA: ECHR did not satisfy Armenia’s main intention regarding Ramil Safarov
Leyla Abdullayeva, Spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan, answers questions from the media regarding the decision of the European Court of Human Rights "Makuchyan and Minasyan against Azerbaijan and Hungary" dated May 26.
Q: What can you say about the known decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)?
A: We got acquainted with the relevant decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Certainly, the decision should be studied at the lawyer expert level in order to concretely comment regarding it, but it is possible to share observations on the decision.
Firstly, it should be taken into consideration that pain and suffering, with which our region faces at both national and individual levels today, originate from the hostile policy of Armenian nationalist leaders, based on hatred against Azerbaijani people, and Armenia’s aggressive policy against Azerbaijan. Everyone knows that by distorting the main reasons of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the occupying Armenia tries to divert the attention of the international community from the ongoing illegal occupation of Azerbaijani lands and ethnic cleansing of civilians. However, Armenia's responsibility for the occupation of Azerbaijani territories is determined in the decision of the ECHR “Chiragovs and others against Armenia” dated June 16, 2015.
If Armenia really cares about human rights and freedoms as much as it says and respects the European Court, then this country should immediately put an end to the occupation of Azerbaijani lands and violation of the rights of more than a million of our compatriots, which has been going on for 30 years. There is also no moral right for official Yerevan to make any demands on the European Court of human rights until the execution of the ECHR's decision on the Chiragovs' case is not fulfilled.
Q: What can you say about the main results of the court decision?
A: First of all, I would like to note that Armenia's intention to use the European Court as a tool in the smear campaign against Azerbaijan and its attempts to politicize this institution and involve it in the propaganda campaign must be rejected.
Regarding the conclusions of the European Court of human rights, it can be said that the court did not satisfy Armenia's main intention. Thus, the court decision does not require the dissolution of the pardon decree, which is the object of the main contention, or the reopening of the case on the concerned person. On the other hand, the lawsuit on the material violation of the right to life was also rejected.
Q: Does this mean that, as mentioned in the decision, the Azerbaijani government cannot bear international legal responsibility in this regard?
A: Yes, the European Court found that the material aspect of Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention was not violated by the Government of Azerbaijan. In other words, according to the results of the European Court of human rights, Ramil Safarov acted individually during the actions and did not represent the Government of Azerbaijan. Thus, the Azerbaijani government cannot bear international legal responsibility for these actions.
At the same time, we believe that the court will take into account that the officer of the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan Ramil Safarov, who was born in the Jabrayil District of Azerbaijan, occupied by the Armenian Armed Forces in August 1993, lost his close relatives in the war and experienced the pain and suffering of the IDP's life when he was still a teenager.
Q: The court decision on the issue of pardoning Ramil Safarov after his extradition to Azerbaijan did not take this as a basis for bringing him to respond in accordance with the standards of international law.
A: Pardon is a phenomenon used in the world practice and according to the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan the head of state has the authority to pardon.
I would like to reiterate that Armenia's policy of aggression against Azerbaijan and the unresolved consequences of this policy is at the root of all ills. The only way to put an end to the hostility between the two peoples is to eliminate the consequences of the conflict, i.e., to call the occupying forces from the internationally recognized territories of Azerbaijan and to ensure the fundamental rights of hundreds of thousands of people expelled from these territories.
It would be good if the European Court would mention Armenia's policy of aggression against Azerbaijan and Ramil Safarov's press release on the decision that he was the victim of this policy of aggression.