"We See the Issue of Giving Up Territories with Prisoners" - Siranush Sahakyan on the Stigmatization of Prisoners and Government Action

The government is creating value-based issues about prisoners in society, sending wrong signals to public consciousness regarding the protection of prisoners' rights, stated human rights defender Siranush Sahakyan, who represents Armenian prisoners before the European Court of Human Rights.

Sahakyan noted that one of the examples was the glorification of prisoners of war returning to Armenia through Russian efforts months ago, aimed at raising the government’s ratings, with even a welcome at the level of the Prime Minister, followed by calling all prisoners "criminals" in recent days.

“Now we see another extreme, where without a comprehensive study of specific circumstances, all prisoners are labeled as criminals. I can responsibly say that this is not the reality; many individuals have been captured under circumstances beyond their control and, if given the opportunity, they would sacrifice their lives for the homeland,” emphasized the human rights defender.

She also condemned the labeling of soldiers captured from Khzraberd and the publication of their testimonies by a lawyer.

“There are conditions that must be met concerning interrogations. They have all been interrogated as witnesses, and it was important to discuss whether it was permissible to summon individuals under the psychological and physical condition of being in Azerbaijani captivity and constantly under the threat of death,” said Sahakyan.

The human rights defender announced that they have clear questions regarding the circumstances of the capture of soldiers from Khzraberd and also possess details that provide a basis for specific conclusions.

“There are questions we would like the government to answer: how did it happen that when the November 9 statement prescribed each side to remain in their respective positions, Khzraberd and Hin Tagher remained under Armenian control, a document was signed and the orders were given that turned them into Azerbaijani territories? Secondly, if these soldiers were expected to continue combat missions and orders were given to withdraw from their positions, which units replaced them? If there were no replacement units, who is responsible for that? In other words, if expectations are being formed that these boys should engage in battle, at the very least they should provide justifications for whether it was appropriate for military duty or service there, whether rotations were organized or not. We would also like to understand how it came to be that the same commander left the area during discussions with Azerbaijanis without firing a single bullet, and if battles were supposed to continue, why were they not engaged, why did he not fire a single shot? We can extend this list; we simply advise that they remain vigilant and do not stigmatize these soldiers unnecessarily,” said the human rights defender.

She added that the issue is much more serious and profound.

“In the mentioned incident, we do not see any characteristics of surrendering, of being taken captive. Moreover, we see the problem of giving up territories with prisoners, and these facts should be subjected to more careful investigation,” declared the human rights defender.