What Did the Hague Court Obligate Azerbaijan? Insights from Armenia's Representative at the ECHR, Yeghishe Kirakosyan

"Alongside our application based on the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, a request was also made by Armenia for urgent provisional measures to be applied against Azerbaijan until the substantive end of the case. Within that framework, hearings were held at the International Court of Justice in The Hague on October 14-15 and 18-19," said Yeghishe Kirakosyan, Armenia's representative at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the International Court of Justice.

He referred to the December 7 decision of the UN International Court of Justice regarding the application of urgent measures.

According to him, on December 7, the court recorded its decisions on the requests submitted by both parties. "Of course, in general terms, it can be said that the requests presented by Armenia have been largely satisfied in terms of content. Armenia submitted at least two requests regarding each issue. For example, regarding prisoners of war, one request aimed at ensuring their return or repatriation, and the second one was to strictly adhere to the provisions of the racial discrimination convention until repatriation is ensured," Kirakosyan stated, adding that similarly, two requests were made concerning Armenian cultural heritage.

Kirakosyan noted that a demand was also presented to the court to require Azerbaijan to regularly report on the implementation of the court's decisions.

"Based on Armenia's demands, the Court made several very important recordings, which, I believe, we all need to understand well. Firstly, concerning repatriation, the Court did not conclude that this demand arises from the provisions of the racial discrimination convention; however, it emphasized that the issues surrounding the repatriation of individuals captured as a result of armed conflicts are regulated in the context of humanitarian law, referring to the Geneva Conventions, which I believe is a very significant recording in the international legal context because it is a well-known fact that humanitarian law imposes an obligation to return captured persons," Kirakosyan said, adding that the court has affirmed that Azerbaijan is detaining these individuals solely due to their ethnic Armenian national identity.

He highlighted that considering this circumstance, the Court has obligated Azerbaijan to ensure all rights enshrined in the convention and to guarantee that individuals are not subjected to inhumane or degrading treatment.

"The court also made a recording that is of significant importance to the case going forward. This pertains to the incitement and dissemination of hate speech against ethnic Armenians. The court recorded that the right to be free from hate speech or propaganda is itself enshrined in the logic of Article 4 of the convention, and its violation can lead to irreversible consequences," stated Kirakosyan, emphasizing that the court particularly highlighted the inadmissibility of promoting hate speech involving high-ranking officials and the use of state institutions, which could threaten the physical and mental safety of individuals.

In essence, the court has obligated Azerbaijan to cease the promotion of hate speech involving state institutions by officials.

"The basis for the court making such a record has been the overwhelming evidence presented by Armenia, to the extent that the Court has also made an emphasis concerning officials," noted Armenia's representative at the Hague court.

The Court's next recording, according to Kirakosyan, pertains to safeguarding Armenian cultural heritage objects from vandalism and destruction. "The court explicitly recorded and obligated Azerbaijan to take appropriate measures in this direction to ensure the proper fulfillment of its obligations arising from the Convention. This also holds key importance from the perspective of Armenia's claim, because Armenia's claim asserts that Azerbaijan is implementing a consistent anti-Armenian, ethnically discriminatory policy against ethnic Armenians, which is accompanied by calls for hatred from the highest-ranking individuals, including the president of the country, and also notes that destruction, falsification of cultural objects, and the elimination of the Armenian trace in the region are ongoing," stated Armenia's representative at the UN court.

He emphasized that the interim measures taken by the Court are mandatory, and it has been outlined that the Court's decisions create international legal obligations for both parties. Moreover, according to the procedure, the Court immediately notifies the UN Security Council about this decision, as it is the political body that has the authority to ensure oversight for the implementation of the court's decisions.

When asked whether the statements made by Alen Simonyan hinder their work on the return of captives, Kirakosyan responded that the work regarding the return of captives is currently ongoing and parallel work is being conducted in the context of the ECHR. "It is clear that statements at various levels can have an impact, but in any case, we are carrying out our work," concluded Kirakosyan.