European Court Never Ruled That Armenia Occupied Nagorno-Karabakh, Yeghishe Kirakosyan

Yeghishe Kirakosyan, Armenia's representative on international legal issues, stated that his remarks denying Armenia's illegal seizure of Azerbaijani territory or control over Nagorno-Karabakh had drawn criticism from Azerbaijan's representative on Monday, according to News.am.

Azerbaijan's representative claimed that Armenia is "ignoring the overwhelming response regarding the invasion and occupation by Armenia." Azerbaijan heavily emphasizes a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, which asserts that Armenia has jurisdiction over Nagorno-Karabakh under the first article of the European Convention. However, Azerbaijan conveniently overlooks the fact that the question of jurisdiction determined by the Court, according to the Court's case law, cannot be equated with the criteria for establishing state responsibility for international violations.

The European Court has never ruled that Armenia has occupied Nagorno-Karabakh. The same can be said about the UN Security Council resolutions concerning the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, which have been misrepresented by the Azerbaijani representative and legal advisors. The Council has called on Armenia to continue exercising its influence to ensure compliance with norms by the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh but has never stated that Armenia is an occupying state, let alone an aggressor. Instead, it has referred to the local Armenian forces in Nagorno-Karabakh as occupying forces and called upon the parties to immediately resume negotiations for the settlement of the conflict within the framework of the Minsk Group peace process.

Armenia and the authorities of Nagorno-Karabakh have acted accordingly. In contrast, Azerbaijan has unilaterally decided, as President Aliyev has stated, that war is inevitable and that the Minsk Group is deceased. Furthermore, according to President Aliyev, it was Azerbaijan that started the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, a claim which the Azerbaijani representative did not dare to refute yesterday.

The Azerbaijani representative accused the Armenian lawyer of preventing Azerbaijan from having access to a previous occupied territory, thus not allowing Azerbaijan to lodge complaints about Armenia's alleged racist occupation after liberating those territories. "As Azerbaijan knows, neither Armenia nor the local representatives of Nagorno-Karabakh have ever denied UN access to Nagorno-Karabakh. The Azerbaijani representative presented no arguments to substantiate this claim. In fact, it is Azerbaijan that has blocked UN access and continues to do so today. Azerbaijan has repeatedly refused to cooperate with issues concerning ethnic Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh, including environmental protection and the Sarsang Reservoir."

He read Armenia’s closing remarks: "The Republic of Armenia respectfully urges this Court to: a. accept Armenia’s preliminary objection regarding the time frame of the Court's jurisdiction, determining and affirming that the Court lacks jurisdiction over Azerbaijan's claims and allegations concerning events that occurred before September 15, 1996, i.e., the entry into force of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination for the parties; b. alternatively, accept Armenia's preliminary objection concerning the admissibility of the claims, deeming unacceptable Azerbaijan's claims and allegations concerning events that occurred before the Convention's entry into force in September 1996 and recognizing Azerbaijan's counterclaims as inadmissible; c. accept the preliminary objection relating to the Court's substantive jurisdiction and affirm by ruling that the Court lacks jurisdiction to examine Azerbaijan's claims and allegations regarding alleged environmental damages; d. accept the preliminary objection concerning the Court's jurisdictional subject matter and affirm by ruling that the Court has no jurisdiction to examine Azerbaijan's claims and allegations regarding alleged environmental damages."