Interview with Siranush Sahakyan, the lawyer representing the Armenian prisoners’ interests at the European Court of Human Rights.
Ms. Sahakyan, it will soon be three months since the so-called “trials” of the leaders of Artsakh and other Armenian prisoners began. Although Azerbaijani media initially “threatened” that it would become a “Nuremberg trial,” we are now finding that the anticipated resonance is lacking. Even the presence of Azerbaijani journalists has been limited. What are your impressions?
Both the preliminary investigation and the so-called “trials” are being conducted in gross violation of international law, and it is evident that the rights of Armenian prisoners —political and otherwise— to a fair trial have been disregarded. These “trials” have nothing to do with Nuremberg; even the comparison is ridiculous. The Nuremberg trials were conducted by an international tribunal established through the joint efforts of several states, and their proceedings contributed to the creation of the International Criminal Court. They were guided by the principles of law and involved reputable judges, international law experts, psychologists, and journalists.
The fact is, the “trials” taking place in Azerbaijan are closed, secret, and non-public, which constitutes a severe violation of the right to a fair trial. International experts authorized to conduct independent observations were denied entry to Azerbaijan. Even Azerbaijani media outlets are reporting that only journalists from the state-run media agency, “Azertaj,” are allowed to attend the sessions, while participation by others is restricted. What Nuremberg can we even talk about? We are dealing with a formal process that is a mockery of the legal system.
Various testimonies were published from the recent sessions, with David Ishkhanyan and David Babayan speaking. What are your thoughts on this?
We have no access to the real testimonies of the Armenian prisoners. We only know what the Azerbaijani media reports, which is based on information from a single agency. We receive alternative information through Ruben Vardanyan, who is making every effort to convey what he can, and some limited details are transmitted to the families by his private lawyer. Let’s not forget that Ruben Vardanyan’s statement made before the start of the “trials” was of great significance.
It is clear that there is immense pressure on everyone, but even under these conditions, their statements demonstrate that Artsakh had the right to self-determination and legitimately exercised its right to independence.
Yesterday, the hearings in Ruben Vardanyan’s “case” continued, which would be almost comical if it weren’t so tragic. This is the third session during which a group of Azerbaijani soldiers have claimed that they were wounded during military operations and that they know of Ruben Vardanyan through social media. Despite this, they still demand the maximum punishment for him. What are your thoughts on this absurdity?
You’re right. I am even surprised that they are making such absurdities public, because all of this will likely be used against them in the future. It is clear that there is no legitimate legal process here, as I mentioned. For any serious expert, this is not only untrustworthy but also laughable. Most likely, this is being published for the domestic audience, and they are attempting to “create grounds” for the life sentence that Vardanyan is facing. It is no coincidence that all the other prisoners are being asked how they know Vardanyan.
It should be noted that the international community is closely following the process. Two days ago, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Michael O’Flaherty announced that he had already requested permission from the Azerbaijani authorities twice to visit Azerbaijan and planned to apply for a third and fourth time. In response, the Azerbaijani government media cynically stated, “You will not reach Baku.” If this visit does not take place either, the international community must clearly recognize that it is dealing with a country that places itself outside international law. It must respond appropriately and apply sanctions.
In any case, we will continue our work with all international structures and expose the formal, absurd, and illegal nature of this “judicial process.”