Sunday, December 23, 2007

Turkish M.F.A. Expresses Discontent Over Rejection Of Perincek's Appeal By Swiss F.S.C.

Turkish Press

ANKARA - Turkish MFA said the rejection of the appeal of Dogu Perincek, leader of Worker's Party (IP) by The Federal Supreme Court(FSC)of Switzerland was "a serious violation of freedom of expression".

FSC of Switzerland had announced its rejection of the appeal of Perincek, IP leader, against the verdicts of Lausanne Court of First Instance and Regional Court of Appeal on 19 December 2007.

"We maintain the same views put forward in our press release which was made following the verdict of Lausanne Court of First Instance. We consider the verdicts of these courts, above all, as serious violations of freedom of expression," said a press release issued by Turkish MFA on Thursday.

Turkish MFA noted that 'an understanding which was predicated on subjective assessments' prevailed in the said verdicts instead of universal norms, principles and rules of law.

"In these verdicts, the historical facts have been replaced by the self-constructed memory of Armenian circles and the erroneous convictions of some circles concerning the 1915 events," said the press release.

Turkish MFA recalled the proposal it had made in 2005 to Armenia for the establishment a joint commission of historians to study the incidents of 1915 and said, "history should be evaluated and commented by historians and not by judicial or legislative organs."

On the other hand, Jean-Philippe Jeanneraz, Spokesperson of the Swiss MFA told A.A that the Swiss Government was of the belief that formation of a commission of historians would be beneficial for shedding light to the incidents that had occured in the last period of the Ottoman Empire, on Thursday.

Turkish MFA welcomed the statement made by the Swiss MFA following the verdict of FSC.

IP leader Perincek, who had been fined to 9,000 francs for breaching the disputed Swiss law on "denying" Armenian allegations of genocide saying "Armenian genocide is an imperialist lie", had filed an appeal with the FSC in March 2007.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.



Post a Comment

<< Home