IP Leader Perincek To Apply To ECJ Regarding Decision Of Swiss FSC

12/22/2007
Turkish Press, MI

ISTANBUL - Dogu Perincek, the leader of Workers` Party (IP) said he would apply to European Court of Justice regarding the ratification of the verdicts of Lausanne Court of First Instance and Regional Court of Appeal by the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland, on Saturday.

Holding a press conference at his party`s HQs in Istanbul Perincek, said the Swiss FSC had seriously violated freedom of thought and scientific freedom.

Perincek said the verdict of FSC rested on the political decisions of EU acknowledging the `Armenian genocide lie`.

"This is a politically motivated verdict. The Swiss administration and Swiss judges are becoming a tool for US plot of separating Turkey under the Greater Middle East Project. This is a shame for Switzerland," noted Perincek.

Perincek who indicated they would not surrender to this decision wowed to mobilise the Turkish citizens living in Europe to stand to this verdict.

Perincek said he would apply to the ECJ about the verdict.

"I will put a 90kg pile of Armenian documents --proving that the allegations of an Armenian genocide is an international lie-- on the bench of the ECJ," said Perincek.

IP leader Perincek, was prosecuted for breaching the Swiss law on "denying" Armenian allegations of genocide because of the remarks he made during a conference in the Winterthur city of Switzerland in 2005 saying that Armenian allegations of genocide were "an imperialist lie".

(OZG-AÖ)
22.12.2007 - 16:21:00

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.

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

12/21/2007
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.

Turkish politician loses final appeal against Swiss racism conviction, high court says

2007-12-19
PR-Inside.com, Austria

LAUSANNE, Switzerland (AP) - Switzerland's highest court confirmed the sentence against a Turkish politician convicted of racism for denying that the early 20th century killing of Armenians was genocide, according to a ruling published by the court Wednesday.

Dogu Perincek, the leader of the Turkish Workers' Party, lost his final appeal in Swiss courts against the conviction by a lower tribunal in March and a fine of 3,000 Swiss francs (US$2,450; ¤1,870). He now will appeal the ruling to the European Court of Human Rights, according to the office of his lawyer, Laurent Moreillon.

Perincek, who was also given a suspended penalty of 9,000 francs (US$7,360; ¤5,600) and ordered to pay 1,000 francs (US$820; ¤620) to an Armenian association, had repeatedly denied during a visit to Switzerland in 2005 that the World War I-era killings of up to 1.5 million Armenians amounted to genocide.

The Federal Tribunal said in its ruling that many historians, the European Parliament and numerous national parliaments considered the killings as genocide. In literature, the slaughter is mentioned as a classic example of genocide, the tribunal said.

The case was seen as a test of whether Switzerland's anti-racism law can be invoked against someone who denies that the Turks committed genocide in the killings. The legislation has previously been applied to Holocaust denial.

The case has caused diplomatic tension between Switzerland and Turkey, which insists Armenians were killed in civil unrest during the tumultuous collapse of the Ottoman Empire and not in a planned campaign of genocide.

Turkey has called the case against Perincek «inappropriate, baseless and debatable in every circumstance.

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.

Jews, Armenians : « Solidarity for the befallen »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9Pv89pykC0

Swiss authorities arrest two Turks for denying Armenian ‘genocide’

02.07.2007
Today's Zaman with AP Ankara

Two Turks were arrested over the weekend on suspicion of breaking Swiss anti-racism laws for allegedly denying that the killing of Anatolian Armenians in the early 20th century was "genocide," police said.

The two were arrested on Saturday at a conference in the Zurich suburb of Winterthur, where posters were hung up and leaflets distributed rejecting that the killing was genocide. One of the Turks organized the event and the other was shouting slogans before a crowd.
Switzerland's anti-racism legislation, which previously applied to Holocaust denial, was used earlier this year to prosecute a Turkish politician for denying at a gathering in 2005 that the Turks committed "genocide" in the World War I-era killings.

Last week, a Swiss cantonal court upheld the conviction against Doğu Perinçek, the leader of the neo-nationalist Turkish Workers' Party (İP). The case of Perinçek has caused diplomatic tension between Switzerland and Turkey. Ankara has called the case against Perinçek "inappropriate, baseless and debatable in every circumstance."

Perinçek was invited to Saturday's conference, but was prevented from entering Switzerland because he had not applied for a visa, said Dominique Boillat, spokesman for the Federal Office for Migration. Police in the canton (state) of Zurich identified the two arrested individuals as a 57-year-old resident of Germany and a 51-year-old Swiss resident.

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.

Turkish objections to "Armenian genocide" yields results

25 April 2007
The New Anatolian
Ankara

It is not Armenians that Turkey is battling with, Turkey is battling with its own conscience. Therefore if Turkey wins its conscience will loose. Those who are helping Turkey to hide its own conscience will eventually have to answer to history. Because the truth can be buried but it will not stay there forever when the Turkish conscience reawakens.

Turkey is not losing its battle against the radical Armenian diaspora in all front as its latest diplomatic victory shows.

Last week the European Union approved a framework decision aimed at criminalizing denial of the Holocaust and other genocides following six years of intense debate. Attempts by the Armenain to qualify the incidents of 1915 as an act of genocide by the Ottoman Turks was turned down and were not included in the scope of the law.

The end product was described as a carefully-balanced compromise by EU diplomats, which allows EU countries to opt out of enforcing the law if national laws do not prohibit similar conduct. The bill authorizes a maximum sentence of three years for:

Publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising: (1) crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes...directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin, and (2) crimes defined by the Tribunal of Nüremberg...directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.

Thus, the bill only covers incidents that are covered within the scope of the International Criminal Court's jurisdiction, such as the Holocaust and the 1994 Rwanda genocide, but does not cover events such as the alleged Armenian genocide or Stalin's purges and deportations in Soviet Russia.

The decision allows member states to retain constitutional language granting freedoms of speech and press. The decision also criminalizes publicly inciting to violence or hatred , even by dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material, directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.

The International Herald Tribune quoted EU officials as saying the law was notable for what it omitted.

Fearing that the legislation could be hijacked by groups trying to right historical wrongs, a majority of EU countries rejected a demand by the formerly communist Baltic countries that the law criminalize the denial of atrocities committed by Stalin during Soviet times. As a political gesture, however, Franco Frattini, the EU's justice commissioner, said the EU would organize public hearings on the "horrible crimes" of the Stalin era in the coming months.

The scope of the law also does not cover other historical events, like the alleged massacre of Armenians during the First World War by Ottoman Turks, which Armenians claim a genocide.

France has recognized the Armenian claims and is trying to pass legislation that makes it a crime to deny the events as a genocide.

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.

EU aims to criminalise Holocaust denial

April 17 2007
Financial Times
By Tobias Buck in Brussels

Below it says "In an attempt to assuage Turkish fears, several EU diplomats said the provisions would not penalise the denial of mass killing of Armenians by Ottoman troops in the aftermath of the 1915 collapse of the Ottoman empire. Turkey strongly rejects claims that this episode amounted to genocide."

What the several EU diplomats are promoting is a sham and defeats the purpose of drafting the law in the first place.

Laws that make denying or trivialising the Holocaust a criminal offence punishable by jail sentences will be introduced across the European Union, according to a proposal expecting to win backing from ministers Thursday.

Offenders will face up to three years in jail under the proposed legislation, which will also apply to inciting violence against ethnic, religious or national groups.

Diplomats in Brussels voiced confidence on Tuesday that the controversial plan, which has been the subject of heated debate for six years, will be endorsed by member states. However, the Baltic countries and Poland are still holding out for an inclusion of “Stalinist crimes” alongside the Holocaust in the text – a move that is being resisted by the majority of other EU countries.

The latest draft, seen by the Financial Times, will make it mandatory for all Union member states to punish public incitement “to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin”.

They will also have to criminalise “publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes” when such statements incite hatred or violence against minorities.

Diplomats stressed the provision had been carefully worded to include only denial of the Holocaust – the Nazi mass murder of Jews during the second world war – and the genocide in Rwanda in 1994.

They also stressed that the wording was designed to avoid criminalising comical plays or films about the Holocaust such as the Italian comedian Roberto Benigni’s prize-winning Life is Beautiful . The text expressly upholds countries’ constitutional traditions relating to the freedom of expression.

Holocaust denial is already a criminal offence in several European countries, including Germany and Austria. It is not a specific crime in Britain, though UK officials said it could already be tackled under existing legislation.

In an attempt to assuage Turkish fears, several EU diplomats said the provisions would not penalise the denial of mass killing of Armenians by Ottoman troops in the aftermath of the 1915 collapse of the Ottoman empire. Turkey strongly rejects claims that this episode amounted to genocide.

The proposal draws what is likely to be a controversial distinction between inciting violence against racial or ethnic groups and against religious groups. Attacks against Muslims, Jews or other faiths will only be penalised if they go on to incite violence against ethnic or racial groups, the draft text states.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 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.

ARMENIA. LAW AGAINST GENOCIDE

04/04/2007
AZG Armenian Daily #061
Source: Le Monde
By Bernard Henry Levi

"Thus, the matter is not about stating the facts. It has been already done. The matter is about preventing their denial. The matter of discussion at the US Congress will somewhat mess up those who deny the Genocide. In France laws exist against defamation and slander. Will not it be reasonable to have also a law providing for criminal responsibility from defaming the memory of the genocide victims?

Many agree with this but say that the legislation must not interfere the discovery of the truth, which is the business of historians. But, on the contrary, the denial of the Genocide impedes the historians. The deniers are who are confusing the facts and the traces of history. Did ever the laws punishing the denial of the Holocaust hinder the historians?"

Denial is the uttermost point of genocide. This is true both for the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust. The legislation must prevent the reality from being faded from memory.

One might say, "The law is not to make history". This is absurd, as the history is already written down. The fact that the Armenians were victims of genocide, i.e. of an attempt of systematic eradication of their nation, was stated by Churchill and Jores. Few people know that already in 1918 Mustafa Kemal Ataturk had confessed that the Turkish authorities committed a genocide against the Armenians. Military tribunals were established, which sentenced to death hundreds of people. Nothing to say of scientists and historians like Yad Vashem, Jehuda Bauer, Raul Hilberg and others, for who (except Bernard Lewis) the Genocide was never dubitable.

Thus, the matter is not about stating the facts. It has been already done. The matter is about preventing their denial. The matter of discussion at the US Congress will somewhat mess up those who deny the Genocide. In France laws exist against defamation and slander. Will not it be reasonable to have also a law providing for criminal responsibility from defaming the memory of the genocide victims?

Many agree with this but say that the legislation must not interfere the discovery of the truth, which is the business of historians. But, on the contrary, the denial of the Genocide impedes the historians. The deniers are who are confusing the facts and the traces of history. Did ever the laws punishing the denial of the Holocaust hinder the historians?

Those are a law that prevents Le Pain and Golnisch from trespassing the confines of reason, which limits the statements of Forrison. Those are laws that let us avoid repetition of the comical court trial of David Irving. Due to lack of legislation seven years ago the judges and the reporters were to take the place of historians and try to spread light on the history. Moreover those laws helped the historians to avoid the pressure of the deniers. It would be reasonable if similar laws are applied to the matter of the Armenian Genocide.

There are sarcastic suggestions to adopt laws also against colonialism and prophet Mohammed cartoons. This is another trap. The matter is not about putting everything in legislation frames. The matter is only about genocides, which count only 4 or 5 in the world history, including Rwanda, Cambodia and Darfur. Therefore, application of such laws can never restrict the freedom of speech or thought.

Let us be serious. We are no against unofficial opinions, we are against denial of historical events. Denial is not simply a specific point of view on Hitler or Turkey and their victories. Denial is stating that certain things merely did not happen. Let us not vainly speak of the "Box of Pandora", unleashing global Inquisition. Punishing anti-Armenian policy of denial will by no means require revisal of politically correct laws.

There is also opinion that the Holocaust is not to be confused with the Armenian Genocide and therefore diminished. Here one thing is certain. The two crimes were committed in different times and in different ways, and the number of victims is different. Gas chambers were not invented yet at the time of the Armenian Genocide. If the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust are not similar, they at least have much in common.

The first person to realize this was the renowned Adolf Hitler, who was rather encouraged than thrilled with the Genocide. The Armenian Genocide was the first by all means. It was experimental and global and it was observed as a laboratory by the Nazis. When being involved in study of literature denying the Armenian Genocide it became quite clear that it is quite similar with the literature aimed at extermination of the Jews. The same eloquence, the same arguments, the same explanations (massacres are just a part of war, nothing more), efforts to change the roles (in the same manner as Seline claimed that the Jews were guilty in unleashing the war, Turk deniers claim that Armenians were in secret alliance with Russia and suffered as they deserved).

One thing can be said to those who play the "war of memories". That is the position Jan Patozka, and that is the position of the founders of Israel, who found their fate similar to the fate of the expelled Armenians. There can be no diversity in the war against denial. Giving preference to one would mean offence to the other.

The last argument of some is that the truth is strong enough to defend itself and make the deniers remain silent. No it is not, as unlike the denial of the Holocaust, the denial policy of the Armenian Genocide is implemented on governmental level and has the support of strong statehood.

Imagine, what would do the survivors of the Holocaust in case Germany denied the history after the war? What would the Jews do if Germany threatened its partners in case of recognizing the massacre of men, women and children as genocide? That is the case of the Armenians. Enmity against them has no match in this world and even the truth in its nude grace is helpless.

In 1942 Himler created a special troop, "Commando-1005", which was ordered to exhume the bodies and burn them. Everything was done to avoid publicity and to conceal the reality.

Ideal crime is the traceless crime, and terminating the traces is part of the crime itself. Therefore, the deniers of genocides are advocates of crime, deeming themselves free-minded advocates of criticism. They are finishing the work of death.

It is necessary to have a law against denial, for, as it was said, deniel is the uttermost point of genocide.

By Bernard Henry Levi, "Le Monde"


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.

Ankara concerned over EU plans for Genocide legislation

26.03.2007
Today's Zaman
By Süleyman Kurt, Murat Aydın Ankara

At the end of this article there is a mention that "He {Daniel Fried} added that such a step would undercut those voices in Turkey which are calling for a "truthful exploration of these events in pursuit of Turkey's reconciliation with its own past and with Armenia." How ironic is this statement in the face of scholars in Turkey not being free to express their views about the genocide of the Armenians. On the contrary, they are being charged, sent to jail and even killed.

A draft resolution drawn up by European Union term president Germany to introduce punishment for denial of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity has raised concerns in Ankara, which fears it could be used to silence debate about Armenian claims of genocide at the hands of the Ottoman Empire.

The draft legislation was an issue in Justice Minister Cemil Çiçek's talks in Berlin last week and is expected to be debated at a Cabinet meeting today. Çiçek will brief members of the government in detail concerning possible unfavorable results of the resolution for Turkey if it is eventually adopted. Germany, which took the helm of the EU presidency as of Jan. 1, has been working on the draft since the end of last year. The draft, which has been supported by the Armenian lobby, would bring up to three years of imprisonment for those who deny "genocides and war crimes committed against humanity." Çiçek, who held talks in Germany last week, discussed the issue with his counterpart, Brigitte Zypries, and expressed Ankara's concerns over the draft.

According to the draft, crimes of racism, xenophobia and denial of genocide will be included in the joint legislation, which is binding for all member countries. If the draft is adopted, any decision by a national court or a national parliament of an EU member country which would make it a crime to deny that Armenians were victims of "genocide" at the hands of the Ottoman Empire, would open the way for imprisonment for dismissing the genocide charges in other EU member countries.

Germany's goal is taking the draft on agenda of a meeting of Justice and Home Affairs Council before July 1 when it hands over the EU presidency to Portugal. In order to have the draft adopted as part of EU legislation, EU members need to reach a consensus. There is already an opposition to the draft within the EU. Britain, Italy and Denmark are against the adoption of the draft, arguing that "it will limit freedom of expression."

Turkey categorically denies charges that Armenians were subject to genocide during World War I, and says that there were deaths on both sides after Armenians took up arms and revolted against the Ottoman Empire. The parliaments of a number of countries have endorsed resolutions recognizing the alleged genocide, causing serious deterioration in ties with Turkey.

The French National Assembly infuriated Turkey last October, by backing a bill making it a crime to deny that Armenians were victims of "genocide" at the hands of the Ottoman Empire, though it is unlikely to become a law due to opposition from the Senate and President Jacques Chirac. Ankara said the legislation would strike a heavy blow to Turkish-French ties and also accused France, one of the EU's founding countries and which is known for championing liberties, of staining freedom of expression with the bill it adopted. Slamming the bill, the Turkish Parliament then released a joint declaration, signed by all parties in Parliament, and said the bill was motivated by calculations of domestic political gain. They said the bill would also harm prospects for the normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia. Turkey also illustrated how seriously it takes the issue when it said it would suspend military operations with France after the vote.

Germany's move as the EU term president comes at a time when the public opinion in Turkey is highly concerned over passing of a resolution supporting Armenian claims of genocide by the US Congress as the April 24, anniversary of the alleged genocide approaches closer.

Earlier this month, a senior US State Department official warned Congress against passing the resolution, saying the move could result in Turkey closing the İncirlik air base that is used by the US military. Daniel Fried, the assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, told a hearing of a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Europe that Turkish officials have informed the US that approval of the resolution could lead to a shutdown of the base or a restriction on US over-flight privileges granted by Turkey. He also said the US has been informed that Ankara would respond with "extreme emotion" if the Armenian resolution were approved. He added that such a step would undercut those voices in Turkey which are calling for a "truthful exploration of these events in pursuit of Turkey's reconciliation with its own past and with Armenia."

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.

Armenians urge EU to echo Swiss ‘genocide' ruling

13.03.2007
Today's Zaman

Buoyed by a Swiss court's decision condemning Doğu Perinçek, chairman of the Turkish Workers' Party, for denying the Armenian "genocide," the Armenian lobby has called on the European Union to follow suit and also criminalize genocide denial.

In a written statement yesterday the European Armenian Federation called the Swiss verdict "an unprecedented legal victory." This is the first time a court has given a verdict on the Armenian "genocide" and is also the first time the alleged genocide has been recognized by a court of criminal law.

EU president Germany wants to criminalize the denial of recognized genocides, war crimes and crimes against humanity under a pan-EU law, with prison sentences for offenders of between one and three years. Though the Armenian lobby strongly supports the bid, several member states like Britain, Italy and Denmark oppose such legislation on the basis of freedom of expression.

"At the time when the EU is considering EU legislation aiming at penalizing genocide denial, the Swiss case shows the path to follow, i.e., the one in which denials of all clear instances of genocides are fined -- including those, such as the Armenian genocide, that have never been previously sanctioned by international jurisdiction," read the statement.

A controversial figure in Turkey, Perinçek immediately made it clear he would appeal the Swiss court's decision. He also signaled that he could take the verdict to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg if the verdict is upheld by the Swiss Supreme Court. Perinçek was fined 3,000 Swiss francs and has to pay another 1,000 in damages to the Switzerland-Armenia Association.

The Swiss press has criticized the verdict, arguing it has created the potential for future problems.

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.

Swiss and Turkish press mull Perinçek verdict

March 10, 2007
swissinfo

The Swiss media have taken a critical look at trial of Turkish politician Doğu Perinçek, found guilty on Friday of racial discrimination over Armenian genocide comments.

In Turkey reactions were strong, with some newspapers [...]{condemning} the verdict. The Turkish Foreign Ministry said it was "saddened" by the trial's result.

Perinçek was found guilty by a court in Lausanne, western Switzerland, of racial discrimination for denying the 1915 Armenian massacre was genocide. He was handed a suspended fine of SFr9,000 ($7,336).

The politician, the head of the left-wing Turkish Workers' Party, came before the court after calling the genocide "an international lie" during a public speech in Lausanne in July 2005.

Armenians maintain the mass killings in 1915 were genocide, a charge Turkey disputes.

Under the Swiss penal code any act of denying, belittling or justifying genocide is a violation of the country's anti-racism legislation.

The Turkish politician said he would appeal against the verdict.

"Doğu Perinçek had to be punished," wrote the Zurich-based Tages-Anzeiger on Saturday, adding that Perinçek had deliberately provoked the trial. It also criticised Perinçek's "overbearing and arrogant behaviour".

But it warned that the verdict was not water tight, raising doubts over whether the appeal court would follow the Lausanne judge's reasoning.

Sense and nonsense

Another Zurich newspaper, the Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ), had mixed views.

The trial had not made sense because a Turkish politician from a minor party had been judged on behaviour more relevant in his own country, it said. In addition the trial had given Perinçek a platform and blighted relations with Turkey.

But the judge had also delivered a consistent judgement, despite being criticised for using historians' views rather than medical or technical knowledge, wrote the editorialist.

"Nevertheless, the government is still free to avoid using the world "genocide" out of foreign (trade) considerations," it noted.

The Geneva-based Le Temps described the judgement as one on memory.

"The Lausanne judgement does not make history. It gives the Armenians a protection of [their] memory that has already been recognised for the Shoah victims," it wrote in its editorial.

However, the mass-circulation Blick said it was time for the government to recognise the mass killings as genocide after the Lausanne court's "courageous" verdict.

Referring to Swiss Justice Minister Christoph Blocher's controversial attempts to revise the racism law, Blick said Blocher would be better off recognising the genocide than changing legislation.

"If he keeps on, the other six [cabinet members] should at least show him the red card for this totally unnecessary messing around," said the newspaper.

For their part, Swiss Turks interviewed in the Basler Zeitung were restrained in their reaction, with most welcoming the trial as a way of opening up debate.

Turkish reaction

The press reaction comes a day after the Turkish Foreign Ministry sharply criticised the Lausanne verdict, saying it ignored "freedom of expression". In a statement, the ministry said the Swiss legal system and the press had been biased.

"The court case was inappropriate, groundless and controversial in every sense ... The verdict cannot be accepted by the Turkish people," said the ministry in a statement on Friday.

The Saturday editions of Turkish newspapers also had harsh words. The nationalist press was particularly critical.

"Dishonourable Switzerland" screamed the headline of Gözcü, which went on to say that the verdict was another proof of European hypocrisy – Europeans underline the importance of freedom of opinion but were quick to condemn it.

For its part, the right-leaning Yeni Cag newspaper wrote that Perinçek's verdict meant "the whole Turkish nation had been punished".

Other parts of the media were less severe, but were still widespread in their coverage. Hürriyet quoted Perinçek as saying his trial had started a debate in Switzerland over how to judge historical events, but that he would go to the European Court of Human Rights with his case.

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.

Turkey condemns Swiss court over genocide verdict

10 March 2007
Khaleej Times Online
Source: Reuters

Turkey of course condemns it because as way back, the UN Whitaker Report on Genocide, 1985, at the United Nations Economic and Social Council Commission on Human Rights Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities Thirty-eighth session, Item 4 of the provisional agenda, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1985/6 — 2 July 1985, said "present official Turkish contention is that genocide did not take place although there were many casualties and dispersals in the fighting, and that all the evidence to the contrary is forged.", here. This at the time Turkey declared that it will supposedly open its archives to the public. It is definitely a case of saying "do you believe your eyes or do you believe what I say?"

ANKARA - Turkey has condemned the decision of a Swiss court to impose a suspended jail sentence and a fine on a Turkish citizen for denying that mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915 amounted to genocide.

In the first such conviction under Swiss law, the court on Friday sentenced Dogu Perincek, head of the leftist-nationalist Turkish Workers’ Party, to a 90-day suspended jail term and fined him 3,000 Swiss francs ($2,461).

‘The court case was inappropriate, groundless and controversial in every sense ... The verdict cannot be accepted by the Turkish people,’ Turkey’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement released late on Friday.

It criticised Swiss media coverage of the case, calling it biased, and said the verdict violated free speech.

Perincek, whose party has no seats in the Ankara parliament, was convicted under a 1995 Swiss law which bans denying, belittling or justifying any genocide. Twelve Turks were acquitted of similar charges in 2001.

Perincek, 65, said he would appeal against the verdict.

Turkey strongly denies claims by Armenia and its supporters that the Ottoman Empire committed a systematic genocide against about 1.5 million Armenians during World War One.

Ankara says that figure is greatly exaggerated. It says large numbers of both Christian Armenians and Muslim Turks died because of inter-ethnic fighting, famine and disease as the Ottoman Empire collapsed.

But many parliaments around the world have now recognised the Armenian killings as genocide.
The Swiss verdict coincides with Turkish diplomatic efforts to head off a resolution in the US Congress on the genocide.

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.

Shaw: ICJ’s Serbian genocide verdict does not improve the standing of the court

10.03.2007
Today's Zaman
SELÇUK GÜLTAŞLI - BRUSSELS

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling on Bosnia has created waves of intense debate, not only in Bosnia and Serbia but all over the world.

As the ICJ cleared Serbian state of genocide, both Bosnian victims and many scholars criticized the verdict as being political.

Professor Martin Shaw of Sussex University, one of the leading experts of the issue, has strongly condemned the decision and accused the ICJ of "engaging in the systematic denial of the Bosnian Genocide." Professor Shaw answered our questions:

In your article "The International Court of Justice: Serbia, Bosnia and Genocide," posted on the opendemocracy.net Web site, you argue: "It is not too strong to say that in this case, the International Court of Justice has engaged in systematic denial of the Bosnian genocide." It is quite a tough statement.

Clearly the International Court of Justice did recognize that genocide occurred at Srebrenica and indicted Serbia with its failure to prevent the massacre there. This is important. However, while the court recognized that acts that could constitute genocide had been committed by Serbian nationalists across Bosnia throughout the years 1992-1995, it produced unconvincing, inconsistent legal reasons for saying that genocide had not generally occurred. Thus I argue that the court denied the full scale of the Bosnian genocide -- because it recognized genocide at Srebenica, this was a partial denial of the Bosnian genocide, but a serious failure nonetheless.

Is this verdict a purely technical one or a political one? How one can make that distinction?

The court argued its verdict in legal terms. However, because of the unconvincing character of its legal arguments, one is bound to ask whether political factors influenced the verdict.

If the decision was not taken not on purely legal grounds, what are the other considerations?

Clearly the court could have wanted to avoid a verdict that would have provoked further political conflict inside Serbia, where the situation is currently delicate. But we cannot be certain that this sort of consideration influenced the verdict.

Anthony Dworkin, also writing for opendemocracy.net, has criticized your approach and implies that genocide is something serious and cannot be applied wherever you like. He also argues that the Serbs' intentions regarding the Bosnians were far from clear.

I agree that genocide is a serious charge. This is why it must not be applied lightly -- nor must it be rejected or minimized without good reason. I think the Serbian intentions to destroy the Bosnian Muslim and Croat communities, in the areas of Bosnia-Herzegovina that the Serbian nationalists controlled or conquered, were very clear and consistent from the widespread policies of expulsion, murder and rape that they adopted from 1992 onwards. And they were, and still are, largely successful -- only a small number of non-Serbs remain in the so-called Republika Srpska inside Bosnia.

As you said in your article: "Yet in relation to the Srebrenica massacre, the ICJ 'sees no reason to disagree' with the finding of the [International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia] that these acts constituted genocide." How can one possibly explain this?

It seems to me that this is a compromise verdict. The court upheld the Bosnian claim that genocide was committed at Srebrenica, but in other respects upheld the Serbian view that genocide had not been committed. So both sides gained something.

Do you think the confidence in the court will now be in jeopardy with the latest verdict?

This kind of verdict does not improve the standing of the court.

How do you think the verdict will contribute to the healing process in the region?

I think the verdict will not help much since it is inconsistent and enables both sides to stick to their original positions, saying they have won something.

Do you think this verdict has once more punished Bosnians who were victims and rewards the Serbian state by clearing it from the "crime of crimes," i.e., genocide?

It is too strong to say that this has rewarded Serbia, since clearly there are some serious indictments of it and there is more pressure to yield Ratko Mladic to the Hague. But the Serbian state has certainly escaped the more serious consequences that could have followed if Bosnia's case had been fully successful.

Have Bosnian Muslims interpreted the verdict as yet another decision of the West against Muslims? How do you react to the Bosnians' evaluation?

I think this is too simple. This was an international court with judges drawn from a wide range of countries. And it does still reinforce the prevailing view that the Serbians were the main criminals in the Bosnian war and the Muslims the main victims.

Muslims in Europe, citing the cartoons of the Prophet of Islam and the war in Iraq, argue that this verdict will not help in the dialogue between civilizations. Do you think the verdict can have such implications?

Genocide should not be an issue between civilizations. Muslims were victims in Bosnia, but they were also victims in Iraq when Saddam's regimes massacred Kurds, and they are victims there today when Sunni militias kill Shia, and Shia militias kill Sunnis. Muslims can be perpetrators of genocide as well as victims; Christians can be victims as well as perpetrators. From a human point of view we have to stop all genocide -- whoever commits it and whoever is the victim.

Another popular question among Muslims is if the Bosnians were Christians and the Serbs Muslims, would the verdict be the same?

International courts and authorities often avoid recognizing genocide whoever the victims are -- look at Rwanda, where the UN turned away from helping the Tutsis, who were mostly Christians. This weakness of international institutions is not to do with anti-Muslim ideas.

Turkey has been accused of the Armenian "genocide" with no court decision and you have referred to the events of 1915 as genocide in your book "War and Genocide: Organized Killing in Modern Society?" Do you think the court decision can create a jurisprudence for similar cases? If Turkey goes to international arbitration, for example, do you think it can be exonerated?

The International Court of Justice decision arose because Bosnia took a case against Serbia to the court. In relation to the events of 1915, no such case can now arise: this is now a matter for history rather than law. However, just as Serbia will not be a healthy society until it recognizes the Serbian state's responsibility for genocide in Bosnia and Kosovo, so Turkey will not be a healthy society until it abandons the denial of the Ottoman genocide against the Armenians. Nearly a century on, it should be possible for modern Turkish democracy to fully acknowledge that this crime was committed, and to say that Turkey today is a society in which this kind of policy will never again arise.

I don't think I can answer your question about international arbitration, as I don't know enough about it. I'm not sure in any case that the issues arising from the Armenian genocide are necessarily issues between modern Turkey and modern Armenia, although if both sides favored that, it could help. The ICJ decision by itself is only one decision in the international jurisprudence of genocide, and needs to be seen with other decisions by the tribunals and the new ICC.

Do you think it is wise to legislate laws to punish the deniers of genocides or to legislate on historical events?

No, in general I think that it is better to deal with genocide denial through argument and education than through law.


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.

Swiss convict Turk of denying Armenian genocide

09 Mar 2007
AlertNet
Source: Reuters

The article below says "Twelve Turks were acquitted of similar charges in 2001". I think the difference this time is that Perincek, submitted 90 kg (200 lb) of historical documents, arguing that there had been no genocide against Armenians, but there had been "reciprocal massacres", so the court became more knowledgeable, thanks to Perincek. It is also interesting to observe what Turkey will do regarding this court verdict.

Gündüz Aktan,in Opinion & Editorials, 12 October 2006 in the Turkish Daily News here, said "the wisest thing we can do is to calmly wait for the enactment of the bill and then file a complaint against the French state at the European Court of Human Rights on the grounds that the law is contrary to the freedom of expression cited in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

France would argue that the Armenian genocide did happen and invoke both French legal provisions and Articles 4 and 7 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965) to justify the punishment of those denying the genocide.

We, in turn, would stress that according to Articles 6 and 9 of the genocide convention no case can be called genocide in the absence of a court decision to this effect. The European Court of Human Rights is not competent to deal with a case on whether a given incident constitutes genocide or not. So it has to accept our thesis. Our winning the case would constitute a big defeat for the Armenians".

Will this advice be heeded now by Turkey based on this court's conviction of Perincek on genocide denial?

GENEVA, March 9 (Reuters) - A Turkish politician was found guilty on Friday by a Swiss criminal court of denying that mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915 amounted to genocide, the first such conviction under Swiss law.

Dogu Perincek, head of the leftist-nationalist Turkish Workers' Party, called the Armenian genocide "an international lie" during a speech in the Swiss city of Lausanne in July 2005.

Judge Pierre-Henri Winzap sentenced him to a 90-day suspended jail term and fined him 3,000 Swiss francs ($2,461), in line with the prosecutor's request, the Swiss news agency ATS reported from the Lausanne criminal court.

Perincek, who submitted 90 kg (200 lb) of historical documents, argued there had been no genocide against Armenians, but there had been "reciprocal massacres".

The 65-year-old politician, whose party has no seats in the Turkish parliament, was convicted under a 1995 Swiss law which bans denying, belittling or justifying any genocide. The maximum penalty is three years.

Twelve Turks were acquitted of similar charges in 2001.

The case has further soured relations between neutral Switzerland and Turkey, which denies any genocide during the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire in World War One.

Armenia says around 1.5 million Armenians perished in the killings, while Turkey says the deaths were part of inter-ethnic fighting, disease and famine in which both sides suffered.

Ankara was incensed last year when France's parliament approved a bill that made it a crime to deny the Armenian genocide. The bill did not become law.

The U.S. Congress is widely expected to back a resolution next month recognising the killings as genocide. The Bush administration is opposed to the move, fearing the impact on relations with its NATO ally.

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.

Turk goes on trial in Switzerland for denying Armenian genocide

March 6, 2007
IHT
Source: Reuters

GENEVA: A Turkish politician went on trial Tuesday in Switzerland for denying that the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks during World War I amounted to genocide.

Dogu Perincek, head of the Turkish Workers' Party, called the Armenian genocide "an international lie" during a speech in the Swiss city of Lausanne in July 2005.

The state prosecutor has called for a six month prison term for violating a 1995 Swiss law that bans denying, belittling or justifying any genocide. The maximum penalty is three years.

Perincek told the Lausanne criminal court that there had been no genocide against Armenians, but there had been "reciprocal massacres," according to Swiss Radio.

"I defend my right to freedom of expression," Swiss Radio quoted Perincek, 65, as saying in German. "There was no genocide, therefore this law cannot apply to my remarks."

The case has further soured relations between Switzerland and Turkey. Ankara criticized the decision to prosecute the case and later canceled an official visit in 2005 by Joseph Deiss, who was the economy minister at the time.

If found guilty, Perincek would become the first person to be convicted under the law. Twelve Turks were acquitted of similar charges in 2001.

Turkey denies charges by Armenia and other countries that 1.5 million Armenians died in a systematic genocide at the hands of Ottoman Turks beginning in 1915.

Turkey says that hundreds of thousands of both Muslim Turks and Christian Armenians died in a conflict during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

A verdict is expected Friday.

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.

Perinçek before Swiss court, supporters not admitted

07.03.2007
Today's Zaman Ankara

Rauf Denktaş below says "We're not going [to Switzerland] for enmity, we're going to see whether we can lay the foundations of a friendship … In order to be friends, parties should avoid insults. We hope that cantons and governments in Switzerland eventually draw the conclusion that a years-long smear campaign is not something necessary for world peace,". Mr. Denktaş, in order to be friend you should take your friend's concern seriously and not belittle your friend. As far as Professor Justin McCarthy's claim below that "the "Blue Book," chosen by Armenians to prove their claims of genocide, was one of the products of the British war propaganda bureau's efforts at misinformation during World War I", U.K. FOREIGN OFFICE REJECTS TURKISH PARLIAMENT'S BID TO UNDERMINE HISTORICAL DOCUMENTATION OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE.

The leader of the neo-nationalist Turkish Workers' Party (İP), Doğu Perinçek, went on trial in the Swiss city of Lausanne for calling the alleged genocide of Armenians in 1915 an "international lie" during Turkish rallies in Lausanne two years ago.

Nevertheless, 160 members of the Talat Pasha Committee who traveled to Lausanne in show of support to Perinçek were not allowed to enter the court hall, as well as the Turkish journalists who wanted to watch the trial.

The Talat Pasha Committee, which aims at combating Armenian allegations, is named after an Ottoman interior minister whom Armenians claim had a key role in the alleged Armenian genocide. Talat Pasha was killed in 1921 by an Armenian gunman in Berlin.

A Swiss official said the Turkish group -- most of whom were wearing red scarves and waving Turkish flags -- should have had written accreditation earlier from Swiss authorities to enter the court, the Anatolia news agency reported, noting that meanwhile, a group of Swiss and foreign journalists based in Switzerland and a group of Armenians living in Switzerland were allowed to enter the court hall. The trial, which started yesterday, will continue for four days, the agency also reported from Lausanne.

Among Perinçek's supporters was Rauf Denktaş, the first and former president of Turkish Cyprus. "We're not going [to Switzerland] for enmity, we're going to see whether we can lay the foundations of a friendship … In order to be friends, parties should avoid insults. We hope that cantons and governments in Switzerland eventually draw the conclusion that a years-long smear campaign is not something necessary for world peace," Denktaş said on Monday ahead of his departure for Switzerland.

If found guilty, Perinçek will be the first person sentenced under Switzerland's anti-racism law for denying the alleged genocide. In the past, a Bern court acquitted 12 Turks facing similar charges in 2001.

Turkey vehemently denies that Armenian subjects under its predecessor the Ottoman Empire were victims of genocide. Facing a mounting Armenian campaign to get international recognition for the alleged genocide, Turkey called for a joint committee of Turkish and Armenian experts in 2005 to study the allegations. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan sent a letter to Armenian President Robert Kocharian proposing the establishment of such a committee. Nevertheless, Yerevan hasn't given a positive answer to Ankara's proposal up to date, instead arguing that such a committee should be inter-governmental.

American historian Professor Justin McCarthy was also in Lausanne yesterday in order to stand before the court as a witness for the defendant. McCarthy has become a well-known name in Turkish public opinion in recent years.

McCarthy said at the time that the source known as the "Blue Book," chosen by Armenians to prove their claims of genocide, was one of the products of the British war propaganda bureau's efforts at misinformation during World War I. Turkey also argues that Armenian allegations in the book, formally titled "The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915-1916," are not factually supported and the book as a whole was wartime propaganda by the British.

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.

Srebrenica verdict to facilitate Turkish efforts against alleged genocide

Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Turkish Daily News

The ruling issued by the international court as a result of a trial based upon documents proves Armenian genocide allegations can be countered through arbitration, says retired Ambassador Gündüz Aktan

FULYA ÖZERKAN
ANKARA - Turkish Daily News

The latest verdict delivered by a top U.N. court clearing Serbia of direct responsibility for genocide during the Bosnian war is most likely to strengthen the hand of Turkey, a target of allegations that Armenians were subjects of a genocide at the hands of the Ottoman Empire during World War I.

“The ruling will make our position stronger except for one point, which concerns the responsibility of the state but I don't see it that much important because what matters is whether there is an intention on the part of the state [to commit a systematic genocide],” said retired Ambassador Gündüz Aktan, who is also a member of a commission that advises the government to counter genocide allegations.

Last month, the International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled that the massacre in Srebrenica was tantamount to genocide but Belgrade was not directly responsible. But it said Serbia broke international law by failing to stop the killings. The case was the first of a state being charged with genocide.

At least 100,000 people died in the 1992-1995 war, triggered by the break-up of the former Yugoslavia. Bosnia's Muslims and Croats wanted to cut ties with Belgrade, a move opposed by Bosnian Serbs.

The landmark ruling, which could serve the purpose of clarifying the definition of genocide as well as the responsibility of state to prevent it, came at a time when the Turkish government is pondering ways to take Armenian genocide claims to international arbitration.

Faced with growing international pressure to recognize the allegations, Turkey has intensified its quest for a new strategy and fresh thinking on the intractable issue that has long tied up its relations with neighboring Armenia. The move also comes as a long-term policy against influential Armenian diaspora's efforts to get international recognition for the killings between 1915 and 16.

However, it is not clear how the latest court ruling on Srebrenica would impact Turkey's efforts to counter genocide claims through the court option. According to Aktan, it would have a positive effect. “Differing from ethnic cleansing, the expulsion between 1915 and 16 is in accordance with the established legal practice.”

In his daily column today, Aktan said the Ottomans had never had an intention of wiping out the Armenians with racist hatred, while the Armenian terrorist organizations harbored racist hatred against the Turks. “Armenian [history] archives still remain closed, while Turkey has additionally opened all of its archives. This verdict issued by the international court as a result of a trial based upon documents proves Armenian genocide allegations can be countered through arbitration.”

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.

In Lausanne, Dogu Perincek goes on trail for denying Armenian genocide claims

Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Hurriyet

Rauf Denktas below says "Thousands of our Armenian siblings live here under good conditions. Workers come from Armenia to make a living here, and do so. So friendship between Turkey and Armenia is necessary on both sides. But friendship cannot be based on lies and slander.". If friendship relies on ignoring the past then Turkey and Armenia will be living a dream world. It is by admitting and reconciling the past that enduring friendships are based on. Turkey is looking back from the present day and saying that it could not have committed such an atrocious crime. Turkey instead should listen with compassion to what Armenians have gone through and the trauma they are enduring to this day.

A delegation of 160 people, included former President of Northern Cyprus, Rauf Denktas, has gone to Switzerland to show support for the head of Turkey's Workers' Party, Dogu Perincek, who is on trial there for publicly denying Armenian allegations of genocide.

Perincek, who is being tried in Lausanne, was joined in court by a large group of academicians, historians, retired military officials, and politicians from Turkey, who left Istanbul on a specially chartered Turkish Airlines flight for Geneva. Speaking prior to departure at Istanbul's Ataturk Airport, Denktas told reporters "Thousands of our Armenian siblings live here under good conditions. Workers come from Armenia to make a living here, and do so. So friendship between Turkey and Armenia is necessary on both sides. But friendship cannot be based on lies and slander."

The general leader of the Turkish Workers' Party, Dogu Perincek is on trial in Switzerland for calling Armenian allegations of genocide in Turkey "an imperialist lie" during a 2005 demonstration in Lausanne. Reports say Perincek left Turkey for his trial in Lausanne carrying 90 kilos worth of Russian and Armenian documents with him.

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.

Genocide denial trial raises many questions

March 5, 2007 - 9:45 PM
SwissInfo

The trial has opened in Lausanne of Turkish politician Doğu Perinçek, who made comments in Switzerland denying the 1915 Armenian massacre was genocide.

The court case, which is centred on Swiss anti-racism legislation, is set to test the already shaky relations between Bern and Ankara.

A meeting between Swiss Justice Minister Christoph Blocher - an opponent of the law - and his Turkish counterpart Cemil Cicek in Bern at the weekend raised eyebrows.

Perinçek, the head of the left-wing Turkish Workers' Party, stands accused of racial discrimination after he called the genocide "an international lie" during a public speech in the city of Lausanne in July 2005.

Lausanne is the main city of canton Vaud, where the parliament in 2003 voted to recognise the killings as genocide.

An estimated 150 supporters of Perincek held a silent protest in the city on Tuesday to coincide with the start of the trial.

In court, Perinçek admitted there had been massacres but said there could be no talk of genocide.

"I have not denied genocide because there was no genocide," he argued.

Under the Swiss penal code any act of denying, belittling or justifying genocide is a violation of the country's anti-racism legislation.

Armenians maintain the mass killings in 1915 were genocide, a charge Turkey disputes.

Experts say the presiding judge at the district court in Lausanne will have to negotiate some tricky waters concerning both the law and Swiss-Turkish relations.

Tensions between Bern and Ankara were high in 2005 after Turkey criticised the Swiss authorities' decision to investigate Perinçek. It also later cancelled an official trip to Turkey by the then economics minister, Joseph Deiss.


Law debate

The law itself has been the subject of debate since Blocher announced during a visit to Turkey last October that the legislation was incompatible with freedom of expression.

The comments were welcomed by Ankara but caused a storm of protest in Switzerland.

Blocher has again come in for criticism by the media and some politicians over the timing of the meeting with his Turkish counterpart at the weekend. According to the justice ministry bilateral issues – and not the trial – were discussed.

Legal experts have also raised questions about the law – albeit in a different context.

"The lawmakers wanted to assimilate the negation of a historical reality to a racist proclamation. This is controversial, because it is about two different things," said Robert Roth, dean of the faculty of law at Geneva University.

But Roth believes the central question of the trial will be something else – who should make a judgement on historical events?


Genocide or massacre?

The Armenians say Ottoman Turks slaughtered up to 1.8 million Armenians in a planned genocide between 1915 and 1918. Turkey denies the mass killings were genocide, saying the death toll is inflated.

So far most historians, the Council of Europe, the French parliament and the Swiss House of Representatives – plus two cantonal parliaments in Switzerland – have all recognised the events as genocide. The Swiss government does not officially speak of genocide.

Francesco Bertossa, who was part of the defence team in another Turkish genocide denial trial in 2001 in Bern, believes the definition question should not influence the verdict.

"The anti-racism law does not only punish genocide denial but also any crime against humanity," he said.


Swiss-Armenians

For its part, the Swiss-Armenian Association, the private party associated with the public prosecutor in the trial, welcomes the case.

"We will finally know if denigrating our people and tarnishing our memory is a crime in Switzerland," said co-president Sarkis Shahinian.

Prosecutor-general Eric Cottier has been quoted as saying that unless shown to be otherwise, the Armenian genocide was "sufficiently recognised to be defined as such".

But Perinçek remains defiant. Arriving in Switzerland at the weekend he reiterated his call for the law to be abolished and said he could prove that genocide did not take place.

A verdict in the trial is expected on Friday.

swissinfo, based on an article in Italian by Luigi Jorio


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.

Turkish nationalist to stand trial for Armenian Genocide denial in Switzerland

05.03.2007 17:40

YEREVAN (YERKIR) - Turkish nationalist, leader of the Turkish Labor Party Dogu Perincek will stand trial in Switzerland. The legal proceedings launched over violation of Swiss anti-racist law on the Armenian Genocide denial may cause tension in the Swiss-Turkish relations.

The news has already made a stir in Turkey, where nationalists, specifically members of the Talaat-pasha committee claim “it’s a process against Turkey.” Representatives of the Armenian Association of Switzerland said this trial may become a kind of “premiere”. They say rallies in Perincek’s support and attempts to threaten the Swiss authorities are also possible.

In September 2005 the Swiss law enforcement charged Dogu Perincek of violating the anti-racist law by denying the Armenian Genocide three times. Perincek called the Genocide “an international lie” during his speech in Bern and repeated the same words in Zurich.

According to the Swiss legislation, public denial or justification of the Armenian Genocide conflicts with the law and is viewed as a criminal deed. Dogu Perincek made a similar statement in May 2005 and also during an event dedicated to the 82nd anniversary of the Lausanne Treaty, reported PanARMENIAN.Net.

A criminal case was also initiated against chairman of the Turkish Association of Historians Yusuf Halacogly, who repeatedly denies the Armenian Genocide. Official Ankara is constantly censuring the Swiss government and the court decisions. The Swiss authorities, however, say the juridical system functions independently of the government.

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.