DOCSLIB.ORG

GRANDE CHAMBRE AFFAIRE CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES C. ARMÉNIE

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GRANDE CHAMBRE AFFAIRE CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES C. ARMÉNIE GRANDE CHAMBRE AFFAIRE CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES c. ARMÉNIE (Requête no 13216/05) ARRÊT STRASBOURG 16 juin 2015 Cet arrêt est définitif. ARRÊT CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES c. ARMÉNIE 1 En l’affaire Chiragov et autres c. Arménie, La Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, siégeant en une Grande Chambre composée de : Dean Spielmann, président, Josep Casadevall, Guido Raimondi, Mark Villiger, Isabelle Berro, Ineta Ziemele, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Alvina Gyulumyan, Khanlar Hajiyev, George Nicolaou, Luis López Guerra, Ganna Yudkivska, Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, Ksenija Turković, Egidijus Kūris, Robert Spano, Iulia Antoanella Motoc, juges, et de Michael O’Boyle, greffier adjoint, Après en avoir délibéré en chambre du conseil les 22 et 23 janvier 2014 et le 22 janvier 2015, Rend l’arrêt que voici, adopté à cette dernière date : PROCÉDURE 1. À l’origine de l’affaire se trouve une requête (no 13216/05) dirigée contre la République d’Arménie et dont six ressortissants azerbaïdjanais, M. Elkhan Chiragov, M. Adishirin Chiragov, M. Ramiz Gebrayilov, M. Akif Hasanof, M. Fekhreddin Pashayev et M. Qaraca Gabrayilov (« les requérants ») ont saisi la Cour le 6 avril 2005 en vertu de l’article 34 de la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales (« la Convention »). Le sixième requérant est décédé en juin 2005. Son fils, M. Sagatel Gabrayilov, poursuit la procédure au nom de son père. 2. Les requérants, qui ont été admis au bénéfice de l’assistance judiciaire, ont été représentés par Me M. Muller QC, Me C. Vine, Me M. Butler, Me M. Ivers, Me B. Poynor et Me S. Swaroop, avocats à Londres, ainsi que par M. K. Yıldız. Le gouvernement arménien (« le Gouvernement ») a été représenté par son agent, M. G. Kostanyan, représentant de la République d’Arménie auprès de la Cour. 2 ARRÊT CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES c. ARMÉNIE 3. Les requérants alléguaient en particulier être empêchés de retourner dans le district de Latchin, situé en territoire occupé par le Gouvernement, et être de ce fait privés de la jouissance de leur domicile et de leurs biens situés dans ce district. Ils se plaignaient en outre de ne pas avoir été indemnisés du préjudice ainsi subi. Ils y voyaient des violations continues de l’article 1 du Protocole no 1 et de l’article 8 de la Convention. Invoquant également l’article 13 de la Convention, ils estimaient de plus ne pas avoir disposé d’un recours effectif relativement à ces griefs. Enfin, pour tous les griefs exposés ci-dessus, ils s’estimaient victimes d’une discrimination fondée, au mépris de l’article 14 de la Convention, sur leur appartenance ethnique et religieuse. 4. La requête a été attribuée à la troisième section de la Cour (article 52 § 1 du règlement de la Cour, « le règlement »). Le gouvernement azerbaïdjanais, qui a exercé son droit d’intervention prévu à l’article 36 § 1 de la Convention, a été représenté par son agent, M. C. Asgarov. 5. Le 9 mars 2010, une chambre de la troisième section composée de Josep Casadevall, président, Elisabet Fura, Corneliu Bîrsan, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Alvina Gyulumyan, Egbert Myjer et Luis López Guerra, juges, ainsi que de Stanley Naismith, greffier adjoint de section, s’est dessaisie au profit de la Grande Chambre, ni l’une ni l’autre des parties ne s’y étant opposée (articles 30 de la Convention et 72 du règlement). 6. La composition de la Grande Chambre a été arrêtée conformément aux articles 26 §§ 4 et 5 de la Convention et 24 du règlement. Le président de la Cour a décidé que, dans l’intérêt d’une bonne administration de la justice, la présente affaire et l’affaire Sargsyan c. Azerbaïdjan (requête no 40167/06) devaient être attribuées à la même formation de la Grande Chambre (articles 24, 42 § 2 et 71 du règlement). 7. Une audience sur la recevabilité et le fond de l’affaire a eu lieu en public au Palais des droits de l’homme, à Strasbourg, le 15 septembre 2010 (article 59 § 3 du règlement). 8. Le 14 décembre 2011, la requête a été déclarée recevable par une Grande Chambre composée de Nicolas Bratza, président, Jean-Paul Costa, Christos Rozakis, Françoise Tulkens, Josep Casadevall, Nina Vajić, Corneliu Bîrsan, Peer Lorenzen, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Elisabet Fura, Alvina Gyulumyan, Khanlar Hajiyev, Egbert Myjer, Sverre Erik Jebens, Giorgio Malinverni, George Nicolaou et Luis López Guerra, juges, ainsi que de Michael O’Boyle, greffier adjoint. 9. La partie requérante et le Gouvernement ont chacun soumis des observations écrites complémentaires (article 59 § 1 du règlement) sur le fond de l’affaire. Par ailleurs, des observations ont été reçues du gouvernement azerbaïdjanais. 10. Une audience sur le fond de l’affaire a eu lieu en public au Palais des droits de l’homme, à Strasbourg, le 22 janvier 2014. ARRÊT CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES c. ARMÉNIE 3 Ont comparu : – pour le Gouvernement MM.G. KOSTANYAN, agent, G. ROBERTSON, QC, conseil, E. BABAYAN, T. COLLIS, conseillers ; – pour les requérants MM.M. MULLER, QC, M. IVERS, S. SWAROOP, Mmes M. BUTLER, conseils, C. VINE, B. POYNOR, S. KARAKAŞ, A. EVANS, conseillers ; – pour le gouvernement azerbaïdjanais MM.C. ASGAROV, agent, M.N. SHAW, QC, G. LANSKY, conseils, O. GVALADZE, H. TRETTER, O. ISMAYILOV, Mme T. URDANETA WITTEK, conseillers. M. Hasanof et M. Pashayev, requérants, étaient également présents. La Cour a entendu en leurs déclarations M. Muller, M. Swaroop, M. Ivers, Mme Butler, M. Robertson, M. Shaw et M. Lansky. 11. À l’issue de l’audience, la Cour a jugé qu’il n’y avait pas lieu, aux fins de l’examen de l’affaire, d’organiser de mission d’établissement des faits ni d’entendre de témoins. EN FAIT I. LES CIRCONSTANCES DE L’ESPÈCE A. La genèse de l’affaire 12. À l’époque de l’effondrement de l’URSS, l’oblast autonome du Haut-Karabagh (« OAHK ») était une région autonome de la République socialiste soviétique d’Azerbaïdjan (« la RSS d’Azerbaïdjan »). Situé sur le 4 ARRÊT CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES c. ARMÉNIE territoire de cette république, l’OAHK s’étendait sur une superficie de 4 388 km2. À ce moment-là, il n’y avait pas de frontière commune entre le Haut-Karabagh (en arménien, Artsakh) et la République socialiste soviétique d’Arménie (« la RSS d’Arménie »), qui étaient séparés par le territoire azerbaïdjanais ; la zone où ils étaient le plus rapprochés était le district de Latchin, qui comprenait une bande de terre de moins de 10 km de largeur souvent appelée « corridor de Latchin ». 13. Selon le recensement soviétique de 1989, l’OAHK comptait environ 189 000 habitants, dont 77 % d’Arméniens, 22 % d’Azéris et quelques membres des minorités russe et kurde. Le district de Latchin présentait quant à lui une démographie différente, la grande majorité de la population (60 000 personnes environ) y étant d’ethnie kurde ou azérie. Seuls 5 à 6 % des habitants du district étaient d’ethnie arménienne. 14. Au début de l’année 1988, des manifestations eurent lieu à Stepanakert, la capitale régionale de l’OAHK, ainsi qu’à Erevan, la capitale arménienne. Les manifestants demandaient le rattachement du Haut-Karabagh à l’Arménie. Le 20 février, le soviet de l’OAHK présenta aux soviets suprêmes de la RSS d’Arménie, de la RSS d’Azerbaïdjan et de l’URSS une demande tendant à ce que cette région fût autorisée à se séparer de l’Azerbaïdjan et à être rattachée à l’Arménie. Le 23 mars, le soviet suprême de l’URSS rejeta cette demande. En juin, le soviet suprême d’Azerbaïdjan la rejeta à son tour, celui de l’Arménie votant de son côté en faveur de l’unification. 15. Tout au long de l’année 1988, les manifestations appelant à l’unification se succédèrent. Le district de Latchin fit l’objet d’attaques et de barrages routiers. De nombreuses personnes furent victimes d’affrontements et des réfugiés, qui se comptaient par centaines de milliers des deux côtés, passèrent d’Arménie en Azerbaïdjan et réciproquement. En conséquence, le 12 janvier 1989, l’URSS plaça l’OAHK sous le contrôle direct de Moscou. Puis, le 28 novembre de la même année, le contrôle de la région fut rendu à l’Azerbaïdjan. Quelques jours plus tard, le 1er décembre, le soviet suprême de la RSS d’Arménie et le conseil régional du Haut-Karabagh adoptèrent une résolution conjointe sur la réunification du Haut-Karabagh et de l’Arménie. En conséquence de cette résolution, un budget commun aux deux entités fut établi en janvier 1990 et, au printemps de la même année, il fut décidé que le Haut-Karabagh participerait aux élections arméniennes suivantes. 16. Au début de l’année 1990, le conflit s’étant aggravé, les troupes soviétiques investirent Bakou et le Haut-Karabagh, lequel fut placé sous état d’urgence. De violents affrontements, dans lesquels intervinrent parfois les forces soviétiques, continuèrent cependant d’opposer les Arméniens et les Azéris. 17. Le 30 août 1991, l’Azerbaïdjan proclama son indépendance à l’égard de l’Union soviétique. Cette déclaration fut ensuite officialisée par ARRÊT CHIRAGOV ET AUTRES c. ARMÉNIE 5 l’adoption, le 18 octobre 1991, de la loi constitutionnelle sur l’indépendance nationale. Le 2 septembre 1991, le soviet de l’OAHK annonça la fondation de la « République du Haut-Karabagh » (« RHK »), comprenant l’OAHK et le district azerbaïdjanais de Chahoumian, et déclara que cette République ne relevait plus de la juridiction azerbaïdjanaise. Le 26 novembre 1991, le parlement azerbaïdjanais abolit l’autonomie dont bénéficiait jusque-là le Haut-Karabagh. Lors d’un référendum organisé dans cette région le 10 décembre 1991, 99,9 % des votants se prononcèrent en faveur de la sécession.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dissertation Final Aug 31 Formatted
    Identity Gerrymandering: How the Armenian State Constructs and Controls “Its” Diaspora by Kristin Talinn Rebecca Cavoukian A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Political Science University of Toronto © Copyright by Kristin Cavoukian 2016 Identity Gerrymandering: How the Armenian State Constructs and Controls “Its” Diaspora Kristin Talinn Rebecca Cavoukian Doctor of Philosophy Department of Political Science University of Toronto 2016 Abstract This dissertation examines the Republic of Armenia (RA) and its elites’ attempts to reframe state-diaspora relations in ways that served state interests. After 17 years of relatively rocky relations, in 2008, a new Ministry of Diaspora was created that offered little in the way of policy output. Instead, it engaged in “identity gerrymandering,” broadening the category of diaspora from its accepted reference to post-1915 genocide refugees and their descendants, to include Armenians living throughout the post-Soviet region who had never identified as such. This diluted the pool of critical, oppositional diasporans with culturally closer and more compliant emigrants. The new ministry also favoured geographically based, hierarchical diaspora organizations, and “quiet” strategies of dissent. Since these were ultimately attempts to define membership in the nation, and informal, affective ties to the state, the Ministry of Diaspora acted as a “discursive power ministry,” with boundary-defining and maintenance functions reminiscent of the physical border policing functions of traditional power ministries. These efforts were directed at three different “diasporas:” the Armenians of Russia, whom RA elites wished to mold into the new “model” diaspora, the Armenians of Georgia, whose indigeneity claims they sought to discourage, and the “established” western diaspora, whose contentious public ii critique they sought to disarm.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenia Hostage Crisis Continues
    JULY 23, 2016 Mirror-SpeTHE ARMENIAN ctator Volume LXXXVII, NO. 1, Issue 4445 $ 2.00 NEWS The First English Language Armenian Weekly in the United States Since 1932 INBRIEF French Senate to Armenia Hostage Crisis Continues Discuss Armenian Genocide YEREVAN (Combined Sources) — Pro- opposition gunmen are holding four police PARIS (PanARMENIAN.Net) — The French officers hostage, officials said Tuesday, July Senate will discuss the bill to outlaw the denial of 19, two days after they seized a police the Armenian Genocide in September, Armenia’s building, killing one officer and taking sev- public TV reports. eral hostages. The French National Assembly on July 1 voted The gunmen seized the police station on unanimously to penalize denial or trivialization of Sunday, before demanding Armenians take all crimes against humanity, including the to the streets to secure the release of jailed Armenian Genocide. opposition politicians. The amendment of a previous law, adopted in the first reading, criminalizes denial with one year (PHOTOLUR PHOTO) imprisonment and a 45,000 euro fine. The crimes included in the text are genocides, “other crimes against humanity,” “the crime of enslavement and exploitation of an enslaved per- son” and “war crimes.” City of Ani on UNESCO Demonstrators in Yerevan (Russia Times Photo) World Heritage List PARIS (PanARMENIAN.Net) — The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural situation without bloodshed,” far refused to surrender. Organization (UNESCO) cultural agency on Jirair Sefilian, second from left, as he was arrested in June Armenia’s first deputy police The hostages include Armenia’s Deputy Friday, July 15 added a ruined Armenian city inside chief Hunan Pogosyan told AFP.
    [Show full text]
  • Standoff with Police Continues in Yerevan
    JULY 30, 2016 Mirror-SpeTHE ARMENIAN ctator Volume LXXXVII, NO. 2, Issue 4446 $ 2.00 NEWS The First English Language Armenian Weekly in the United States Since 1932 INBRIEF Egypt Parliament May Standoff with Police Continues in Yerevan Recognize Genocide CAIRO (Armenpress) — More than 300 Egyptian All Hostages Released lawmakers have signed a survey on putting up to vote a bill recognizing the Armenian Genocide, RIA YEREVAN (Combined Sources) — Novosti reported, citing Youm7. Thousands of demonstrators were marching in The initiator of the measure is noted Egyptian Yerevan late on July 25 in support of a group reporter and Member of Parliament Mustafa Bakri. of gunmen who have occupied an Armenian According to his colleague, Faiza Barakyatay, in police station for more than a week. case the bill passes, it will be “a response to The demonstrators chanted “unity” and Turkey’s hostile actions against Egypt and official called for bystanders to join them, swelling Ankara’s attempts to interfere in Egypt’s internal their numbers as the march progressed affairs.” along the streets of the Armenian capital and the demonstrators arrived at Yerevan’s central Republic Square. Iran Proposes to Triple It was the largest gathering of support Gas Exports to Armenia for the gunmen since the crisis began on July 17. YEREVAN (Armenpress) — After discussions with The march began on July 25 after mili- Armenian Energy and Natural Resources Minister tary helicopters were seen flying over the L. Yolyan in Tehran, Minister of Petroleum of Iran occupied police building. Bijan Zangeneh announced that Iran will triple the The presence of the helicopters prompt- volumes of exported gas to Armenia, Iranian state ed speculation that a military raid against A spokesman for the insurgents media reported.
    [Show full text]
  • Current State of Activism in Armenia by Vartan Panossian Presented To
    Current State of Activism in Armenia by Vartan Panossian Presented to the Department of English & Communications in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts American University of Armenia Yerevan, Armenia May 19, 2018 1 Table of Content Abstract 3 Introduction 4 Literature Review 5 Sense of Connectivity 6 Collective Vs. Individual 7 Cause of Engagement 8 Violent Vs. Nonviolent 9 Traditional Vs. Modern 9 Methodology 10 Findings 11 Section I Electric Yerevan 11 Section II Analysis 13 Section III Daredevils of Sassoun 17 Section IV Analysis 19 Section V Military Deferment Law 20 Section VI Analysis 23 Section VII Current Events 25 Conclusion 26 References 27 Appendices 28 2 Abstract Looking at past events in Armenia when the people came together with a specific demand for change, this paper will try to conclude what the state of activism is currently in Armenia (how active the people are and their willingness to volunteer their time [sometimes more] for a specific cause). We look at three events which are: I) Electric Yerevan, II) Daredevils of Sassoun, III) Military Deferment Law. By implementing the research conducted by other scholars, along with our survey and a close study of the events, we can make an assumption as of how active the people are. The survey consists 85 students from the American University of Armenia with a range of answers regarding how each movement affected them and how they reacted to each. In short, the outcome was promising. We can see that there is a slight increase in the moral of the people from one activism to the next, where those who for their entire life thought participating would be a waste of time, started to take part in the protest themselves thus improving the stance of activism amongst the people.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Global Development and Security Studies
    .. ............... .......... .......... ........... ... ......................................... ....... .. ............ ......... ..... ........... .. Journal of Global Development and Security StudiesProceedings Eurasia International University Stonehill College International Conference Eurasia Partnership Foundation Yerevan 2017 June 23-24 Journal of Global Development and Security Studies International Conference Proceedings Yerevan 2017, June 23-24 Recommended for publication by the Scientific UDC 327:341:06 Council of Eurasia International University Editorial Board: Piyush Chandra, Stonehill College Benjamin Cole, Simmons College Richard Finnegan, Stonehill College Aleksandra Nesic, US Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and school, USA Anna Ohanyan, Stonehill College Proceedings Editors: Nichali M. Xhelili Ciaccio, Eurasia International University Anna Ohanyan, Stonehill College Anamika Twyman-Ghoshal, Stonehill College © Eurasia International University, 2018 ISBN 978-9939-866-04-8 © Stonehill College, 2018 © Eurasia Partnership Foundation, 2018 Table of Contents Acknowledgements...............................................................................4 Disclaimer.............................................................................................6 Economic Development, Resource Management, and Human Security ............................................................................7 Agricultural Cooperatives as a Strategy for Economic Development and the Improvement of National Security in Armenia.............................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Chiragov-S.A.-Impotriva-Armeniei.Pdf
    Tradus şi revizuit de IER (www.ier.ro) CURTEA EUROPEANĂ A DREPTURILOR OMULUI MAREA CAMERĂ Hotărârea (fond) din 16 iunie 2015 În Cauza Chiragov şi alţii împotriva Armeniei (Cererea nr. 13216/05) Strasbourg Hotărârea este definitivă. Aceasta poate suferi modificări de formă. În cauza Chiragov şi alţii împotriva Armeniei, Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului, reunită în Marea Cameră compusă din Dean Spielmann, preşedinte, Josep Casadevall, Guido Raimondi, Mark Villiger, Isabelle Berro, Ineta Ziemele, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Alvina Gyulumyan, Khanlar Hajiyev, George Nicolaou, Luis López Guerra, Ganna Yudkivska, Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, Ksenija Turković, Egidijus Kūris, Robert Spano, Iulia Antoanella Motoc, judecători, şi Michael O’Boyle, grefier adjunct, după ce a deliberat în camera de consiliu, la 22 şi 23 ianuarie 2014 şi la 22 ianuarie 2015, pronunţă prezenta hotărâre, adoptată la aceeaşi dată: PROCEDURA 1. La originea cauzei se află cererea nr. 13216/12 îndreptată împotriva Republicii Armenia, prin care şase resortisanţi ai acestui stat, domnii Elkhan Chiragov, Adishirin Chiragov, Ramiz Gebrayilov, Akif Hasanof, Fekhreddin Pashayev şi Qaraca Gabrayilov („reclamanţii”), au sesizat Curtea la 6 aprilie 2005, în temeiul art. 34 din Convenţia pentru apărarea drepturilor omului şi a libertăţilor fundamentale („Convenţia”). Al şaselea reclamant a decedat în iunie 2005. Fiul acestuia, domnul Sagatel Gabrayilov, continuă procedura în numele tatălui său. 2. Reclamanţii, care au beneficiat de asistenţă judiciară, au fost reprezentaţi de domnii M. Muller, QC, C. Vine, M. Butler, M. Ivers, B. Poynor şi S. Swaroop, avocaţi la Londra, precum şi de domnul K. Yıldız. Guvernul armean („Guvernul”) a fost reprezentat de agentul guvernamental, domnul G. Kostanyan, reprezentant al Republicii Armenia în faţa Curţii.
    [Show full text]
  • No Relógio 19:15, Passados Mais De 100 Anos Em Guerra
    UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO FACULDADE DE FILOSOFIA, LETRAS E CIÊNCIAS HUMANAS DEPARTAMENTO DE GEOGRAFIA PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM GEOGRAFIA HUMANA Artur Attarian Cardoso Camarero No relógio 19:15, passados mais de 100 anos em guerra São Paulo 2017 UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO FACULDADE DE FILOSOFIA, LETRAS E CIÊNCIAS HUMANAS DEPARTAMENTO DE GEOGRAFIA PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM GEOGRAFIA HUMANA Artur Attarian Cardoso Camarero No relógio 19:15, passados mais de 100 anos em guerra Dissertação de Mestrado apresentada ao Programa de Pós-graduação em Geografia Humana da Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas da Universidade de São Paulo, para obtenção do título de Mestre em Geografia sob a orientação do Prof. Dr. Heinz Dieter Heidemann. São Paulo 2017 Ficha de Aprovação Autor: Artur Attarian Cardoso Camarero E-mail: [email protected] Orientador: Prof. Dr. Heinz Dieter Heidemann Título: No relógio 19:15, passados mais de 100 anos em guerra Dissertação apresentada ao Programa de Pós-graduação em Geografia Humana da Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas da Universidade de São Paulo, para obtenção do título de Mestre em Geografia. Banca examinadora: Prof(a). Dr(a). __________________________________________________________ Instituição:___________________________________Assinatura:_________________ Prof(a). Dr(a). __________________________________________________________ Instituição:___________________________________Assinatura:_________________ Prof(a). Dr(a). __________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Diasporas in Conflict
    United Nations University Press is the publishing arm of the United Nations University. UNU Press publishes scholarly and policy-oriented books and periodicals on the issues facing the United Nations and its peoples and member states, with particular emphasis upon international, regional and trans-boundary policies. The United Nations University was established as a subsidiary organ of the United Nations by General Assembly resolution 2951 (XXVII) of 11 December 1972. It functions as an international community of scholars engaged in research, postgraduate training and the dissemination of knowledge to address the pressing global problems of human survival, development and welfare that are the concern of the United Nations and its agencies. Its activities are devoted to advancing knowledge for human security and development and are focused on issues of peace and governance and of environment and sustainable development. The Uni- versity operates through a worldwide network of research and training centres and programmes, and its planning and coordinating centre in Tokyo. Diasporas in conflict Diasporas in conflict: Peace-makers or peace-wreckers? Edited by Hazel Smith and Paul Stares United Nations a University Press TOKYO u NEW YORK u PARIS 6 United Nations University, 2007 The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not nec- essarily reflect the views of the United Nations University. United Nations University Press United Nations University, 53-70, Jingumae 5-chome, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 150-8925, Japan Tel: þ81-3-3499-2811 Fax: þ81-3-3406-7345 E-mail: [email protected] general enquiries: [email protected] http://www.unu.edu United Nations University Office at the United Nations, New York 2 United Nations Plaza, Room DC2-2062, New York, NY 10017, USA Tel: þ1-212-963-6387 Fax: þ1-212-371-9454 E-mail: [email protected] United Nations University Press is the publishing division of the United Nations University.
    [Show full text]
  • Enragés De Sassoun » (Sasna Tsrer) Prise D’Otages À La Caserne De Police D’Erebouni Et Manifestations De Juillet 2016
    ARMENIE 22 février 2018 Les « Enragés de Sassoun » (Sasna Tsrer) Prise d’otages à la caserne de police d’Erebouni et manifestations de juillet 2016 Résumé : Chronologie non exhaustive de la prise d’otages de juillet 2016 à la caserne de police d’Erebouni et des manifestations de soutien aux « Enragés de Sassoun » Abstract: Non-exhaustive chronology of the July 2016 hostage-taking at the Erebuni police barracks and demonstrations of support for the "Daredevils of Sassoun" Avertissement Ce document a été élaboré par la Division de l’Information, de la Documentation et des Recherches de l’Ofpra en vue de fournir des informations utiles à l’examen des demandes de protection internationale. Il ne prétend pas faire le traitement exhaustif de la problématique, ni apporter de preuves concluantes quant au fondement d’une demande de protection internationale particulière. Il ne doit pas être considéré comme une position officielle de l’Ofpra ou des autorités françaises. Ce document, rédigé conformément aux lignes directrices communes à l’Union européenne pour le traitement de l’information sur le pays d’origine (avril 2008) [cf. https://www.ofpra.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/atoms/files/lignes_directrices_europeennes.pdf ], se veut impartial et se fonde principalement sur des renseignements puisés dans des sources qui sont à la disposition du public. Toutes les sources utilisées sont référencées. Elles ont été sélectionnées avec un souci constant de recouper les informations. Le fait qu’un événement, une personne ou une organisation déterminée ne soit pas mentionné(e) dans la présente production ne préjuge pas de son inexistence. La reproduction ou diffusion du document n’est pas autorisée, à l’exception d’un usage personnel, sauf accord de l’Ofpra en vertu de l’article L.
    [Show full text]
  • Reimagining the Role and Relations of Civil Society In
    ANALYTICAL REPORT FROM SHRINKING SPACE TO POST-REVOLUTIONARY SPACE: REIMAGINING THE ROLE AND RELATIONS OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN ARMENIA ANALYTICAL REPORT FROM SHRINKING SPACE TO POST-REVOLUTIONARY SPACE: REIMAGINING THE ROLE AND RELATIONS OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN ARMENIA 5 INTRODUCTION We at Socioscope NGO would like to extend our gratitude to all individuals and organizations that have assisted us in this work. We are deeply thankful to all interviewed civil society representatives both NGO members and individual activists, as well as representatives of donor organizations who have kindly agreed to share their insightful opinions, concerns and perspectives at both pre-revolution and post-revolution stages Based on findings of “Research & Education for Building the Capacities of Civil of our research project. We hope that the knowledge co- Society in Armenia” project. created in these discussions and reflected in this document will Implemented by Socioscope Societal Research & Consultancy Center NGO. Supported by the Heinrich Boell Foundation South Caucasus Office. be a useful resource for further action of civil society aimed at strengthening democracy, human rights and good governance Prepared by: Zhanna Andreasyan, Armine Ishkanian, Arpy Manusyan, Sona in this important period of social and political change. Manusyan and Anna Zhamakochyan. Contributed by: Eduard Danielyan and Mariam Khalatyan. The research has been implemented with the financial support of the Heinrich Boell Foundation South Caucasus Office. The content of the research, implemented by Socioscope, may not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Foundation. Cover photo by: Narek Aleksanyan Design and layout by: Nora Galfayan 2018 CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations Introduction 8 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights in Armenia a Member State of the Eurasian Economic Union State of Play in 2015 and Perspectives
    Human Rights in Armenia a member state of the Eurasian Economic Union State of Play in 2015 and Perspectives By Willy Fautre Copyright 2015: Human Rights Without Frontiers International 1 All Rights Reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from Human Rights Without Frontiers International. Requests for permission to make copies of any part of this publication should be mailed to the address below. Copies of this book can be ordered on the HRWF page on Amazon. Contact address Human Rights Without Frontiers International Avenue d’Auderghem 61/ 16, 1040 Brussels. Belgium Tel: +32 2 3456145 Website: http://www.hrwf.eu Email: [email protected] 2 Table of Contents Introduction p. 7 Ch. I: Right to a Fair Trial p. 9 Ch. II: Freedom of Assembly p. 15 Ch. III: Political Persecutions p. 23 Ch. IV: Human Rights Violations by the Police p. 27 Ch. V: Torture and Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment p. 31 Ch. VI: Freedom of Expression, Journalists and the Media p. 37 Ch. VII: Human Rights Defenders p. 45 Ch. VIII: Freedom of Religion or Belief p. 49 Ch. IX: Rights of the Child p. 61 Ch. X: Violence against Women p. 65 Ch. XI: Human Rights Violations of LGBT People p. 71 Ch. XII: European Court of Human Rights p. 77 Conclusions p. 81 Recommendations p. 83 3 4 Acronyms Acronyms Explanation AAC Armenian Apostolic Church ANC Armenian National Congress AMD Armenian Dram (500 AMD = 1 EUR) ARF Armenian Revolutionary Federation Abbreviated name of a person wanting to remain A.T.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenia, 2016 and 2018
    Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization 26: 4 (Fall 2018): pp. 483-508. MY STEP ASIDE FROM SASNA TSRER: THE DYNAMICS OF PROTEST COALITIONS IN ARMENIA, 2016 AND 2018 NIKOLAI SILAEV MGIMO IVAN FOMIN NATIONAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY HIGHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS Abstract: This article is devoted to the comparison of two Armenian protest coalitions: the 2016 coalition of Sasna Tsrer supporters and Nikol Pashinyan’s My Step coalition of 2018. The analysis shows that Pashinyan’s coalition, unlike the coalition of Sasna Tsrer supporters, was not a liberal-nationalist alliance, but rather a liberal- bureaucratic one. This difference turns out to be crucial, as the Sasna Tsrer polemic was heavily polarized by the clash between the statist and counter-statist frames of the Armenian nation, with none of the sides possessing enough symbolic or political resources to win. The generally successful outcome of Pashinyan’s protest can thus be explained by the fact that it was not so strongly framed by a counter-statist understanding of the Armenian nation. n recent years, Armenia has experienced a series of mass political and Isocial protests.1 In the Million Mask March of 2013, large numbers of anti-government protesters rallied in the streets of Yerevan and clashed 1 The research was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grant project N 17-03-12024, “Eurasia Index—Information Analysis System”). Nikolai Silaev is Senior Research Fellow at MGIMO, Moscow, Russia. Contact: nikolai. [email protected]. Ivan Fomin is Associate Professor at National Research University Higher School of Economics and Research Fellow at INION RAN, Moscow, Russia.
    [Show full text]