On October 15, 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that a Swiss law making it a crime to oppose the Armenian allegation of genocide, among other things, violated fundamental principles of free expression enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights. The court properly focused on whether the value of free speech outweighed the feelings of those who may be offended that there is any debate at all on this historical controversy. As was appropriate, free speech prevailed.
The case stemmed from a series of statements made in Switzerland by controversial Turkish politician Dogu Perincek that had publicly challenged the Armenian allegation of genocide. More specifically, Perincek had denied that the events of 1915 and the following years could be classified as genocide though not disputing the reality of the massacres and mass deportations. Further, as the court recognized, Perincek never concluded that the Ottoman Armenians deserved their tragic fate. Nevertheless, Swiss Courts convicted Perincek, ultimately leading to appeals to the ECHR.
The case’s conclusion is a major triumph for Perincek and for Turkey, which seeks a robust public debate on the genocide allegation, a debate that cannot take place when those who would argue against the application of the genocide label are cast under suspicion of being immoral or even criminal. To paraphrase the court, TCA is “aware of the immense importance attached by the Armenian community to the question whether the tragic events of 1915 and the following years are to be regarded as genocide, and of that community’s acute sensitivity to any statements bearing on that point.” But, this cannot and must not squelch cherished rights to free expression. The ECHR’s decision is a milestone for those who support Turkey and for those who consider the tragedies of 1915 a genuine historical controversy.
