Baku slams ECHR decision in 'VT and Others v Azerbaijan' case as unjust

Azerbaijan's Authorized Representative of to the European Court of Human Rights Chingiz Asgarov has issued a statement regarding the judgment delivered by the European Court of Human Rights, in the case of 'V.T. and Others v. Azerbaijan'.

In its judgment, the European Court was made without any reliable evidence, without conducting a comprehensive examination of the circumstances of the case.

Baku noted that the European Court employed terminology that is unacceptable to Azerbaijan and contradicts its internationally recognized sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Phrases such as ‘the line of contact between Azerbaijan and the “NKR” create the impression of legal or factual equality between Azerbaijan and an illegal separatist entity that has not been recognized by any state or international organization.

Chingiz Asgarov noted that although the European Court earlier acknowledged in its judgment in the case of ‘Chiragov and Others v. Armenia’ that part of Azerbaijan’s territory had been occupied by Armenia, the use of the term ‘NKR’ in the current judgment with respect to territories that remained under occupation until November 2020 contradicts basic logic.

The judgment delivered yesterday did not examine why a serviceman who was a citizen of Armenia was serving on the sovereign territory of Azerbaijan.

"Furthermore, if the judgment states that the events occurred on the territory of the ‘NKR,’ that the investigation was conducted by the ‘state authorities of the NKR,’ and that information regarding the incident was reflected in a report by the ‘NKR ombudsman,’ why were the investigation materials submitted to the European Court as evidence not by the applicants but by Armenia?" Chingiz Asgarov said.

In other words, the judgment is based entirely on assumptions and arguments supporting the narrative advanced by the Armenian side.

Chingiz Asgarov said that Baku firmly rejects the conclusions contained in the European Court’s judgment in the case and states that all available legal and procedural remedies will be considered in response to this erroneous judgment.”