Turkish Forum

Category: Harut Sassounian

Harut Sassounian is the Publisher of The California Courier, founded in 1958. His weekly editorials, translated into several languages, are reprinted in scores of U.S. and overseas publications and posted on countless websites.<p>

He is the author of “The Armenian Genocide: The World Speaks Out, 1915-2005, Documents and Declarations.”

As President of the Armenia Artsakh Fund, he has administered the procurement and delivery of $970 million of humanitarian assistance to Armenia and Artsakh during the past 34 years. As Senior Vice President of Kirk Kerkorian’s Lincy Foundation, he oversaw $240 million of infrastructure projects in Armenia.

From 1978 to 1982, Mr. Sassounian worked as an international marketing executive for Procter & Gamble in Geneva, Switzerland. He was a human rights delegate at the United Nations for 10 years. He played a leading role in the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the U.N. Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities in 1985.

Mr. Sassounian has a Master’s Degree in International Affairs from Columbia University, and a Master’s in Business Administration from Pepperdine University.

  • Remember, Remind, and Reclaim: Guidelines for the Genocide Centennial

    Remember, Remind, and Reclaim: Guidelines for the Genocide Centennial

     

    Sassunian -son resim

     

    Armenian communities around the world are gearing up for the Centennial of the Genocide on April 24, 2015, by coordinating their commemorative plans at the local, regional, and international levels.

     

    A Pan-Armenian Centennial Committee was established in Armenia two years ago consisting of the leadership of the Republics of Armenia and Artsakh (Karabagh), heads of religious denominations, and representatives of major Armenian political, charitable, and cultural organizations. Local committees have also been formed throughout the Diaspora. As reported earlier, the international committee of Armenian Genocide experts met in Yerevan last month to recommend specific projects to be adopted by the Pan-Armenian Centennial Committee during its May 30 meeting.

     

    On April 6, the Centennial Committees of eight Middle Eastern countries (Cyprus, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Syria, the United Arab Emirates, and Iran represented by committees in Tehran, Esfahan, and Tabriz,) met in Beirut to coordinate their plans on a regional basis. Also attending was Hayk Demoyan, Secretary of the Pan-Armenian Centennial Committee in Armenia.

     

    His Holiness Aram I, Catholicos of Cilicia, presided over the meeting and gave a timely keynote address outlining the principles that should guide the regional committees in planning for the Centennial. Aram Vehapar succinctly formulated the objectives in three key Armenian words: “Hishel, Hishetsnel, yev Bahanchel” [To Remember, To Remind, and To Reclaim].

     

    His Holiness went on to explain: “for 100 years, we stressed the remembrance of the Genocide. We lit candles, organized commemorative evenings, and published books. These important activities will imbue our youth with the sacred testament and souls of our martyrs. Yet, we should not singly focus on this subject. For 100 years, we reminded people through demonstrations, lobbying, and raising our voices. We aim to continue

    these activities with different approaches. However, it is imperative that we stress our demands for restitution.”

     

    The Vehapar reminded the attendees about the international conference organized by the Catholicosate of Cilicia a year ago with the theme: “From Recognition to Restitution,” with the participation of international legal experts. “We need legal experts in order to present, defend, and pursue our claims appropriately in international courts,” the Catholicos stated.

     

    Aram I went on to suggest a division of labor between the Republic of Armenia and the Diaspora: “We should work in unison. Our approaches and emphasis could be different from one another; and sometimes they must be different! Let’s not forget that Armenia is a state, and the Diaspora is a diaspora. Neither the state nor the diaspora can speak on each other’s behalf. Each has its own unique voice and function. But, there should be intra-Armenian harmony and coordination. In other words, we should plan and work with a common purpose, holding on firmly to our demands for restitution.”

     

    The Catholicos then urged Armenians to include the far-flung regions of Africa, the Far East, and South America within the scope of the Centennial activities. Turning to the Middle East, Aram I made three important points:

     

    1) The pursuit of the Armenian Cause in the Islamic world requires a special approach, because Turkey is a Muslim state.

     

    2) Turkey’s ever-increasing and penetrating influence in the region is a serious problem. “In my meetings with leaders of countries in the region, I always tell them: ‘you have kept your doors very wide open in front of Turkey. The day will come when you will recognize your mistake. Turkey uses different masks.’ Therefore, we must be alert as the genocidaire is closely following our steps. We will not retreat and will not weaken in the face of Turkish meddling.”

     

    3) Genocide is not an event that belongs to the past. The Diaspora is a consequence of the Genocide, and in a sense, it is still continuing.

     

    Catholicos Aram I concluded by categorizing the Armenian efforts for recognition and restitution into three dimensions: historical, political, and legal. “The time has come, without ignoring the first two, to place a clear priority on the legal aspect. In this regard, we have a massive amount of work to accomplish,” he stated.

     

    Significantly, Hayk Demoyan, Secretary of the Pan-Armenian Centennial Committee, also speaking at the regional meeting in Beirut, noted: “We know that we cannot undo some of the consequences of the Armenian Genocide, such as the lost lives and destroyed churches, nevertheless, the major consequence is the loss of the territories!”

     

     

     

     

  • Istanbul Patriarchate Ignores Armenian Community’s Religious Needs

    Istanbul Patriarchate Ignores Armenian Community’s Religious Needs

    Sassunian -son resim

    The Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul upset many Armenians in Turkey and around the world when it failed to send a clergyman to the recently renovated Saint Guiragos Church in Dikranagerd (Diyarbakir) to celebrate Divine Liturgy on Easter Sunday.
    St. Guiragos is not just any Armenian church. With seven altars and a capacity for 3,000 worshipers, it is one of the largest Christian churches in the Middle East. The church’s belfry was destroyed on May 28, 1915, by Turkish artillery because it was much taller than the minarets of nearby mosques. Turkish soldiers forced the city’s Deputy Prelate, Mgrditch Vartabed Chlghadian, to watch the destruction of the belfry as he was dragged to his eventual martyrdom!
    Amazingly, St. Guiragos remained a functioning church until the 1980’s with a local priest performing regular church services year round. As the few remaining descendants of Armenian Genocide survivors left the city, the church fell into disrepair and was abandoned.
    In recent years, Dikranagerd Armenians who had resettled in Istanbul established the St. Guiragos Foundation which renovated the church at a cost of $3.2 million. Two thirds of the funds were donated by Armenians of Istanbul, Europe, and North America. The remaining one-third was provided by Diyarbekir’s Kurdish city government which has been highly supportive of many local Armenian initiatives.
    To their great chagrin, St. Guiragos parishioners were deprived of liturgical services on Easter Sunday as the Armenian Patriarchate informed them that it could not spare a clergyman to perform Mass in their church. They were told that none of the Patriarchate’s 23 clergymen were available, as they had to officiate in Istanbul’s more than two dozen functioning churches, but were promised that a priest would arrive in Dikranagerd the Sunday after Easter.
    St. Guiragos parishioners were terribly disappointed, since they had just installed new church bells procured from Moscow at great expense and effort. They had to ring the bells on Easter Sunday for the first time in almost 100 years, without a cleric’s presence to hold services! The worshipers, inspired by the majesty of the church, lit candles and recited prayers, assisted by local Armenian language teacher Kevork Fikri.
    The Armenian Patriarchate does not seem to be the least bothered by its inexcusable failure to provide a clergyman to the Dikranagerd church on the joyous occasion of Easter Sunday, even though the embarrassing details of its unacceptable behavior were widely publicized in the pages of several Turkish newspapers, including Hurriyet and Radikal.
    In the absence of Patriarch Mesrob Moutafian, who has been hospitalized for years with a terminal illness, the Deputy Patriarch Aram Ateshian has been running the Patriarchate’s affairs. He should have assigned a clergyman to serve in Dikranagerd not only on Easter Sunday but throughout the year. He should have also provided all possible assistance to the many Islamized and Turkified Armenians who have come forward asking to be baptized in the newly renovated church.
    Even more disturbing is the fact that Aram Srpazan on several occasions has made critical remarks about Diaspora Armenians asking the Turkish government to return to the Armenian Patriarchate over 2,500 confiscated churches. He has repeatedly asserted that the Patriarchate has neither the funds nor the clergy to renovate and operate these churches. Srpazan Ateshian fails to understand that the first step is to secure the return of the church structures before worrying about renovating them. Whether the Patriarchate has the necessary funds or not, Armenians have the right to demand the return of these churches. Moreover, many of the confiscated Armenian churches owned adjacent lands and buildings that could provide the necessary income to renovate and operate these parishes.
    Given Archbishop Ateshian’s lack of enthusiasm about the return of Armenian churches to the Patriarchate, it is not surprising that, even though he is a native of Dikranagerd, he has not made a sincere effort to provide a clergyman to St. Guiragos Church on Easter Sunday. One wonders if he is buckling under Turkish pressure to discourage the budding national and religious revival movement among Dikranagerd Armenians. Otherwise, making advance arrangements to send a clergyman from Istanbul, Armenia, Lebanon, Jerusalem, Europe or even the United States, would have been an easy task.
    It is unfortunate that Islamized and Turkified Armenians have to confront the Patriarchate while battling the Turkish government in their quest to return to their ethnic and religious roots, and regain their usurped rights and properties.
  • Federal Judge Wrongfully Dismisses Lawsuit on Armenian Properties in Turkey

    Federal Judge Wrongfully Dismisses Lawsuit on Armenian Properties in Turkey

     

     Sassunian -son resim

    Federal Judge Dolly M. Gee, wrongfully claiming lack of jurisdiction, dismissed a lawsuit on March 26, filed by Armenian-Americans demanding compensation from the Republic of Turkey for confiscating their properties during the Armenian Genocide.

    Attorneys Berj Boyajian, Mark Geragos, Ara Jabagchourian, and Brian Kabateck had filed a class action lawsuit on July 29, 2010, on behalf of Garbis Davoyan of Los Angeles, Hrayr Turabian of New York City, and all Armenians whose ancestors had real estate holdings in Turkey. The grandparents of Davoyan and Turabian owned land near Aintab and Adana. The complaint also charged Turkey’s Central Bank and Ziraat Bankasi of unjust enrichment by benefiting from the proceeds of the confiscated Armenian properties.

    Since the Republic of Turkey and its two major banks contended that US courts lacked jurisdiction over foreign entities due to sovereign immunity, the Armenian plaintiffs argued that the lawsuit should proceed due to two exceptions to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA): “Commercial Activity” and “Expropriation.”

    The Federal Judge ruled that both of these exceptions did not apply in this case. She found the banks’ commercial role in the US to be minimal and unrelated to the claimed grievances. She ruled that the expropriation exception is also not valid because the property was not “taken in violation of international law.” She stated that the appropriation of personal property contravenes international law if: 1) it does not serve a public purpose; 2) it discriminates against or singles out aliens; and 3) the foreign government does not pay compensation. Judge Gee held that Armenians were citizens of the Ottoman Empire based on the Law of Nationality of January 19, 1869, “which treated all persons found within the Ottoman Empire as Ottoman subjects.” According to the Judge, this law “remained in effect until May 23, 1927, when Law No. 1041 stripped Turkish citizenship from the Armenians who had fled or were deported from the Empire during the events at issue in this lawsuit.” She concluded: “Legally, Armenians whose property was taken and who were deported from the Ottoman Empire were citizens at the time.”

    In making these rulings, Judge Gee made a series of grave factual errors and misapplied the law. Her contention that Armenians were Ottoman citizens at the time of the genocide and deportations, and therefore not subject to US court jurisdiction, is flatly wrong. In a telegram dated Sept. 9, 1915, Minister of Interior Talaat issued the following order: “The rights of Armenians to live and work on Turkish soil are totally abolished.” Thus, Talaat had revoked the Armenians’ Ottoman citizenship as of Sept. 9, 1915, making them non-citizens at the time of the expropriation of their properties. This fact alone invalidates the fundamental premise of the Judge’s ruling that the Federal Court has no jurisdiction over Turkey’s expropriation of its citizens’ property.

    Furthermore, since Ottoman citizenship was imposed upon native Armenians after their territory was overrun by Ottoman armies, Armenians were forced to become the unwilling subjects of a foreign invader. The Judge’s erroneous ruling leads to the absurd and dangerous notion that the rights of people under occupation can be violated without any recourse to international law, once the conquering nation declares them to be its citizens.

    Judge Gee committed a second serious error when she made the convoluted argument that expropriation of foreign properties could have fallen under the jurisdiction of her court if carried out in conjunction with acts of genocide, because “genocide violates international law.” However, she ruled that the Armenian lawsuit does not meet the foregoing criteria, because it involves a “Political Question” related to foreign policy that falls under the jurisdiction of the executive and legislative branches, not the judiciary. She completely ignored the fact that the lawsuit was not filed under a claim of genocide, but as a violation of international law that includes Crimes Against Humanity, but not necessarily genocide. Apparently, the Judge was not aware that the US government on several occasions had recognized the Armenian Genocide, making her argument about the separation of powers completely meaningless.

    There is a good possibility that the Federal Court of Appeals would reverse Judge Gee’s baseless and erroneous ruling. The plaintiffs’ lawyers could strengthen their case considerably by pointing out some of the factual errors in her ruling, as well as rectifying the shortcomings in their own filing.

    Lawsuits against Turkey must be filed with utmost care, preparation and professionalism, since they impact the interests of the entire Armenian nation, particularly on the eve of the 100th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

  • Experts Meet in Yerevan to Strategize For Armenian Genocide Centenary

    Experts Meet in Yerevan to Strategize For Armenian Genocide Centenary

     

    Sassunian -son resim

     

     

    Over 40 Armenian Genocide specialists from nine countries met in Yerevan on March 22-23 to strategize on how to devise a legal framework to mitigate the consequences of the Genocide, counter Turkish denialism, and organize genocide studies programs and museum exhibits. The conference was organized by the State Commission coordinating activities leading to the 100th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

     

    In his message to the conference, Pres. Serzh Sargsyan expressed regret that the Armenian Genocide has gone unpunished which paved the way for the Jewish Holocaust. He hoped that the 100th anniversary would be an occasion to demonstrate Armenian unity and resolve to alleviate the consequences of the Genocide, secure restorative justice, and pass on to the next generation new methods of struggle and survival. The President welcomed the fact that more conscientious elements of Turkish society are shattering the wall of silence and denialism, and reexamining the revisionist policies of their country. The President asked conference participants to recommend suggestions to the State Commission for the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

     

    Here is a summary of the comments made by some of the genocide experts participating in the March 22-23 conference:

     

    Israeli scholar Yair Auron criticized the State of Israel for not recognizing the Armenian Genocide, pointing out, however, that a large segment of the Israeli public acknowledges it. Having experienced a similar tragic fate during the Holocaust, Israel should have been the first country to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, stated Prof. Auron.

     

    Historian Richard Hovannisian of Los Angeles urged the State Commission to plan artistic and cultural events rather than academic conferences to reach out to more people around the world. He suggested organizing a pan-Armenian philharmonic orchestra that would tour the world during the months leading to April 24, 2015. He also expressed the concern that the Turkish government is better prepared to counter the Centenary activities than Armenians are in planning them.

     

    Hayk Demoyan, Secretary of the State Commission and Director of the Genocide Museum in Yerevan, presented to conference participants the plans for the expansion of the museum by 2015.

     

    Prof.  Vahakn Dadrian of New York commented that when a denialist country is weak, it accepts its crimes more easily. As long as Turkey remains a powerful country, it will not recognize the Armenian Genocide, Dadrian observed.

     

    Researcher Mihran Minassian from Aleppo, Syria, suggested that commemorative events be jointly observed with Greeks and Assyrians. He pointed out that Turkish denialists had not accused members of these two ethnic groups of joining the Russian Army or forming armed bands, yet they too became victims of mass violence and genocide.

     

    Prof. Nikolay Hovannisyan of Yerevan explained that contrary to popular belief, the Ottoman Empire, not Uruguay, was the first country to recognize the Armenian Genocide through court verdicts in 1919-1926. Uruguay’s Parliament recognized the Armenian Genocide in 1965.

     

    Vladimir Vardanyan, Head of International Treaties Department of Armenia’s Constitutional Court, stated that the concept of Crimes Against Humanity was first used on May 24, 1915 in a joint declaration issued by Britain, France and Russia, warning Turkish officials that they would be held responsible for the Armenian massacres. Similarly, after World War II, the Nuremberg Tribunal accused Nazi war criminals of committing Crimes Against Humanity rather than genocide. Vardanyan suggested that the Republic of Armenia set up a permanent state body that would research and develop the legal framework for the pursuit of genocide-related demands from Turkey in international courts.

     

    Ragip Zarakolu, a prominent Turkish human rights activist from Istanbul who has been frequently jailed for publishing Armenian Genocide books, spoke about the “growing denial industry in Turkey.”  He suggested that denialism encouraged terrorism in Turkey.

     

    As a participant in the genocide conference, I spoke about the need to pursue “justice” rather than mere “genocide recognition,” which has already been accomplished. The concept of justice comprises all Armenian demands from Turkey: moral, financial, and territorial restitution.

     

    I also suggested that before planning any specific activities for the Genocide Centenary, Armenians worldwide first develop a single message and agreed upon set of goals. Otherwise, they would be sending mixed messages to Turkey and the international community as to what they really want and seek to accomplish on April 24, 2015.

     

    Finally, the pursuit of Armenian demands must not end in 2015. They should persist in seeking their just demands from Turkey until they accomplish “justice” for their cause!

     

     

     

     

  • Will Pope Francis Repeat Cardinal Bergoglio’s Words on the Genocide?

    Will Pope Francis Repeat Cardinal Bergoglio’s Words on the Genocide?

     

    Sassunian -son resim

     

    Shortly after Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio became Pope Francis I, Armenian and Turkish media outlets rushed to inform their audiences that the Argentinean Archbishop had acknowledged the Armenian Genocide on a number of occasions.

     

    When Catholicos Karekin II visited Buenos Aires on April 23, 2004, Cardinal Bergoglio joined him in an ecumenical liturgy and spoke during the commemoration of the victims of the Armenian Genocide. The Cardinal stated: “We are united in grief over a genocide — the first of the 20th century — a genocide that powerful empires seek to silence and cover up by all means.”

     

    Last week, in his congratulatory letter to Pope Francis I, Karekin II “fondly remembered” their joint meetings and prayers in Argentina, and praised the Catholic Pontiff “as a courageous, wise, and righteous shepherd.” The Catholicos recalled Cardinal Bergoglio’s “sincere affection toward the Armenian people,” adding: “We gladly confirm that the historical relationship between our churches is marked by fraternal warmth. We greatly value the progress registered by our churches as a result of collaborative efforts undertaken during the pontificates of ourselves and our predecessors. This has been manifested during mutual visits and elaborated through a multitude of educational and charitable programs.”

     

    On April 22, 2006, during a program commemorating the 91st anniversary of the Armenian Genocide in Buenos Aires, Cardinal Bergoglio urged Turkey to unconditionally recognize the Armenian Genocide as the “gravest crime of Ottoman Turkey against the Armenian people and the entire humanity.”

     

    More recently, in 2011, after an Argentinean Federal Court found Turkey guilty of committing genocide against Armenians in response to a lawsuit filed by survivor Krikor Hairabedian, Cardinal Bergoglio issued a statement condemning “the abominable crime of genocide that the Turkish state committed against the Armenian people between 1915 and 1923.”

     

    Both Armenians and Turks are now wondering if in his new capacity Pope Francis I will repeat the words he uttered as Cardinal Bergoglio. Armenians are delighted that a close friend of their community in Argentina has been elected to lead the Catholic Church. Meanwhile, the Turkish press has expressed great concern that “the new Pope could be influenced by [Armenian] lobbying groups.”

     

    Now that he has ascended to the highest office of the Roman Church, no one really knows what position Pope Francis would take on Armenian issues. One must remember that the Pontiff has two distinct functions as head of the Catholic Church and the sovereign city-state of Vatican. In other words, he is both a spiritual leader and head of state. Hence, depending on the issue, he may not necessarily express the views he held as Cardinal Bergoglio. At times, he may assume positions on political matters that diverge from his personal views and coincide with Vatican’s more worldly interests. As head of the Vatican state, the Pope may be forced to act as any other politician, such as Pres. Obama, who said one thing before the election and changed his tune afterward. However, as the spiritual leader of the Catholic Church and a man of strong moral values, the Pope cannot simply ignore or contradict his deeply held convictions.

     

    Realizing that all Popes are not alike, it may be useful to review recent papal pronouncements on the Armenian Genocide. Pope John Paul II, on two occasions, used the term Armenian Genocide — on November 9, 2000 and September 27, 2001. However, unlike his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI refrained from using that term, preferring to qualify the Genocide as “martyrdom” and “unspeakable suffering.”

     

    In the case of Pope Francis I, there is no need for Armenians to insist that he use the term Armenian Genocide; as the Vatican has twice acknowledged the Armenian Genocide. Thus, no purpose is served by demanding that every new Pope reaffirm the facts of the Armenian Genocide all over again. It is important, however, that Pope Francis I not retreat from his earlier position on the Armenian Genocide; substitutes and euphemisms would not be appropriate.

     

    Given the Vatican’s positive record on the Armenian Genocide, it would be best to go beyond this issue and look for other areas in which the Pontiff could be supportive, such as pressing for the security of Armenians and other Christians in Syria. Efforts should also be made to strengthen the existing amicable ties between the Armenian Apostolic and Catholic churches, and friendly relations between the Vatican State and the Republic of Armenia.

     

     

     

  • Bizarre Court Verdict: French-Armenian Guilty of Defaming a Turkish Denialist!

    Bizarre Court Verdict: French-Armenian Guilty of Defaming a Turkish Denialist!

     

    Sassunian -son resim

     

     

     

    The Empire Strikes Back, not in a science fiction movie, but in a French court!

     

    For several years, the French-Armenian community has been trying to pass a law to penalize Armenian Genocide denial, similar to the law that sanctions Holocaust denialism. Even though the French Parliament and Senate have approved such a law, and both Pres. Hollande and former Pres. Sarkozy have supported it, the Armenian efforts have been aborted by powerful Turkish political and economic circles.

     

    Turning the proposed law on its head, Sirma Oran-Martz, a French citizen of Turkish origin, had filed a lawsuit in France against Laurent Leylekian, a French-Armenian, for defamation of character. Leylekian, former editor of “France-Armenie” magazine and former executive director of the European-Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy, had written a sarcastic editorial titled, “Martz Attack” in the magazine’s website, denouncing attempts to transplant Turkish denialism to French soil. Ironically, Oran-Martz is daughter of Prof. Baskin Oran who resides in Turkey and acknowledges the facts of the Armenian Genocide without using that term because Turkish law penalizes those who recognize the Genocide.

     

    In a shocking verdict last month, the court found Leylekian guilty, ordering him to pay a total of 7,500 euros ($10,000): 4,000 euros to Oran-Martz for moral damages, and 3,500 euros for court costs, despite her evasive and irrational testimony during the proceedings. She had lost an earlier court case after suing Jean-Paul Bret, the Mayor of Villeurbanne, who had requested that she acknowledge the Armenian Genocide before agreeing to include her in his party’s candidate list. She refused and withdrew from the race. In that verdict, the court referred to the Turkish state’s “vast program of denialism — powerful, perverse, and sophisticated” — a sentence later quoted by Leylekian in his editorial.

     

    Three prominent individuals testified in court on Leylekian’s behalf: Francois Rochebloine, a French Parliamentarian; Yves Ternon, renowned expert on genocide and denial; and Hilda Tchoboian, former Chairwoman of the European-Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy. Oran-Martz was accused by Leylekian of taking part in a protest by the Turkish extremist Grey Wolves group against an Armenian Genocide Monument in Lyon, France, and signing a petition against the law on genocide denial. Testifying on behalf of Oran-Martz were: Murat Erpuyan, director of Paris-based ATA Turquie Association; Maxime Gauin, a French researcher working at a denialist Think Tank in Ankara; Alain Mascarou, a retired French teacher who knew the plaintiff in Ankara; and her husband, Jean-Patrick Martz.

     

    Hopefully, Leylekian would be vindicated when he appeals this outrageous guilty verdict. Clearly, the judge has made a mockery of French justice by siding with a genocide denialist, while punishing a descendant of Armenian Genocide victims. By condemning Leylekian for ostensibly defaming Oran-Martz in an editorial, the judge has chosen to deny him free speech, especially a journalist’s right to express his views in an opinion column. Surely, the French judge knows the difference between an opinion piece and a news item! Furthermore, the judge ignored the public prosecutor’s request not to file criminal charges against Leylekian and to refrain from sentencing him.

     

    It is ironic that while the French-Armenian community is trying to penalize genocide deniers, an Armenian is being sued by a denialist Turk. This topsy-turvy state of affairs makes the best case as to why the French government should pass a law banning genocide denial.

     

    While Oran-Martz gave incoherent answers in court, frequently irritating the judge, Leylekian provided clear, concise, and convincing arguments in his defense. This is why his guilty verdict was completely unexpected. Could it be that the long arm of Turkish influence peddling has reached into the French judicial system?

     

    After losing her first lawsuit against the Mayor of Villeurbanne three years ago, Oran-Matz vowed to continue her legal battle by announcing that this was “only the first round.” It is imperative that the verdict against Leylekian be reversed through an appeal filed by a competent, high-powered lawyer in order to right this miscarriage of justice and put a stop to more anti-Armenian lawsuits by Turkish denialists.

     

    The French-Armenian community should not remain silent, but express its outrage in the strongest possible terms against this unjust verdict and demand that the judge be disciplined for violating French laws and insulting the memory of genocide victims.

     

    It is high time Armenians show some resolve to defend their rights in France and elsewhere, particularly on the eve of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide!