Azerbaijan's violence against ethnic Armenians is within scope of action of Committee for Elimination of Racial Discrimination: Kirakosyan

This week, Azerbaijan failed to respect the clearly circumscribed limits of the preliminary objections phase. It disregarded the legal standards clearly established in the Court’s jurisprudence, and it distorted Armenia’s factual evidence. But Azerbaijan’s tactic has failed. Its stance is not conducive to the good administration of justice, Yeghishe Kirakosyan, Armenia's representative for International Legal Matters, announced this during the second round of hearings in the International Court of Justice in the case of Armenia vs. Azerbaijan. He added that Azerbaijan's tactics failed.

"As Armenia’s learned counsel demonstrated this week, Armenia genuinely attempted to negotiate its claims under the CERD, but to no avail. Armenia thus fully complied with the negotiation precondition of Article 22 of the CERD.

Moreover, all of Armenia’s claims fall squarely within the material scope of the CERD.

Azerbaijan’s racist violence, arbitrary detention and enforced disappearances perpetrated against ethnic Armenians are plainly capable of falling within the CERD. As you saw this week, these horrific practices are anathema to the promise undertaken by all States.

Parties to the CERD to “adopt all necessary measures for speedily eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms and manifestations, and to prevent and combat racist doctrines and practices in order to promote understanding between races and to build an international community free from all forms of racial segregation and racial discrimination.”

The Court has before it all the necessary elements to easily dispense with Azerbaijan’s objections. Armenia looks forward to continuing its pusuit of accountability in the proceedings on the merits, and reconfirms its dedication to resolving this dispute peacefully, and in a manner that honors both the letter and spirit of international law.

In accordance with Article 60, paragraph 2, of the Rules of Court, I will now read out the Republic of Armenia’s final submissions. The Republic of Armenia respectfully requests that the Court:

a. Reject the first preliminary objection raised by Azerbaijan; and

b. Reject the second preliminary objection raised by Azerbaijan; or in the alternative, decide that Azerbaijan’s second preliminary objection does not possess an exclusively preliminary character.

Before concluding, I wish to express my gratitude to the Registry and its staff for their kind assistance in these proceedings, to the interpreters for their hard work; and finally,

Mr. President, Members of the Court, thank you for your attention and serious consideration of the Parties’ submissions during this week’s hearings," Kirakosyan stated.

Related Articles Those who attend COP29 in Baku have moral duty to call for the return of the Armenians to Nagorno-Karabakh, Nathalie Loiseau Those who attend COP29 in Baku have moral duty to call for the return of the Armenians to Nagorno-Karabakh, Nathalie Loiseau Those who attend COP29 in Baku have moral duty to call for the return of the Armenians to Nagorno-Karabakh, Nathalie Loiseau There are territorial claims against Armenia in Constitution of Azerbaijan: Pashinyan There are territorial claims against Armenia in Constitution of Azerbaijan: Pashinyan