“Those who deny the Holocaust call on racist hatred, but those who deny the Armenian Genocide turn out not to propagate hatred. One thing is unclear: Why does the European Court in Strasbourg make such a distinction?” Felix Schindler, editor of the Swiss magazine Tagesanzeiger writes in his article, referring to the judgment of the ECHR on the case Dogu Perinçek v. Switzerland.
The author writes that Switzerland took a decision on criminalizing the Genocide denial. “Our people singled out the red democratic thread in this issue; racists cannot circumvent it. The judges decided that Armenian pogroms were a Genocide. But at the same time, Switzerland has no right to sue nationalist Dogu Perinçek if he starts denying the Armenian Genocide in our country,” Schindler writes.
The editor is outraged by the fact that the ECHR makes distinction between genocides. “Those who deny the Holocaust call on racist hatred, but those who deny the Armenian Genocide turn out not to propagate hatred. Why must there be such a difference?” the author asks.
According to Schindler, the judgment of the ECHR is unlikely to contribute to the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation. “Whether the Armenians and Turks will reach reconciliation is another big question. I don’t think the latest decision will result in that.” Schindler also recalls the same court siding with the national minority in France when the Muslim women were banned from wearing hijab in public places. “Actually, ECHR finds wearing hijab more legal than the denial of the Genocide of an entire nation,” the author stresses.