The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has declared admissible the application in a case of Elkhan Chiragov v Armenia.

Talking to Armenian News-NEWS.am lawyer Ara Ghazaryan said the Court is to focus on the issue of territorial jurisdiction

On January 9 ECHR declared admissible two lawsuits filed by refugees – an Armenian and an Azerbaijani. The applicants are Elkhan Chiragov, former resident of Lachin (territory of security zone around Nagorno-Karabakh Republic) and former resident of Gulistan village of Shahumyan region (presently occupied by Azerbaijan) Minas Sargsyan.

The complaints were selected from over 1,000 similar cases (about 600 filed by Azerbaijani refugees and about 500 from Armenian refugees) last year to serve as a precedent. Both complaints say about loss of property as a result of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Chiragov’s complaint also includes certain ethnic and religious provisions. The Court is supposed to deliver its judgment on both cases at a later date.  

Ara Ghazaryan stressed that taking into procedure compliant filed by Chiragov, the Court should solve the problem concerning territorial jurisdiction.

“The alleged violation of Chiragov’s rights did not occur in the territory of Armenia,” he said noting that obviously both cases have political coloring.

In case of Chiragov, ECHR must answer the question whether Armenia is responsible for the alleged violation which took place outside its territory. At the same time, the ECHR is not authorized to hear cases involving non-members of the European Convention on Human Rights (Nagorno-Karabakh is non-member).

Regarding Sargsyan’s case, Azerbaijani side put forward as a “counter-argument” the claim that the Shahumyan region allegedly is not controlled by Azerbaijan.

“It’s ridiculous assertion. Everyone knows that since 1993, Shahumyan region has been occupied and controlled by Azerbaijan. Thus, parity is not maintained,” he added.

ECHR has not answered the question on territorial jurisdiction since Chiragov’s complaint was filed in 2005.

“What new facts can emerge in the coming 6-7 months? Does the ECHR intend to send a monitoring team to review the situation? If so, why was not it done earlier?” the lawyer wonders.

“In general, both judgments are similar. I believe the Court will maintain parity in the future,” Ghazaryan concluded.