Maxime Gauin
Abstract: The ECHR’s Perincek v. Switzerland verdict is understandable to its full extent only by considering the previous legal cases involving allegations of genocide. When the Armenian side can present its allegations freely and without counter-argument, it is generally able to obtain victories. On the other hand, the confrontation of arguments for and against the “Armenian genocide” label leads to disastrous results for the supporters of Armenian terrorism. Moreover, the decisions of the European Union’s Court of Justice (2003-2004) rejecting the legal value of non-binding resolutions, and of the French Constitutional Council against the Boyer bill have paved the way for the ECHR’s verdict. This decision is a major victory both for freedom of speech, but also for the recognition of the scholarly debate on the Armenian question. This decision should be used not only as an argument in exchange of ideas at every level, but also as an additional legal basis for defamation cases against Armenian nationalists who attempt to portray their opponents as being no better than Holocaust-deniers.
Keywords: Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA), Armenian revolutionary Federation (ARF), Armenian terrorism, European Court of European Rights, European Union’s Court of Justice, defamation, Holocaust, Switzerland, Turkey. . . .
Facing Liberty The Victory of Rational Argumentation and Its Consequences by Maxime Gauin
Source:Review of Armenian Studies, Issue 29: 2014 .
1 comments:
Dear Editor
Thanks and compliments again to Maxime Gauin, a devoted researcher and defender of truth and his great service in opening the French version of the Pandora box.
As regards the "Background and reference to Tehlirian's murder case in Berlin", I and my friend Prof. Ata Atun, have sent a detailed essay to a respectable Law Institute very recently. In case they will publish our research, in their Fall issue, I hope that it may be another brick in the strong wall built by Maxime. His references are logical and judicial; no one can refute any of these.
Regarding the middle paragraph on page 143, about the need of court cases which should be opened for defamation by Armenians of respected scholars such as Heath Lowry and Justin McCarthy, I do not think that the Turkish Governments ever made or will make any such offers asking the approval of these gentlemen. Hence this serious opportunity, with my judgment is no more than a "small slip of good wish... in a Chinese fortune cookie". Compliments to AVIM as well, for having such a valued researcher.
B.regards
Post a Comment
Please Update/Correct Any Of The
3700+ Posts by Leaving Your Comments Here
- - - YOUR OPINION Matters To Us - - -
We Promise To Publish Them Even If We May Not Share The Same View
Mind You,
You Would Not Be Allowed Such Freedom In Most Of The Other Sites At All.
You understand that the site content express the author's views, not necessarily those of the site. You also agree that you will not post any material which is false, hateful, threatening, invasive of a person’s privacy, or in violation of any law.
- Please READ the POST FIRST then enter YOUR comment in English by referring to the SPECIFIC POINTS in the post and DO preview your comment for proper grammar /spelling.
-Need to correct the one you have already sent?
please enter a -New Comment- We'll keep the latest version
- Spammers: Your comment will appear here only in your dreams
More . . :
http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2007/05/Submit-Your-Article.html
All the best