AA17CR34ADD2

AS (2017) CR 34
Addendum 2

2017 ORDINARY SESSION

________________________

(Fourth part)

REPORT

Thirty-fourth sitting

Thursday 12 October 2017 at 10 a.m.

Debate:

Prosecuting and punishing the crimes against humanity or even possible genocide committed by Daesh

The following texts were submitted for inclusion in the official report by members who were present in the Chamber but were prevented by lack of time from delivering them.

Ms HOVHANNISYAN (Armenia) – First, I would like to highlight the importance and necessity of Mr Omtzigt’s report and express my gratitude for the opportunity to debate this topic.

Although the wounds from the first genocide of the 20th century have not healed, it is still unreal to imagine that in the 21st century we are facing another genocide.

The subject is of course very sensitive and there is no doubt that atrocities by Daesh should be considered genocide. The stories we hear from victims are horrifying, but it is more horrifying to think that these atrocities continue and we have not managed to stop them.

In August 2014, Daesh captured the Yazidi town of Sinjar. As estimated by the United Nations, 5 000 men were massacred and 7 000 women were sold or enslaved, and many were displaced from their cities. Can you believe that this is happening close to Europe in the 21st century and that so far we have limited ourselves to mere condemnations, as was the case with the genocides of the previous century?

No wonder that in 2016, the Václav Havel prize was given to the famous Yazidi activist, Nadia Murad, a genocide survivor. I had the honour of hearing Nadia’s story when she was in Armenia taking part in the second global forum “Against the crime of genocide”. Nadia mentioned that the wounds of millions of Armenians are still open after a century. I am sure that after decades, we will look back to genocides committed by Daesh with the same pain; this cycle will continue if a mechanism against these atrocities is not found.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has been condemning these atrocities for three years now, and so far we have been talking in legal terms, claiming that the ICC does not have jurisdiction over the “crime of crimes”. I am happy that the rapporteur highlighted solutions to overcome the obstacles. We should try to use them all. As mentioned by the rapporteur, an alternative could be the establishment of an ad hoc tribunal, taking into consideration the fact that we have already had a precedent.

I believe, no matter how sensitive the issue is, we should not give in to feelings. We should be realistic, which means realising that we have not made any real attempts to stop the ongoing genocide.

We have not made any attempts to establish a tribunal whose jurisdiction might encompass ISIS crimes against the Yazidis – the least we could do. Otherwise, we will have a situation where genocides will become common and repeated. So let us take action and stop the crime of genocide once and for all.

Mr HOWELL (United Kingdom) – It is clear that the atrocities of Daesh have been absolutely hateful and are acts of utter horror. The title of this debate recognises the difficulties that the term “genocide” creates. We have seen in the former Yugoslavia that there were different results for crimes brought under genocide. That is why, in the United Kingdom, we leave the decision on this to judges rather than it being a political term. I do not think we should consider that there is a hierarchy of crimes with genocide at the top.

The origins of genocide and of crimes against humanity of course lie in the Nuremberg trials that followed the Second World War. Just as an aside, it seems so easy to have set up the Nuremberg trials when it is proving so difficult to identify who might hear the trial against Daesh. There is a need for the world to come together on this one. It is necessary to defeat Daesh and bring its leaders and activists to trial.

I do think that there may be a problem in bringing a charge of genocide against Daesh. I am not saying that it should not be tried. But the charges of genocide and crimes against humanity distinguish between us as members of a group and us as individuals. This goes back to the legal arguments started before the end of the Second World War. I raise it now because without the law we are nothing.

My heart is completely with this motion, but my head suggests we need to be really sure that we have all the facts if we are not to turn this into a coup for Daesh.

Mr V. HUSEYNOV (Azerbaijan) – This report and discussion is about qualifying the brutalities of Daesh as crimes against humanity or recognising them as genocide, even though current developments in the region indicate that this group is in the process of being destroyed and hopefully will disappear completely. However, the issue of the punishment of terrorists involved in these crimes remains an open one.

Therefore, the possibilities and options for the prosecution of criminals as proposed in the report deserve special attention. As noted in the report, elements of realpolitik obstruct the referral of the situation to the International Criminal Court or the establishment of an ad hoc tribunal by the United Nations Security Council. The report also believes that there is a possibility of putting pressure on the United Nations Security Council to refer the situation to the International Court.

However, I am in doubt about the further effectiveness and functionality of the process in practice. I think that we should concentrate more on the option of universal jurisdiction; at the very least, we can ensure the execution of universal jurisdiction by member States of the Council of Europe. 

I support the report. But again, I am also in doubt about the effectiveness of this report in general in bringing change to the situation. Azerbaijan also faced similar crimes and terror during the Khojaly genocide which was carried out by Armenia in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.

The brutality of Armenian troops in Khojaly goes far beyond the brutality of Daesh. Accordingly, the Armenian troops should be identified as “the Daesh of those years”. As the influence and access of social media to information across borders in 1992 cannot be compared to now, I am sure that if, at that time, we had the same level of media as we have now, the Khojaly genocide would be known by the world community as Daesh is known.

Even though there were numerous attempts by the international community and numerous legislative bodies of foreign countries and international organisations that recognised Khojaly as genocide, there have still not yet been tangible achievements to make Armenian terrorists led by the current criminal President Sarkisyan liable for their actions.