The Center for Analysis of International Relations (CAIR) has prepared an analysis regarding the so-called expert opinion titled "Analysis of Luis Moreno Ocampo's Alleged 'Genocide against Armenians in the 2023'," former prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), APA reports.
The analysis reads: "In the face of heightening tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan, on 7 August 2023, Luis Moreno Ocampo, a former prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), produced the so-called expert opinion entitled “Genocide against Armenians in 2023” (“Opinion”). Some international media outlets referred to this opinion without carrying out their own fact-finding and creating a distorted picture of what is really happening on the ground.
In response, a prominent international law expert Rodney Dixon KC at the UK’s Temple Garden Chambers, produced his preliminary legal opinion on Mr. Ocampo’s opinion. Mr. Dixon’s opinion refutes Mr. Ocampo’s allegations as unsubstantiated and manifestly lacking any credibility and notes that the Opinion does not meet the exacting hallmarks of an impartial and rigorous expert analysis, which is essential for reporting of this kind, particularly when the circumstances are complex and sensitive. There is no basis for claiming that a genocide is currently being perpetrated in Nagorno Karabakh.
This brief commentary touches on two major aspects of Mr. Ocampo’s opinion, namely, his credibility as a purported expert and his conspicuous omission of key facts in his analysis, which may have a significant impact on the use and conclusions of this opinion."
The analysis further states: "In this Opinion, Mr. Ocampo claims that the “blockade of the Lachin corridor by the Azerbaijani security forces impeding access to any food, medical supplies, and other essentials should be considered genocide under Article II (c.) of the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1949).” He specifically refers to Article 2: (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
In context, it is not an expert legal opinion but the pro-Armenia political advocacy and consultancy of Mr. Ocampo. For instance, in addition to sketchy discussion of key legal issues, the Opinion uses historical analogies and discusses ‘Russia’s geopolitical interests,’ ‘Ukraine war,’ finding “institutional solutions to the disputed territorial claims before 2025,” and recommends how the EU and the US should use ‘classic diplomatic tools’ against Azerbaijan to influence its foreign policy and decisions etc. It is not a usual practice in any reputable expert legal opinion to advise how to advance Armenia’s interest vis-à-vis Azerbaijan."
Noted that on 23 April 2023, Azerbaijan fully restored its border control with Armenia by building the border crossing post in Lachin and started checking persons and vehicles (via X-rays), including the Russian-peacekeeping force (see Figure 1). Armenia criticized it as a “blockade,” whereas Azerbaijan declared it as routine border control. "Since then, Armenians enter and exit Karabakh – a part of Azerbaijani territory – and carry goods for personal use or business after undergoing the passport and cargo check," the analysis says.
The analysis touches upon the recent history of escalation around the Lachin road and highlights the reasons behind this tension. "On 15 June 2023, Armenian army opened fire on Azerbaijani border guards in Lachin, wounding an Azerbaijani soldier. It interrupted the flow of people and goods through the Lachin crossing post for several days. Many states, including the US, expressed concerns over the shooting.
On 11 July 2023, the International Red Cross’s (IRC) vehicles were caught carrying undeclared goods through the Lachin crossing post.
The IRC issued a statement expressing “regret that without its knowledge four hired drivers tried to transport some commercial goods in their own vehicles, which were temporarily displaying the ICRC emblem.” Lachin border crossing post was temporarily closed due to a probe into smuggling by the IRC.
It is added that on 15 July 2023, the sixth meeting between President Aliyev and Prime Minister Pashinyan by the invitation of the EU Council President Charles Michel (“Brussels format”) happened. The parties also discussed alternative roads to the Lachin road for the transport of IRC’s humanitarian aid, including the Agdam road. The press release issued by President Charles Michel noted both aid transport options as important and encourage humanitarian deliveries from both sides to ensure the needs of the population are met.
Since this date, while there are no restrictions on Armenians’ entry and exit to Karabakh through the Lachin crossing post (including carrying the goods for personal or business purposes), the parties cannot agree to use both roads for carrying aid to Karabakh. In particular, the Armenian side has physically blocked the Adgam road making it impassable for the IRC vehicles.
The analysis also addresses the demands of expert opinion and emphasizes that the absence of bias and credibility are important factors for these demands.
"Unlike advocacy papers, in expert opinions, the credibility of an expert is the most fundamental principle in addition to expertise. The fact is that Mr. Ocampo’s credibility has long been under question during his office at the International Criminal Court (ICC) and after he left the ICC. For instance, the investigation by the European Investigative Collaborations revealed that Mr. Ocampo managed numerous offshore companies based in some of the most notorious tax havens in the world while serving as chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court in The Hague. It was clearly in breach of the requirements of the ICC Statute.
Spiegel’s investigation found Mr. Ocampo took undisclosed millions from alleged criminal billionaires in Libya through many offshore accounts. The investigation concluded that Mr. Ocampo’s actions “betrayed the ideals and spirit of the ICC," the analysis states.
The Financial Times investigation also found that “Luis Moreno Ocampo’s dealings with Hassan Tatanaki, who has more recently been linked to a Libyan militia accused of extrajudicial killings and other rights violations, ICC employees also engaged in questionable dealings with Mr. Ocampo long after he left the organization to become a private consultant.”
Impartiality and credibility are key requirements for writing an expert opinion, which is absent in this case. Considering such credibility issues relating to Mr. Ocampo and his current assignment, international organizations, journalist, and courts of law should not give any significant weight to his politically-charged opinion.
For example, "Opinion" does not mention the following basic facts:
1. At present, Armenians can freely enter and exit Karabakh and carry any supplies through the Lachin border crossing post. It is one of the reasons why there is no lack of food provisions, let alone any “starvation”;
2. At present, Azerbaijan allows the constant flow of electricity and gas shipment from Armenia proper to Karabakh;
3. Azerbaijan has offered to supply ethnic Armenians in Karabakh with food and medicine;
4. Azerbaijan has several times invited the representatives of the ethnic Armenian population in Karabakh for negotiations;
5. Armenia and forces under its control in Karabakh do not allow the humanitarian aid provisions by the International Red Cross (IRC) through the Agdam road by building concrete blocks on the road; it indicates that politics instead of humanitarian need is the driving force for Armenia’s unwillingness to allow the IRC provisions;
6. There is more than 12,000 Armenian army units still illegally stationed in Karabakh which could have a significant impact on diverting the food and provisions at the expense of the civilian population. In addition, the presence of this illegal force causes a serious security threat to Azerbaijan;
7. Azerbaijan does not yet control the entire Karabakh region as the Russian peacekeeping forces illegally prevent access of the Azerbaijani authorities to the local Armenian population;
8. The de-facto Armenian administration of the Russian-controlled Karabakh, which is still composed of separatist leaders who are prima facie war criminals, rejects any proposal to negotiate and co-operate with the Azerbaijani authorities, including on humanitarian issues. These forces have taken the local Armenian population hostage for their political plans;
9. Armenia’s military occupation of a significant part of Azerbaijan’s territories and displacement of a million Azerbaijanis from such occupied territories.
10. The UN Security Council’s resolutions in 1993 on the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict and the UN General Assembly resolution in 2008, which required the withdrawal of Armenian forces from the occupied territories;
11. Armenia’s total destruction of Azerbaijan’s cities, towns, and villages and their cultural heritage, which constitutes an international war crime;
12. Decisions of the leadership of the de-facto regime in Karabakh regarding refusing humanitarian aid and blocking the alternative routes to Karabakh;
"The omission of these substantial facts is not accidental but deliberate, considering that the totality of these omitted facts would refuse a false theory advanced by Mr. Ocampo about the actus reus (act or omission) and the existence of the mens rea (intent). An unbiased expert should have considered the totality of all facts on the ground to assess the allegations and provide a reasonable basis for disregarding these facts. Mr. Ocampo failed to do so," the analysis emphasizes.
The analysis also notes that the expert misinterprets the decisions and recommendations of the International Court of Justice.
It is noted that Okampo's selective approach to facts has not advanced Armenia's cause. On the contrary, it becomes evident that this politically biased "Opinion" is prepared to strengthen support for the extraordinary session of the UN Security Council scheduled for August 16th.
Armenia has the right to raise allegations of genocide against Azerbaijan before the International Court of Justice, but there is no evidence to support such a claim.
"In addition to Mr. Ocampo’s “dubious reputation” and prejudgment against Azerbaijan, the Opinion’s defects on legal and factual points calls on exercising strict scrutiny when utilized by international organizations, media outlets and judicial bodies," the analysis states.
Source: Azeri-Press News Agency