Tweet
ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RECOGNITION LAW: IS FRANCE CRIMINALIZING FREE SPEECH?
International Business Times
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/286574/20120124/armenian-genocide-recognition-law-france-criminalizing-free.htm
Jan 24 2012
By Amrutha Gayathri: Subscribe to Amrutha's RSS feed
Taking the international rhetoric on the Armenian genocide to the next
level, the French government has approved a bill making it illegal
to deny that the massacre of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in the first
quarter of the last century was genocide.
As expected, the approval of the bill, on Monday, sparked an angry
retaliation from Turkey, including a threat of "total rupture" of
diplomatic ties with France.
However, the international debate currently involving France, Armenia
and Turkey seems to conveniently overlook a key controversial element
in the new law - it criminalizes free speech.
The adoption of the new law seems to erroneously suggest that France
has only recently joined the global crusade to recognize the Armenian
genocide. The fact is France passed a bill, in 2001, officially
accepting the Armenian massacre between 1915 and 1923 was genocide.
The new genocide law - which penalizes anyone who chooses to have a
different opinion about the Armenian mass killing from that which
the constitution mandates - is clearly in conflict with France's
obligation as a democracy to respect free speech.
The new law should, perhaps, have been named Anti-Genocide Denial
law, rather than the widely used but more general term, Genocide
Recognition law.
An overwhelming majority of historians and academic institutions
across the world have already recognized the Armenian mass killing
was genocide. However, this is not enough for legislators to "lock"
history up or constitutionally "protect" history, effectively
criminalizing dissent.
"Officially recognizing the Armenian Genocide is one thing, and I have
no problem with it. Criminalizing free speech is quite another. The
fact that there is a consensus on a particular view doesn't justify
declaring dissenting views illegal; there is value in periodically
reevaluating our conclusions in cases like this. France should
be ashamed of this attack on freedom," a commentator wrote on an
Internet forum.
The law which mandates a maximum 45,000 Euro ($58,000) fine and a
year in jail for offenders has met with criticism for being grossly
anti-democratic. The suggestion that the State is better equipped
than the people in determining truth is high-handed, to say the least.
"As repugnant as the atrocities against ethnic Armenians were, it
is undesirable for States to interfere with the right to know and
the search for historical truth, especially when those events took
place in another country," Article19.org, an organization "defending
freedom of expression and information" wrote in a post, published
while the law was still a draft.
"The notion of forbidding words, even ugly words, is repulsive
in the extreme. It is very sad to see one of the cornerstones of
European democracy taking that path. France has lost all moral right
to condemn anyone else for repressing the right to speak freely,"
wrote another commentator.
When there is no social necessity in France to limit political views,
as is the case during a State-imposed emergency, the new law should
be deemed undemocratic and orchestrated merely to restructure its ties
with Armenia and to appease 500,000 ethnic Armenians in France, in the
wake of a two-round presidential vote scheduled for April 22 and May 6.
International Business Times
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/286574/20120124/armenian-genocide-recognition-law-france-criminalizing-free.htm
Jan 24 2012
By Amrutha Gayathri: Subscribe to Amrutha's RSS feed
Taking the international rhetoric on the Armenian genocide to the next
level, the French government has approved a bill making it illegal
to deny that the massacre of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in the first
quarter of the last century was genocide.
As expected, the approval of the bill, on Monday, sparked an angry
retaliation from Turkey, including a threat of "total rupture" of
diplomatic ties with France.
However, the international debate currently involving France, Armenia
and Turkey seems to conveniently overlook a key controversial element
in the new law - it criminalizes free speech.
The adoption of the new law seems to erroneously suggest that France
has only recently joined the global crusade to recognize the Armenian
genocide. The fact is France passed a bill, in 2001, officially
accepting the Armenian massacre between 1915 and 1923 was genocide.
The new genocide law - which penalizes anyone who chooses to have a
different opinion about the Armenian mass killing from that which
the constitution mandates - is clearly in conflict with France's
obligation as a democracy to respect free speech.
The new law should, perhaps, have been named Anti-Genocide Denial
law, rather than the widely used but more general term, Genocide
Recognition law.
An overwhelming majority of historians and academic institutions
across the world have already recognized the Armenian mass killing
was genocide. However, this is not enough for legislators to "lock"
history up or constitutionally "protect" history, effectively
criminalizing dissent.
"Officially recognizing the Armenian Genocide is one thing, and I have
no problem with it. Criminalizing free speech is quite another. The
fact that there is a consensus on a particular view doesn't justify
declaring dissenting views illegal; there is value in periodically
reevaluating our conclusions in cases like this. France should
be ashamed of this attack on freedom," a commentator wrote on an
Internet forum.
The law which mandates a maximum 45,000 Euro ($58,000) fine and a
year in jail for offenders has met with criticism for being grossly
anti-democratic. The suggestion that the State is better equipped
than the people in determining truth is high-handed, to say the least.
"As repugnant as the atrocities against ethnic Armenians were, it
is undesirable for States to interfere with the right to know and
the search for historical truth, especially when those events took
place in another country," Article19.org, an organization "defending
freedom of expression and information" wrote in a post, published
while the law was still a draft.
"The notion of forbidding words, even ugly words, is repulsive
in the extreme. It is very sad to see one of the cornerstones of
European democracy taking that path. France has lost all moral right
to condemn anyone else for repressing the right to speak freely,"
wrote another commentator.
When there is no social necessity in France to limit political views,
as is the case during a State-imposed emergency, the new law should
be deemed undemocratic and orchestrated merely to restructure its ties
with Armenia and to appease 500,000 ethnic Armenians in France, in the
wake of a two-round presidential vote scheduled for April 22 and May 6.