Tweet
ISSUE OF RETURNING CHURCH PROPERTIES IN TURKEY
http://www.noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6891
07.02.2013
Vahram Hovyan
Senior Expert at the Center for Armenian Studies, "Noravank" Foundation
Confiscation of the properties belonging to the Christian communities
in Turkey was one of the components of persecution and suppression
policy carried out on the state level in regard to the national and
religious minorities. Since 1936 the state has initiated confiscation
of the religious minorities' properties by law. The efforts taken for
reclaiming the confiscated property have not taken an effect till
recently thus being doomed.
Hence, over the last period positive tendencies can be observed in the
issue of the protection of the rights of the religious minorities in
Turkey, including the returning of the church properties. This issue
is in direct connection with the international pressure. It is known
that one of the preconditions for Turkey's entry in the EU was
improvement of the situation connected with the religious minorities,
which includes recovery of the confiscated ecclesiastic property. The
U.S. also, on the political ground, i.e. exerting pressure on Turkey
on certain issues, from time to time raises the problem of the
protection of the rights of the Christians, including returning of the
confiscated church properties. In this aspect the Resolution 306
passed on June 15, 2011 by the House of Representatives of the U.S.
Congress is remarkable; it urged Turkey "to return to their rightful
owners all Christian churches and other places of worship,
monasteries, schools, hospitals, monuments, relics, holy sites, and
other religious properties, including movable properties, such as
artwork, manuscripts, vestments, vessels, and other artifacts"1.
Yielding to international pressure in August 2011 Turkish authorities
passed the law on returning confiscated church properties which found
a broad response in press. It has been a long time since that law was
passed but there has been no considerable progress in the issue of
returning confiscated properties of the religious minorities in
Turkey. This period is enough to analyze the problems connected with
returning of the confiscated properties as well as further actions.
Obstacles connected with returning of the confiscated properties
Despite passing the law, there are some obstacles on practice, which
essentially complicate returning of the confiscated church properties.
These obstacles can be divided into two groups - legal and political.
In the legal aspect there are following main obstacles to returning of
the church properties:
1. Time constraints. The law warrants returning of the church property
confiscated only after 1936; meanwhile confiscations of the church
property did not take place only after 1936. Moreover, confiscation of
the property mostly took place in the prior period - in the years of
pogroms and Genocide. Over that period Armenians (Apostolic, Catholic
and Protestant), Pontic Greeks, Assyrians, etc. lost most of their
church properties. After 1936 the state confiscated only the property
they obtained after that date. It means that even in case if the law
is fully enforced the religious minorities will have a possibility to
return only a small part of the properties they lost.
2. The issue of legal status of the churches. Today only the Armenian
Apostolic, Greek Orthodox Churches and Jews have legal status in
Turkey. And de-facto existing Christian communities, such as Roman
Catholic Church, Armenian Catholic Church, Protestant churches,
including Armenian Evangelical Church, Christian Arabs, Assyrians, are
not officially recognized by the state. Though the latter accepts the
fact of their existence, it refuses to give them legal status. Even
Roman Catholic Church, despite the efforts of Vatican (the diplomatic
relations between Vatican and Turkey were established more than half a
century ago)2, could not acquire legal status in Turkey.
The absence of legal registration considerably restricts capabilities
of the unrecognized communities in this case particularly in the
aspect of returning their confiscated properties.
In the respect of the Armenian community it means that among the
Armenian Apostolic, Catholic and Evangelical churches only the first
one can put forward such a claim to the state.
3. Time limitation. The law fixes one-year time limit for the
religious minorities to put forward a claim for returning the
properties they owned3.Taking into consideration the fact that
drafting of the claim is rather complicated and long process, which is
connected with the acquisition and clarifying of different documents,
it is clear that the time limitation is not enough for the appropriate
drafting of the claims and returning of the church properties.
4. The fact that the properties were sold. The Turkish government sold
a part of the confiscated properties to the individuals. In respect of
the sold properties the law warrants compensation to the religious
minorities4. However, it is yet difficult to say how adequate the
compensation will be and whether it will allow causing the loss.
Among the political obstacles two stand out:
1. Bureaucratic acrimony. Often the religious minorities face serious
bureaucratic problems5 while reclaiming their property, and this
essentially constraints the application of the law,
2. Political speculations. The Turkish party conditions fulfillment of
its liabilities before the Christian minorities by the solution of the
problems of the Muslim minorities in appropriate countries and this
additionally complicates this rather difficult process. For example,
the Minister for EU Affairs of Turkey E. Bagis connected reopening of
the Greek theological school at the Heybeli Island near Istanbul with
the efforts of the Greek government directed to the improvement of the
conditions of the Muslim minorities in Greece6.
The aforementioned legal and political obstacles reveal the formal
essence of the law passed by the Turkish authorities. The latter
rather carries out the policy of creating an image of democratic
country for international community than reclaiming usurped rights of
the religious minorities.
This is the reason why the religious minorities in Turkey managed to
acquire insignificant progress in reclaiming the church properties.
The Turkish government returned only some property to the Armenian and
Greek Patriarchates in Istanbul7. However this is not a solution of
the problem because "There are thousand of confiscated churches and
estates belonging to the community all over the territory of Turkey
which must be returned to their rightful owners"8.
Prospects of cooperation between the churches
Despite some difficulties connected with the enforcement of the law,
it, nevertheless, opens good prospects for the Armenian Apostolic,
Catholic and Evangelical Churches in the aspect of returning their
confiscated properties. The Catholicosate of the Great House of
Cilicia has already started exerting efforts to return their
confiscated properties.
In order to obtain some success in this issue there must be
cooperation between the churches which can proceed on two levels -
"intra-national" and "international".
â~@¢ Intra-national cooperation supposes inter-confessional cooperation
between Armenian Apostolic. Catholic and Evangelical Churches and this
necessity seems to be acknowledged by them. Due to the fact that this
problem also has legal and political implication it seems reasonable
to involve in this process traditional Armenian parties working in the
Diaspora. In this context the statement of the Catholicosis of the
Great House of Cilicia Aram I9 is remarkable: "The Catholicosate of
the Great House of Cilicia in cooperation with the Armenian Catholic
and Protestant churches and our parties will draft a working programme
in the near future"10.
â~@¢ International cooperation implies cooperation with other Christian
churches in Turkey - Greek Orthodox Church, Christian Arabs,
Assyrians, Roman Catholic Church, Protestant Churches.
Intra-national and international cooperation between the churches
directed to the returning of the church properties can manifest itself
in the following issues:
â~@¢ Struggle for prolonging a time limitation- Christian churches can
jointly struggle for the extension of twelve-month deadline provided
by the law.
â~@¢ Drafting and submitting of the claims - Even if it is impossible to
draft and submit claims jointly, the Christian communities can at
least exert joint efforts by helping each other to draft claims of
each community.
â~@¢ Legal and information assistance - Without having a complete idea
about the complicated legal system of Turkey, separate communities
cannot adequately protect their rights. Besides, the issue of the
church property is connected with large amount of information which
probably may not be possessed by separate communities too, even in
connection with the issues referring particularly to them.
Correspondingly legal and information mutual help (legal
consultations, information sharing, etc.) also plays an important role
for protecting their rights more efficiently.
â~@¢ Calculations - The issue of returning of the church properties is
also connected with numerous and various (sometimes even difficult)
calculations. In this issue some churches can also provide mutual aid.
We believe that for exerting joint efforts directed to the reclaiming
church property as well as making those efforts more efficient, it is
necessary to establish joint church working group dealing with the
aforementioned issues.
1 H. Res. Resolution 306 Urging the Republic of Turkey to Safeguard
its Christian Heritage and to Return Confiscated Church Properties,
June 15, 2011. http://www.atour.com/government/pdf/20110615-USCongress-BILLS-112hres306ih.pdf
2 The diplomatic relations between Turkey and Vatican were established
in 1960 Õ~NÕ"Õ¬Õ°Õ¥Õ¬Õ´ Ô²Õ¡Õ¸O~BÕ´, Ô¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ¡Õ¶ O~G Õ¶O~@Õ¡ O~DO~@Õ"Õ½Õ¿Õ¸Õ¶ÕµÕ¡ O~CÕ¸O~DO~@Õ¡Õ´Õ¡Õ½Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¶Õ¥O~@Õ¨,
Yerevan, Publishing House of the Yerevan State University, 2010., p.
163)
3 Ð' ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~Fии Ñ~@еаÐ"изаÑ~Fии закона о возвÑ~@аÑ~Iении немÑ~CÑ~AÑ~CÐ"Ñ~LманÑ~Aким Ñ~@еÐ"игиознÑ~Kм
обÑ~Iинам конÑ~DиÑ~Aкованного имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва меÑ~HаÑ~NÑ~B бÑ~NÑ~@окÑ~@аÑ~BиÑ~GеÑ~Aкие пÑ~@епонÑ~K,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/11648.html
4 IbidO~I Ð'оÐ"гаÑ~@Ñ~Aкой Ñ~FеÑ~@ковной обÑ~Iине в СÑ~BамбÑ~CÐ"е бÑ~CдÑ~CÑ~B возвÑ~@аÑ~IенÑ~K Ñ~@анее
конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~Kе обÑ~JекÑ~BÑ~K недвижимого имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/11553.html; ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~FиÑ~O веÑ~@неÑ~B Ñ...Ñ~@иÑ~AÑ~Bианам и
иÑ~CдеÑ~Oм конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~CÑ~N Ñ~AобÑ~AÑ~BвенноÑ~AÑ~BÑ~L,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/11330.html
5 See: Ð' ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~Fии Ñ~@еаÐ"изаÑ~Fии закона о возвÑ~@аÑ~Iении немÑ~CÑ~AÑ~CÐ"Ñ~LманÑ~Aким
Ñ~@еÐ"игиознÑ~Kм обÑ~Iинам конÑ~DиÑ~Aкованного имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва меÑ~HаÑ~NÑ~B бÑ~NÑ~@окÑ~@аÑ~BиÑ~GеÑ~Aкие
пÑ~@епонÑ~K, http://drevo-info.ru/news/11648.html
6 Ð~^Ñ~BкÑ~@Ñ~KÑ~Bие ХаÐ"кинÑ~Aкой богоÑ~AÐ"овÑ~Aкой Ñ~HкоÐ"Ñ~K завиÑ~AиÑ~B оÑ~B вÑ~AÑ~BÑ~@еÑ~GнÑ~KÑ... Ñ~Hагов Ñ~Aо
Ñ~AÑ~BоÑ~@онÑ~K Ð"Ñ~@еÑ~Fии, заÑ~OвиÐ" Ñ~BÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкий миниÑ~AÑ~BÑ~@,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/12661.html
7 See, e.g., ibidO~I ТÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкие вÐ"аÑ~AÑ~Bи наÑ~GинаÑ~NÑ~B возвÑ~@аÑ~IаÑ~BÑ~L конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~CÑ~N
недвижимоÑ~AÑ~BÑ~L Ð~ZонÑ~AÑ~BанÑ~BинопоÐ"Ñ~LÑ~Aкого Ð~_аÑ~BÑ~@иаÑ~@Ñ...аÑ~Bа,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/12646.html; ТÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкие вÐ"аÑ~AÑ~Bи веÑ~@нÑ~CÐ"и
Ð~ZонÑ~AÑ~BанÑ~BинопоÐ"Ñ~LÑ~Aкой Ð~_аÑ~BÑ~@иаÑ~@Ñ...ии здание Ñ~HкоÐ"Ñ~K в Ð"аÐ"аÑ~Bе,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/12343.html
8 Õ~@Õ¡O~@Õ¸O~BÕ© Õ~MÕ¡Õ½Õ¸O~BÕ¶ÕµÕ¡Õ¶, Ô"Õ¶Õ¹ÕºÕ¥Õ~^Õ½ ÕºÕ¥Õ¿O~D Õ§ Õ~MO~CÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¼O~DÕ¶ Õ¡O~@Õ±Õ¡Õ£Õ¡Õ¶O~DÕ" Ô¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ¡ÕµÕ"
Õ´Õ¥O~@Õ±Õ¥O~AÕ´Õ¡Õ¶ Õ¶Õ¡ÕÕ¡Õ±Õ¥Õ¼Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¶Õ¥O~@Õ"Õ¶,
http://www.noravank.am/arm/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6508&sphrase_id=17981
9 2012Õ©. O~CÕ¥Õ¿O~@Õ¾Õ¡O~@Õ" 23-26-Õ¨ Ô±Õ¶Õ©Õ"Õ¬Õ"Õ¡Õ½Õ¸O~BÕ´ Â"Õ~@Õ¡ÕµÕ¯Õ¡Õ¯Õ¡Õ¶ O~AÕ¥Õ²Õ¡Õ½ÕºÕ¡Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¨Õ~]
Õ³Õ¡Õ¶Õ¡Õ¹Õ¸O~BÕ´Õ"O~A Õ°Õ¡Õ¿Õ¸O~BO~AÕ¸O~BÕ´Â" ÕÕ¸O~@Õ¡Õ£O~@Õ¸Õ¾ Õ´Õ"Õ"Õ¡Õ¦Õ£Õ¡ÕµÕ"Õ¶ Õ£Õ"Õ¿Õ¡ÕªÕ¸Õ²Õ¸Õ¾Õ" O~CÕ¡Õ¯Õ´Õ¡Õ¶ ÕÕ¸Õ½O~DÕ¸O~BÕ´O~I
Concluding address at the international conference on "The Armenian
Genocide - from Recognition to Reparation" held on February 23-26,
2012.
10 Õ~@Õ¡Õ½Õ¯, 2012, O~CÕ¥Õ¿O~@Õ¸O~BÕ¡O~@, Õ©Õ"O~B 2, Õ§Õ" 116O~I
"Globus" analytical journal, #1, 2013
Another materials of author
THE ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST[24.10.2012]
THE ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN GREECE AT THIS STAGE[04.06.2012]
ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN URUGUAY [06.02.2012]
CURRENT CONDITION OF THE ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN RUSSIA[09.01.2012]
ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN BULGARIA[07.11.2011]
ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN EGYPT[20.01.2011]
ARMENIAN PROTESTANT COMMUNITY IN IRAN[22.10.2010]
ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN SYRIA[24.09.2010]
ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN BULGARIA [26.07.2010]
PROTESTANT ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN TURKEY[17.06.2010]
http://www.noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6891
07.02.2013
Vahram Hovyan
Senior Expert at the Center for Armenian Studies, "Noravank" Foundation
Confiscation of the properties belonging to the Christian communities
in Turkey was one of the components of persecution and suppression
policy carried out on the state level in regard to the national and
religious minorities. Since 1936 the state has initiated confiscation
of the religious minorities' properties by law. The efforts taken for
reclaiming the confiscated property have not taken an effect till
recently thus being doomed.
Hence, over the last period positive tendencies can be observed in the
issue of the protection of the rights of the religious minorities in
Turkey, including the returning of the church properties. This issue
is in direct connection with the international pressure. It is known
that one of the preconditions for Turkey's entry in the EU was
improvement of the situation connected with the religious minorities,
which includes recovery of the confiscated ecclesiastic property. The
U.S. also, on the political ground, i.e. exerting pressure on Turkey
on certain issues, from time to time raises the problem of the
protection of the rights of the Christians, including returning of the
confiscated church properties. In this aspect the Resolution 306
passed on June 15, 2011 by the House of Representatives of the U.S.
Congress is remarkable; it urged Turkey "to return to their rightful
owners all Christian churches and other places of worship,
monasteries, schools, hospitals, monuments, relics, holy sites, and
other religious properties, including movable properties, such as
artwork, manuscripts, vestments, vessels, and other artifacts"1.
Yielding to international pressure in August 2011 Turkish authorities
passed the law on returning confiscated church properties which found
a broad response in press. It has been a long time since that law was
passed but there has been no considerable progress in the issue of
returning confiscated properties of the religious minorities in
Turkey. This period is enough to analyze the problems connected with
returning of the confiscated properties as well as further actions.
Obstacles connected with returning of the confiscated properties
Despite passing the law, there are some obstacles on practice, which
essentially complicate returning of the confiscated church properties.
These obstacles can be divided into two groups - legal and political.
In the legal aspect there are following main obstacles to returning of
the church properties:
1. Time constraints. The law warrants returning of the church property
confiscated only after 1936; meanwhile confiscations of the church
property did not take place only after 1936. Moreover, confiscation of
the property mostly took place in the prior period - in the years of
pogroms and Genocide. Over that period Armenians (Apostolic, Catholic
and Protestant), Pontic Greeks, Assyrians, etc. lost most of their
church properties. After 1936 the state confiscated only the property
they obtained after that date. It means that even in case if the law
is fully enforced the religious minorities will have a possibility to
return only a small part of the properties they lost.
2. The issue of legal status of the churches. Today only the Armenian
Apostolic, Greek Orthodox Churches and Jews have legal status in
Turkey. And de-facto existing Christian communities, such as Roman
Catholic Church, Armenian Catholic Church, Protestant churches,
including Armenian Evangelical Church, Christian Arabs, Assyrians, are
not officially recognized by the state. Though the latter accepts the
fact of their existence, it refuses to give them legal status. Even
Roman Catholic Church, despite the efforts of Vatican (the diplomatic
relations between Vatican and Turkey were established more than half a
century ago)2, could not acquire legal status in Turkey.
The absence of legal registration considerably restricts capabilities
of the unrecognized communities in this case particularly in the
aspect of returning their confiscated properties.
In the respect of the Armenian community it means that among the
Armenian Apostolic, Catholic and Evangelical churches only the first
one can put forward such a claim to the state.
3. Time limitation. The law fixes one-year time limit for the
religious minorities to put forward a claim for returning the
properties they owned3.Taking into consideration the fact that
drafting of the claim is rather complicated and long process, which is
connected with the acquisition and clarifying of different documents,
it is clear that the time limitation is not enough for the appropriate
drafting of the claims and returning of the church properties.
4. The fact that the properties were sold. The Turkish government sold
a part of the confiscated properties to the individuals. In respect of
the sold properties the law warrants compensation to the religious
minorities4. However, it is yet difficult to say how adequate the
compensation will be and whether it will allow causing the loss.
Among the political obstacles two stand out:
1. Bureaucratic acrimony. Often the religious minorities face serious
bureaucratic problems5 while reclaiming their property, and this
essentially constraints the application of the law,
2. Political speculations. The Turkish party conditions fulfillment of
its liabilities before the Christian minorities by the solution of the
problems of the Muslim minorities in appropriate countries and this
additionally complicates this rather difficult process. For example,
the Minister for EU Affairs of Turkey E. Bagis connected reopening of
the Greek theological school at the Heybeli Island near Istanbul with
the efforts of the Greek government directed to the improvement of the
conditions of the Muslim minorities in Greece6.
The aforementioned legal and political obstacles reveal the formal
essence of the law passed by the Turkish authorities. The latter
rather carries out the policy of creating an image of democratic
country for international community than reclaiming usurped rights of
the religious minorities.
This is the reason why the religious minorities in Turkey managed to
acquire insignificant progress in reclaiming the church properties.
The Turkish government returned only some property to the Armenian and
Greek Patriarchates in Istanbul7. However this is not a solution of
the problem because "There are thousand of confiscated churches and
estates belonging to the community all over the territory of Turkey
which must be returned to their rightful owners"8.
Prospects of cooperation between the churches
Despite some difficulties connected with the enforcement of the law,
it, nevertheless, opens good prospects for the Armenian Apostolic,
Catholic and Evangelical Churches in the aspect of returning their
confiscated properties. The Catholicosate of the Great House of
Cilicia has already started exerting efforts to return their
confiscated properties.
In order to obtain some success in this issue there must be
cooperation between the churches which can proceed on two levels -
"intra-national" and "international".
â~@¢ Intra-national cooperation supposes inter-confessional cooperation
between Armenian Apostolic. Catholic and Evangelical Churches and this
necessity seems to be acknowledged by them. Due to the fact that this
problem also has legal and political implication it seems reasonable
to involve in this process traditional Armenian parties working in the
Diaspora. In this context the statement of the Catholicosis of the
Great House of Cilicia Aram I9 is remarkable: "The Catholicosate of
the Great House of Cilicia in cooperation with the Armenian Catholic
and Protestant churches and our parties will draft a working programme
in the near future"10.
â~@¢ International cooperation implies cooperation with other Christian
churches in Turkey - Greek Orthodox Church, Christian Arabs,
Assyrians, Roman Catholic Church, Protestant Churches.
Intra-national and international cooperation between the churches
directed to the returning of the church properties can manifest itself
in the following issues:
â~@¢ Struggle for prolonging a time limitation- Christian churches can
jointly struggle for the extension of twelve-month deadline provided
by the law.
â~@¢ Drafting and submitting of the claims - Even if it is impossible to
draft and submit claims jointly, the Christian communities can at
least exert joint efforts by helping each other to draft claims of
each community.
â~@¢ Legal and information assistance - Without having a complete idea
about the complicated legal system of Turkey, separate communities
cannot adequately protect their rights. Besides, the issue of the
church property is connected with large amount of information which
probably may not be possessed by separate communities too, even in
connection with the issues referring particularly to them.
Correspondingly legal and information mutual help (legal
consultations, information sharing, etc.) also plays an important role
for protecting their rights more efficiently.
â~@¢ Calculations - The issue of returning of the church properties is
also connected with numerous and various (sometimes even difficult)
calculations. In this issue some churches can also provide mutual aid.
We believe that for exerting joint efforts directed to the reclaiming
church property as well as making those efforts more efficient, it is
necessary to establish joint church working group dealing with the
aforementioned issues.
1 H. Res. Resolution 306 Urging the Republic of Turkey to Safeguard
its Christian Heritage and to Return Confiscated Church Properties,
June 15, 2011. http://www.atour.com/government/pdf/20110615-USCongress-BILLS-112hres306ih.pdf
2 The diplomatic relations between Turkey and Vatican were established
in 1960 Õ~NÕ"Õ¬Õ°Õ¥Õ¬Õ´ Ô²Õ¡Õ¸O~BÕ´, Ô¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ¡Õ¶ O~G Õ¶O~@Õ¡ O~DO~@Õ"Õ½Õ¿Õ¸Õ¶ÕµÕ¡ O~CÕ¸O~DO~@Õ¡Õ´Õ¡Õ½Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¶Õ¥O~@Õ¨,
Yerevan, Publishing House of the Yerevan State University, 2010., p.
163)
3 Ð' ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~Fии Ñ~@еаÐ"изаÑ~Fии закона о возвÑ~@аÑ~Iении немÑ~CÑ~AÑ~CÐ"Ñ~LманÑ~Aким Ñ~@еÐ"игиознÑ~Kм
обÑ~Iинам конÑ~DиÑ~Aкованного имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва меÑ~HаÑ~NÑ~B бÑ~NÑ~@окÑ~@аÑ~BиÑ~GеÑ~Aкие пÑ~@епонÑ~K,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/11648.html
4 IbidO~I Ð'оÐ"гаÑ~@Ñ~Aкой Ñ~FеÑ~@ковной обÑ~Iине в СÑ~BамбÑ~CÐ"е бÑ~CдÑ~CÑ~B возвÑ~@аÑ~IенÑ~K Ñ~@анее
конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~Kе обÑ~JекÑ~BÑ~K недвижимого имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/11553.html; ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~FиÑ~O веÑ~@неÑ~B Ñ...Ñ~@иÑ~AÑ~Bианам и
иÑ~CдеÑ~Oм конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~CÑ~N Ñ~AобÑ~AÑ~BвенноÑ~AÑ~BÑ~L,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/11330.html
5 See: Ð' ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~Fии Ñ~@еаÐ"изаÑ~Fии закона о возвÑ~@аÑ~Iении немÑ~CÑ~AÑ~CÐ"Ñ~LманÑ~Aким
Ñ~@еÐ"игиознÑ~Kм обÑ~Iинам конÑ~DиÑ~Aкованного имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва меÑ~HаÑ~NÑ~B бÑ~NÑ~@окÑ~@аÑ~BиÑ~GеÑ~Aкие
пÑ~@епонÑ~K, http://drevo-info.ru/news/11648.html
6 Ð~^Ñ~BкÑ~@Ñ~KÑ~Bие ХаÐ"кинÑ~Aкой богоÑ~AÐ"овÑ~Aкой Ñ~HкоÐ"Ñ~K завиÑ~AиÑ~B оÑ~B вÑ~AÑ~BÑ~@еÑ~GнÑ~KÑ... Ñ~Hагов Ñ~Aо
Ñ~AÑ~BоÑ~@онÑ~K Ð"Ñ~@еÑ~Fии, заÑ~OвиÐ" Ñ~BÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкий миниÑ~AÑ~BÑ~@,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/12661.html
7 See, e.g., ibidO~I ТÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкие вÐ"аÑ~AÑ~Bи наÑ~GинаÑ~NÑ~B возвÑ~@аÑ~IаÑ~BÑ~L конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~CÑ~N
недвижимоÑ~AÑ~BÑ~L Ð~ZонÑ~AÑ~BанÑ~BинопоÐ"Ñ~LÑ~Aкого Ð~_аÑ~BÑ~@иаÑ~@Ñ...аÑ~Bа,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/12646.html; ТÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкие вÐ"аÑ~AÑ~Bи веÑ~@нÑ~CÐ"и
Ð~ZонÑ~AÑ~BанÑ~BинопоÐ"Ñ~LÑ~Aкой Ð~_аÑ~BÑ~@иаÑ~@Ñ...ии здание Ñ~HкоÐ"Ñ~K в Ð"аÐ"аÑ~Bе,
http://drevo-info.ru/news/12343.html
8 Õ~@Õ¡O~@Õ¸O~BÕ© Õ~MÕ¡Õ½Õ¸O~BÕ¶ÕµÕ¡Õ¶, Ô"Õ¶Õ¹ÕºÕ¥Õ~^Õ½ ÕºÕ¥Õ¿O~D Õ§ Õ~MO~CÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¼O~DÕ¶ Õ¡O~@Õ±Õ¡Õ£Õ¡Õ¶O~DÕ" Ô¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ¡ÕµÕ"
Õ´Õ¥O~@Õ±Õ¥O~AÕ´Õ¡Õ¶ Õ¶Õ¡ÕÕ¡Õ±Õ¥Õ¼Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¶Õ¥O~@Õ"Õ¶,
http://www.noravank.am/arm/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6508&sphrase_id=17981
9 2012Õ©. O~CÕ¥Õ¿O~@Õ¾Õ¡O~@Õ" 23-26-Õ¨ Ô±Õ¶Õ©Õ"Õ¬Õ"Õ¡Õ½Õ¸O~BÕ´ Â"Õ~@Õ¡ÕµÕ¯Õ¡Õ¯Õ¡Õ¶ O~AÕ¥Õ²Õ¡Õ½ÕºÕ¡Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¨Õ~]
Õ³Õ¡Õ¶Õ¡Õ¹Õ¸O~BÕ´Õ"O~A Õ°Õ¡Õ¿Õ¸O~BO~AÕ¸O~BÕ´Â" ÕÕ¸O~@Õ¡Õ£O~@Õ¸Õ¾ Õ´Õ"Õ"Õ¡Õ¦Õ£Õ¡ÕµÕ"Õ¶ Õ£Õ"Õ¿Õ¡ÕªÕ¸Õ²Õ¸Õ¾Õ" O~CÕ¡Õ¯Õ´Õ¡Õ¶ ÕÕ¸Õ½O~DÕ¸O~BÕ´O~I
Concluding address at the international conference on "The Armenian
Genocide - from Recognition to Reparation" held on February 23-26,
2012.
10 Õ~@Õ¡Õ½Õ¯, 2012, O~CÕ¥Õ¿O~@Õ¸O~BÕ¡O~@, Õ©Õ"O~B 2, Õ§Õ" 116O~I
"Globus" analytical journal, #1, 2013
Another materials of author
THE ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST[24.10.2012]
THE ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN GREECE AT THIS STAGE[04.06.2012]
ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN URUGUAY [06.02.2012]
CURRENT CONDITION OF THE ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN RUSSIA[09.01.2012]
ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN BULGARIA[07.11.2011]
ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN EGYPT[20.01.2011]
ARMENIAN PROTESTANT COMMUNITY IN IRAN[22.10.2010]
ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN SYRIA[24.09.2010]
ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN BULGARIA [26.07.2010]
PROTESTANT ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN TURKEY[17.06.2010]