Armenian News

Contacts:
Vartkes Yeghiayan
Yeghiayan & Associates
818-242-7400
vartkes@sbcglobal.com
PRESS RELEASE
September 16, 2008


BRITISH INSURANCE GIANT AVIVA IS 11TH INSURER SUED BY VICTIMS OF ARMENIAN
GENOCIDE

Los Angeles, CA--Descendants of the Armenian Genocide filed a class action
lawsuit yesterday against Aviva, a British Insurance company that is the
successor in interest to Norwich Union and Commercial Union, companies that
sold insurance to Armenians in Turkish Ottoman Empire prior to the 1915
genocide (Baghtchedjian and Papazyan et al vs. Aviva et al , U.S. District
Court, Central District of Calif.). The lawsuit seeks to recover life and
fire insurance benefits that were wrongfully withheld from beneficiaries of
those killed during the genocide . AVIVA is the 11th insurance company to be
sued on behalf of Armenian Genocide victims and their heirs.

Raffi Baghtchedjian and Nisan Papazyan, the lead plaintiffs of the federal
class action lawsuit, are suing on behalf of all Armenians who owned Norwich
Union life insurance and Commercial Union life and fire insurance policies
during the Armenian Genocide, and whose beneficiaries were never paid
insurance benefits. Baghtchedjian and Papazyan are represented by attorney
Vartkes Yeghiayan of Glendale-based Yeghiayan & Associates, who is
co-counsel for similar class action cases, including Marootian v. New York
Life Insurance Company, Kyurkjian v. Axa, Movsesian v. Victoria Versicherung
AG, and Deirmenjian, v. Deutsche Bank AG.

>From 1880 to 1915, many Armenians living in Turkey purchased life and fire
insurance policies from various European and American Insurance companies.
This case involves those who purchased policies from Norwich Union and
Commercial union. On April 24, 1915, the Turkish Ottoman Empire launched a
systematic campaign to destroy Armenians through a process of massacre and
deportation, known as the Armenian Genocide. Between 1915 and 1922,
approximately two million Armenians perished as a result.

Among the victims were the owners of life and fire insurance policies issued
by Norwich Union and Commercial union. "These companies never paid benefits
to victims of the Armenian Genocide or their heirs," says Yeghiayan.

In the lawsuit, Baghtchedjian and Papazyan are asking the federal court for
an order requiring Aviva to identify the insurance benefits that belong to
Armenians, identify the rightful heirs and to pay the benefits to them.

"For more than 93 years, Aviva and its subsidiary companies have been
holding millions of dollars that belong to the heirs of the victims of the
Armenian Genocide," says Yeghiayan. " No organization should be allowed to
profit from genocide, but until now, Aviva has had no incentive to identify
the rightful heirs and pay the money owed to them. With this federal
lawsuit, we intend to give them an incentive."

ARMENIA IN NEW TV CONTROVERSY
Opposition station hopes Council of Europe will fight for its right to broadcast.
By Gegham Vardanian in Yerevan

Government critics in Armenia say a small amendment to a new broadcasting law is

being used to keep the country's leading opposition news channel off the air.

Supporters of the A1+ television station, which ceased transmission in 2002 when

broadcasting licenses were renewed, are hoping to win the backing of the Council of

Europe, CoE, which has already criticised the Armenian government's treatment of

the channel.

The new law on TV and radio which parliament passed on September 10 commits the

country to moving completely to digital broadcasting by 2015, with parallel analogue

and digital transmission from 2010 on.

The government is offering currently active TV stations a chance to bid for new digital

broadcasting licenses from 2010.

The catch, as far as A1+ is concerned, is that the current licenses are being automatically

extended until June 2010, which means that no other companies will have a chance to

enter the market before then.

A1+ was a popular source of alternative news to the pro-government line, which now

dominates the electronic media in Armenia. Its removal from the airwaves sparked large

protests.

Economics minister Nerses Yeritsian, presenting the new bill to parliament, denied that

there was any political agenda behind it or any link to A1+, saying that postponing the

issuing of new licenses was "the most fair and open mechanism".

"After 2010, when the current licenses expire, everyone will receive an equal opportunity

to take part in a competition and win a broadcasting frequency," said Yeritsian.

Opposition members of parliament dismissed the minister's arguments.

"This is an underhand way of stripping A1+ of its chances of going on air and taking part

in a license competition," said Zaruhi Postanjian of the opposition Heritage Party. "This

is being done so that the market of existing TV companies won't be extended to include

one more company."

A1+ had hoped to regain its broadcasting rights following a ruling in its favour issued by

the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in June.

The court ruled that Armenia had breached article 10 of the European Convention on

Human Rights by denying A1+ a license. On September 17, the court's decision was

sent to the CoE's ministerial committee, which will issue specific recommendations to

Armenia, and monitor their implementation every six months.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, PACE, in a resolution on Armenia

agreed on June 25, also referred to A1+ and called for the national licensing authority

"to now ensure an open, fair and transparent licensing procedure".

When Claudia Luciani, director general for political affairs and cooperation at the CoE,

met the speaker of Armenia's parliament Tigran Torosian on September 11 she criticised

the way the bill had been passed the day before.

"The bill was adopted in haste, without any European expertise," she said. "It is not a step

towards implanting the resolutions of PACE but a step backwards, which means that both

the government and the national assembly have not taken the proposals in the PACE

resolutions seriously."

Even some pro-government supporters have failed to back the amended broadcasting law.

Armen Ashotian, a parliamentary deputy with the governing Republican Party and chairman

of parliament's commission on science, education, culture and youth, abstained on the first

reading of the bill and did not vote in the second and third readings.

"I am not sure that the technical advantages which are meant to justify the law outweigh the

political risks," Ashotian told IWPR.

A statement by five journalistic organisations called for the decision to be overturned, saying

it had "nothing to do with defending the interests of broadcasters, consumers and the state,

nor with "guaranteeing equal opportunities and preventing market shocks" - arguments the

government has used to justify its amendments.

Movses Hakobian, a legal consultant to the media development organisation Internews, said

the entire law was conceptually flawed.

"There's no definition of the transition to digital broadcasting," said Hakobian. "Even the

justification [document] for the bill points out that it's currently impossible to make an accurate

assessment of the technical requirements this will impose on the state, its citizens and the

broadcasters, or of what the anticipated costs are. They have no idea what the cost will be

- what's going to happen if the cost comes to more than the budget can afford? What will we do?"

Minister Yeritsian responded that the government was seeking the help of outside experts to

ensure that the switch-over works. He said, "We have a programme, but there are gaps and

pitfalls. We have asked for an international audit to be conducted on this and we need serious

international expertise."

Mesrop Movsisian, the director of A1+, believes that the whole bill was designed to keep his

company off the airwaves.

"It shows that the authorities are so frightened by the possibility of suddenly hearing an alternative

voice that they are once again resorting to suppressing free speech in Armenia," he said.

Gegham Vardanian is a journalist with Internews in Yerevan.

REPRESSION CONTINUES DESPITE SO-CALLED "REFORM"
AZG Armenian Daily
17/09/2008

Article 301 still oppresses in Turkey despite the law's supposed
reform and Gul's visit to Armenia

According to the independent Turkish press, AKP Minister of Justice,
Mr. Mehmet Ali Å~^ahin, has authorized the prosecution of Turkish
intellectual dissident Temel Demirer under Article 301.

During a tribute dedicated to Hrant Dink, Temel Demirer stated:
"We live in a country where not shouting the truth makes us
complicit in the murder. Hrant was killed not only because he was
an Armenian, but because he voiced the truth about the Genocide
in this country. If Turkish intellectuals do not commit the crime
outlined in Article 301 301 times, then they will be accomplices
to this murder. There is genocide in our history. It's called the
Armenian Genocide. [...]. Those who massacred Armenians yesterday are
attacking our Kurdish brothers today. Those who desire the brotherhood
of peoples must reconcile with this history. [...]. I ask everyone to
commit this crime. Yes, there was Armenian Genocide in this country."

Demirer had been prosecuted under Article 301 because of this
statement. However, in the spring, the Turkish Assembly achieved a
semblance of reform which replaced the crime of insulting "Turkishness"
with insulting the Turkish nation and which required that the filing
of cases by authorized by the Ministry of Justice. Unlike Human Rights
organizations, the European Commission and Parliaments hailed this
so-called reform.

The European Armenian Federation recounts the comments of Mr. Demirer's
lawyer: "We were expecting this decision. With this decision, they
have just proven that their promises regarding the European Union,
democracy, structural reforms and human rights are all fairytales. On
the one hand, they go to Armenia to watch a football match, on the
other hand they are filing cases under Article 301."

"This is yet another indication that Article 301 is not compatible with
a democratic society and that it must be thoroughly repealed. Turkey
must take steps now toward full and comprehensive recognition of
the Genocide; otherwise, it will be clear that Gul's show in Armenia
was just a PR ploy with no foundation" said Laurent Leylekian, the
executive director of the European Armenian Federation.

The European Armenian Federation emphasizes that there is a current
reality in Turkey that is far different from the illusions propagated
by Ankara's PR strategy. The Federation calls upon the European
Commission, Council and Parliament to act according to this reality.

Addendum: since the initial release of this PR in French (11
Sept.), the Turkish Ministry of Justice allowed prosecuting another
intellectual, columnist Ahmet Altan, for the very same reason,
i.e. for having affirmed the Armenian Genocide.

European Armenian Federation for Justice & Democracy, Brussels

Prison for Turkey book 'insult'

Turkish publisher has been sentenced to five months in prison for publishing a book by

a British author about the mass killing of Armenians in 1915.

Ragip Zarakolu was found guilty of "insulting the institutions of the Turkish republic" under Article 301 of Turkey's penal code.

The controversial law was recently reformed under pressure from the EU to ensure freedom of speech in Turkey.

This is the first high-profile verdict to be handed down since then.

Mr Zarakolu's sentence seems to confirm campaigners' fears that changes to the law were merely cosmetic, says the BBC's Sarah Rainsford in Istanbul.

In April it became a crime to insult the Turkish nation, rather than Turkishness. But insulting the Turkish nation can still be punished by up to two years in jail.

Sensitive issue

Mr Zarakolu was brought to trial for publishing a book by British author George Jerjian on the mass killings of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire in 1915.

Turkey denies the killings were genocide and the issue remains highly sensitive.

Passing sentence, the judge told Mr Zarakolu he had insulted the Turkish republic and its founders. His own defence - that he had the right to criticise - was rejected.

Mr Zarakolu's case was not referred to the Turkish ministry of justice, as required under the reforms, and he has said he will appeal against the verdict, our correspondent reports.

His sentence will not be imposed until that appeal process is complete.

Outside the court, Mr Zarakolu said that such rulings had silenced many writers in Turkey but that he would continue to challenge the restrictions.

"I was partly waiting for this result. But it is a struggle for the truth and it will go on. I do not accept myself as convicted. This is a conviction for official history and for denialism," he said.

The justice ministry recently revealed that 1,700 people were tried under Article 301 in 2006 alone.

I do not accept myself as convicted. This is a conviction for official history and for denialism
Ragip Zarakolu

Story from BBC NEWS: