Azernews.Az

By AzerNEWS Staff

A group of Azerbaijani non-governmental organization (NGO) leaders has sent an open letter to senior British and international legal officials, criticizing what they describe as a politically motivated and biased inquiry targeting Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.

AzerNEWS reports that the letter was addressed to Lindsay Hoyle, Speaker of the UK House of Commons; Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, Speaker of the House of Lords; Claudio Visco, President of the International Bar Association; and Fergus Auld, the UK Ambassador to Azerbaijan.

The letter reads:

Dear Sirs,

We, representatives of Azerbaijani civil society specializing in human rights, freedoms, and cultural heritage, address you regarding the open disrespect shown by a number of members of the UK Parliament and the leadership of the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute toward the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Azerbaijan, as well as their initiation of a political campaign against our country based on unchecked, unverified, and false information.

In this context, they have announced an inquiry titled "The Destruction of Armenian Cultural Heritage in Nagorno-Karabakh."

First and foremost, it must be stated clearly that there is no territorial or administrative unit called "Nagorno-Karabakh" in Azerbaijan. The Garabagh region is the sovereign territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan, a fact unequivocally recognized by the international community, including the United Kingdom. Therefore, the use of the term "Nagorno-Karabakh" in the inquiry is legally and historically incorrect and entirely unacceptable. Such terminology constitutes a blatant political campaign directed against the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Azerbaijani state. This approach alone demonstrates that the inquiry fails to meet basic standards of objectivity and legal credibility.

The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has ended, and both states have made significant progress in the peace process. The text of the Peace Agreement has already been finalized and was initialed during the Summit Meeting held in Washington on August 8 last year. It is evident that the peace agreement to be signed addresses all outstanding issues between the two states. Under these circumstances, the initiation of such an inquiry by actors outside the region raises serious questions about its true intent and objectives. This initiative appears aimed at undermining the normalization process between the two countries, eroding trust, fueling revanchism, and reviving separatist tendencies. Such an approach cannot serve the interests of the British government, which has supported the normalization process from the outset and has already established strategic partnerships with both Azerbaijan and Armenia. This raises a legitimate question: whose interests are actually being served by this initiative joined by certain British parliamentarians?

The content and formulation of the inquiry questions clearly reveal that it is not intended as an objective investigation. Rather than neutrally establishing facts, the questions are framed in a way that presumes violations have already occurred. Anyone reviewing the questions can clearly see that this inquiry is a biased scenario designed to create misleading perceptions within the international community and prepared on the basis of a political order from certain interest groups.

The composition of the panel and the controversial, biased activities of its members in the past raise serious concerns about their neutrality. The British MPs represented on the panel have, for decades, consistently demonstrated anti-Azerbaijani positions. Notably, apart from traditional parliamentarians who previously supported Armenia’s aggression and occupation policies against Azerbaijan, no parliamentarian with a neutral stance on the issue has been included in the panel. Under such circumstances, how can anyone expect objectivity from this inquiry? It is clear that the purpose is not to reach any impartial legal conclusion, but rather to keep an already existing biased position active within the UK Parliament and to weaken the British government’s support for normalization efforts.

Furthermore, at the initial stage of the inquiry, no Azerbaijani official institution was contacted, and the information collected was neither verified nor confirmed. At the second stage, responses to inquiry questions are reportedly accepted only via email, which raises legitimate concerns regarding transparency and procedural integrity.

Within the framework of the inquiry, it is expected that at the first hearing to be held in the UK Parliament on February 25, an NGO called the Center for Justice and Truth will present a report at the invitation of the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI). The report published on the organization’s website grossly distorts the region’s history, presents it through a separatist lens, and questions the fact that Garabagh is the territory of Azerbaijan. IBAHRI’s decision to rely on such a biased organization for the first parliamentary hearing once again reveals the true purpose of the inquiry.

During nearly thirty years of occupation, hundreds of Azerbaijani cultural, religious, and historical heritage sites in Garabagh, Eastern Zangezur, and even within the territory of Armenia were systematically destroyed, desecrated, or had their origins falsified by Armenian authorities. At the same time, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, and crimes against humanity were committed against the Azerbaijani people. Why does IBAHRI ignore these documented violations of international law? Is such an approach compatible with the principles of legal objectivity and impartiality?

It should be particularly emphasized that IBAHRI, on its official website, declares the promotion of the rule of law and the preparation of impartial reports in the field of international fact-finding as its core principles. If IBAHRI does not suspend the current inquiry and fails to act in accordance with these principles, then it should remove these declarations from its official website.

We demand that the activities of the initiators of this inquiry be examined within the relevant ethical mechanisms of the UK Parliament as actions that sabotage the official foreign policy course of the British government regarding the region. We strongly condemn this biased approach as a precedent of instrumentalizing law for political purposes.

We demand the immediate suspension of this inquiry.

We call on the Ambassador of the United Kingdom to Azerbaijan, Fergus Auld, to urgently investigate this matter and to take action to stop this provocation. We also declare our readiness to meet with Ambassador Fergus Auld to discuss this issue.

The open letter was signed by the following individuals:

1. Amir Aliyev – Chairman of the "Center for the Promotion of Human Rights" Public Union

2. Rizvan Nabiyev – Member of the Board of Directors of the "Legal Analysis and Research" Public Union

3. Novella Jafarova – Chairman of the "Azerbaijan Women’s Rights Society named after D. Aliyeva" Public Union

4. Saadat Bananyarli – Chairman of the "Azerbaijan National Branch of the International Human Rights Society" Public Union

5. Saida Gojamanli – Chairman of the "Protection of Human Rights and Rule of Law" Public Union

6. Alimammad Nuriyev – Head of the "Constitution" Research Foundation

7. Zaur Ibrahimli – Member of the Board of Directors of the Azerbaijan National NGO Forum

8. Oguz Mammadov – Chairman of the "Zangi - Study of Historical Heritage" Public Union

9. Dilgam Ahmed – Chairman of the "Chapar" National Heritage Research Center Public Union

10. Fariz Khalilli - Chairman of the "Miras" Social Union for the Study of Cultural Heritage

11. Khalid Kazimov - Chairman of the "Regional Human Rights and Media Center" Public Union

12. Irada Rzazadeh - Chairman of the "For the Social Welfare of Citizens" Public Union.