The fact that the process of "determination" of the
borders with Azerbaijan in the Syunik and Gegharkunik regions of the Republic
of Armenia does not stem from the rule of law and contradicts the principles of
international law is proven by the socio-economic violations of the border villages,
including property rights.
In particular, some of the problems that have arisen for the
villagers in Syunik and Gegharkunik regions of the Republic of Armenia are the
following:
1) A person has a legal document confirming the registration of
his right to a house or a piece land (for example, a cadastral certificate),
but is deprived of that property because it is physically considered an
"Azerbaijani" territory (for example, Shurnukh and Vorotan villages
of the Syunik region).
2) A person has a document confirming his right to a particular
land, but can not, for example, use his land, because it is under direct fire
of the Azerbaijani armed forces, who moreover, regularly discharge and shoot
their firearms in those places (for example, Srashen, Shikahogh, Nerkin, Syunik
region Hand, Aravus, Vorotan, Yeghvard, Agarak villages, Kut, Norabak and, in
general, almost all the border villages of Gegharkunik region).
The same problem applies to and persists in community-owned
lands and the opportunities for the people to use those lands.
3) A business company has been allocated land by a government
decree, but the company is unable to use it because a portion of that specific
area is occupied by the Azerbaijani Armed Forces (for example, Sotk community
of Gegharkunik region).
4) People are deprived of the opportunity to use pastures,
grasslands and gardens because they are either under Azerbaijani control or
under targeting by their armed forces (all community settlements on the border
of Gegharkunik and Syunik).
In response to these problems, some parties point out that since
these solutions are based on a topographic map, and in addition, the use of GPS
and Google Maps, these are solutions which must be adopted.
International rules, in fact, establish a completely different
approach. Cadastral documents or cadastral maps should be the basis for the
preparation of discussions and negotiations. They should be the basis of the
initial (starting) positions of the parties.
According to international rules, the right of ownership of
border residents, their lands and houses (even addresses), as well as cadastral
documents, must be studied and registered in advance.
It is necessary to calculate what possible problems may arise
for the people and only then prepare for international or interstate
discussions.
The main logic remains that the border demarcation process can
not disrupt the normal life of the border residents, their traditional way of
life, and it can not violate their rights.
The issue here is not only human rights to houses and land, but
also to water resources, livelihoods, and so on.
All possible damages and injuries that a person or someone
engaged in business can suffer must also be calculated. All of this should also
be the subject of international negotiations and discussions.
There cannot be any conditions imposed upon a person which
disrupts his normal life in his own permanent residence simply because his
property rights have not been taken into account due to some interstate process
of delimitation.
The entire process should be organized in such a way that no new
problems arise for people, but on the contrary, all inconveniences are
minimized.
These rules are enshrined in OSCE and UN guidelines, case law of
the International Court of Justice, and are cemented within documents of other
international organizations.
Հայերեն
