An important trial process is currently underway in Azerbaijani courts concerning Armenia’s occupation and unlawful actions against Azerbaijan. Fifteen individuals are being tried for their illegal activities before and during the occupation of Azerbaijani lands. These individuals, who served as “presidents” and “ministers” of the illegal entity established in the occupied Azerbaijani territories, were arrested following a counterterrorism operation on Sept. 19, 2023.
Between October 1987 and April 22, 2024, 1,389 cases were compiled and submitted against them to the court, addressing the planning and execution of war, genocide, massacres, slavery, forced displacement of people from their lands, torture, unlawful arrests, terrorism, financial support for terrorism, the forcible seizure of power, the overthrow of constitutional order and other crimes. The ongoing trial has revealed that as a result of these individuals’ illegal actions, Azerbaijan has incurred over $100 billion in damages, with tens of thousands of civilians and soldiers losing their lives and significant environmental harm.
Evasion from prosecution
Although the Azerbaijani Chief Prosecutor’s Office has invited the relevant institutions of the Republic of Armenia to cooperate regarding the suspects and other witnesses involved in these crimes, no positive response has been received from Armenia to date. This is because many individuals responsible for illegal activities on Azerbaijani territory during the occupation period remain in Armenia. While many of these individuals are Armenian citizens, the crimes took place on Azerbaijani land. Armenia not only refrains from prosecuting them for these offenses but also avoids cooperating with Azerbaijani judicial authorities on the matter.
Although all the accused are charged with committing grave crimes against humanity, two individuals stand out in particular. One of those arrested is billionaire Ruben Vardanyan, who arrived in Karabakh from Russia in September 2022 via the Lachin road, controlled by Russian peacekeepers. His arrival was seen as an indication of Russia’s desire to influence political developments in the area. Prosecutors have charged him with allegedly plotting “Operation Nemesis 2.0,” accusing him of masterminding the assassination of high-ranking Azerbaijani officials. The name “Nemesis” refers to an operation led by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, which carried out the assassinations of Ottoman and Azerbaijani leaders after World War I. During the Karabakh War in 2020, the Azerbaijani Embassy in Lebanon and its consulate in Los Angeles were attacked by members of the Armenian diaspora, regions where the radical Armenian diaspora is particularly active.
The second individual of note is Araik Harutunyan, who led the illegal junta regime during the Second Karabakh War. He is accused of ordering the bombing of Azerbaijani cities, such as Ganja and Barda. Harutunyan himself has made a clear confession regarding these actions. On Oct. 4, following the first missile attack on Ganja, he issued a warning to Azerbaijanis, urging them to evacuate the city.
Responsibility of Armenia
What makes this court case significant is the potential for outcomes that could hold the Armenian state accountable, in addition to investigating the individual crimes committed by the arrested suspects. In its initial statement regarding the trial, the Azerbaijani Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office said: “The file regarding the illegal activities against Azerbaijan by the fake ‘Nagorno-Karabakh Republic’ and its illegal forces, established on the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan with the direct and complete support of the Republic of Armenia, was sent to court.”
This statement implies that the Azerbaijani Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office holds the Republic of Armenia directly responsible for the actions, not just the arrested individuals. During the ongoing trial in Azerbaijan, the speaker of the Armenian parliament, Alen Simonyan, made a remark stating, “Karabakh Armenians left the region instead of fighting with the weapons given by the Republic of Armenia,” which further provides evidence of the Armenian state’s involvement and responsibility in the matter.
Alen Simonyan’s statement is not the first to highlight Armenia’s illegal structure and its involvement in supporting arrested persons accused of crimes during the occupation and in the occupied region. Prior to Alen Simonyan, there was already substantial evidence in the statements of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and other Armenian officials pointing to this connection. After Karabakh was liberated from occupation, Azerbaijan collected enough documents from liberated regions to prove that the de facto structure in the occupied region was directly led by Armenia and received instructions from Yerevan.
Araik Harutunyan, one of the arrested individuals accused of ordering the missile attacks on Barda and Ganja during the Second Karabakh War, resulting in civilian casualties, made the following statement in his court testimony: “There is an idea among the Azerbaijani people that I gave this order. This decision was not given by me … I have no jurisdiction, no authority.” Naturally, Harutunyan’s statement raised the question of who, in fact, issued the order to fire missiles on Ganja and Barda.
According to military experts, the ballistic missiles, including Scud, Tochka-U and Smerch, that were launched on the cities of Ganja and Barda during the Second Karabakh War could only have been fired with the approval of the Armenian commander-in-chief. Reports in the press indicate that five Smerch missile systems were shot down by Azerbaijani armed forces on the occupied territory during the war, and these missiles could only have crossed Azerbaijan’s borders with the Armenian commander-in-chief’s consent. Additionally, the Azerbaijani army destroyed some of these missiles within the borders of Armenia, releasing videos to the international community to show that these missiles were launched from Armenian territory. Even during the liberation of Shusha, an Iskander-E missile was fired at the city in an attempt to inflict mass casualties on Azerbaijani soldiers, but it was unsuccessful.
Broken articles
It is clear that there is sufficient evidence supporting Armenia’s state responsibility in this matter. The state responsibility defined by the 2001 “Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts,” as outlined in the annex to U.N. General Assembly resolution 56/83 of Dec.12, 2001, applies directly to Armenia’s actions. Article 8 of this act holds that “The conduct of a person or group of persons shall be considered an act of a State under international law if the person or group of persons is in fact acting on the instructions of, or under the direction or control of that State in carrying out the conduct.” Article 1 of the Act also states, “Every internationally wrongful act of a State entails the international responsibility of that State.” This provides a clear legal basis for holding Armenia responsible for supporting individuals and groups operating in the occupied Azerbaijani territories.
Article 31 of the agreement specifies that Armenia must provide reparation for the damages caused by the individuals or groups it supports. The reparation for damages resulting from state responsibility is outlined in this article. According to Article 31: The responsible State is obligated to make full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act. Injury includes any damage, whether material or moral, caused by the internationally wrongful act of a State.
Article 34 further defines the forms of reparation. It states that full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act shall take the form of restitution, compensation, and satisfaction, either individually or in combination, in line with the provisions of this chapter. This establishes a clear framework for the reparative actions that Armenia is required to undertake as a result of its involvement in the actions that harmed Azerbaijan.
As a result, if the court proves the state responsibility of the Republic of Armenia through the ongoing trial, this decision will represent the second major legal ruling, following the 2015 European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision on Chiragov vs Armenia that affirmed Armenia’s effective control over the occupied Azerbaijani territories. This ruling would carry significant legal consequences for the Armenian administration in terms of compensation and accountability for humanitarian violations. Consequently, a new legal process may be initiated by Azerbaijan against the Armenian administration, which had previously been exempted from responsibility for crimes committed during the First Karabakh War due to its failure to sign the relevant agreements.
