The Investigation of Harutyunyan and Vardanyans Legal Defender

During the 44-day war, the so-called "Artsakh" Minister of Defense was Jalal Harutyunyan.

In the midst of the war, on October 15, 2020, he was promoted to the rank of "General" by the "President of Artsakh."

On October 27, Jalal Harutyunyan was dismissed from his position by an "order" from Arayik Harutyunyan.

Currently, he is under criminal investigation in Armenia, and the case has been ongoing for a considerable period.

The "Artsakh Minister" is accused of two incidents:

The failure of the counter-offensive operation against the Azerbaijani army on October 7, 2020.

The destruction of an Armenian division's personnel by the Azerbaijani Armed Forces on October 12, 2020.

This raises a simple yet crucial question: Why should the "Minister of Defense and General of an independent Artsakh" be subject to criminal prosecution in Armenia?

These investigative actions once again demonstrate that, in 2020, Azerbaijan conducted military operations against the occupying Armenian forces. Nikol Pashinyan bears legal responsibility for the war waged against Azerbaijan in 2020 and is an aggressor with blood on his hands — both Azerbaijani and Armenian. Jalal Harutyunyan is an Armenian citizen, which is a significant point. For Armenians who left Karabakh to return to Azerbaijani territories, they must first hold refugee status, as the right to return under international law applies to refugees.

The case of Jalal Harutyunyan illustrates that Armenians who are citizens of Armenia and have left Karabakh do not possess refugee status. Consequently, their demand to return to Azerbaijani territories has no legal basis.

Moreover, individuals like Jalal Harutyunyan, who have committed crimes against the Azerbaijani people and violated the country’s territorial integrity, must not only be deprived of the right to return but also held accountable under the laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Recently, Ruben Vardanyan, the "State Minister" of the now-defunct illegal entity in Karabakh, and his family have been the subject of legal defense efforts by Jared Genser in an interview with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

This interview further confirmed that no legal expert can effectively defend Ruben Vardanyan or the so-called "DPR" leaders and terrorist network members detained in Baku, whether under national or international law. Those who have committed grave crimes against the Azerbaijani state and people must and will be punished.

Jared Genser came across as arrogant, ignorant, and pretentious. If he were to engage in a debate with even a mid-level Azerbaijani lawyer, he would be utterly dismantled within minutes and forced to leave the studio. Even the neutral questions posed by the journalist Ulker Akifqizi were beyond his capacity and determination to answer fully.

There is no need to dissect every claim made by this odious "lawyer." As the saying goes, a lame horse’s farrier is blind. However, highlighting a few points can help illustrate why his defense position is legally absurd.

First, Jared Genser acknowledges that Karabakh is Azerbaijani territory. In international law, territorial jurisdiction is among the least disputed principles. Its essence is simple: crimes committed within a state's territory fall under that state’s jurisdiction.

Second, according to the passive personality principle of jurisdiction, Ruben Vardanyan is a foreign citizen who committed crimes against the Azerbaijani state and its citizens. Based on this principle, Azerbaijan’s criminal prosecution of Ruben Vardanyan fully aligns with international law.

Third, crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity, extrajudicial executions, war crimes, and torture are subject to the universal jurisdiction principle. Ruben Vardanyan’s actions on Azerbaijani territories, where he operated illegally, violated norms tied to the global community (erga omnes) and the fundamental principles of international law (jus cogens). Under this principle, he can be prosecuted in any competent court. This means that questioning Azerbaijan’s jurisdiction over his case is entirely unfounded.

Finally, the concept of territorial sovereignty in international law is far broader than jurisdiction.

Territorial sovereignty in modern international law encompasses the following:

The state exercises supreme authority over all physical and legal entities within its territory. A state cannot be deprived of its territory by force. Its borders are inviolable and immutable. No other state may exercise overarching authority within the sovereign state’s territory. The state enforces legislative, executive, judicial, and administrative authority through its institutions. Without explicit consent, no other state may use the land or resources of a sovereign state.

Therefore, Jared Genser’s attempt to justify Ruben Vardanyan’s role as "State Minister" of the illegal entity sponsored by occupying Armenia is incompatible with international law. If Jared dismisses Azerbaijan’s status as a unitary state and absurdly refers to the defunct "DPR" as "sub-regional authority," it shifts from a legal debate to a psychiatric issue.

Taleh Shahsuvarli