UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

The International Legal Framework for the Dignified Return and Security of Azerbaijanis Deported from Present-Day Armenia

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.33327/ajee-18-9.3-a0001987

Auteurs

Saftar Rahimli

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.725844+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:04:47.725844+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Baku State University

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

AZ

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Background: The forced displacement of the Western Azerbaijani population, initially uprooted from territories occupied by Russia in 1920 and subsequently transferred to the jurisdiction of Armenia, constitutes a critical nexus in international law regarding the repatriation, security, and restoration of rights for displaced cohorts. Under the doctrine of jus cogens, the prohibition of deportation is categorised as a peremptory norm of international law, mandating universal adherence and triggering state responsibility for its breach. The legal framework governing such cases is multifaceted, drawing on International Humanitarian Law (IHL) to address populations displaced by military aggression, while also invoking the principles of State responsibility for international wrongful acts. These principles necessitate comprehensive reparations, including restitutio in integrum (restoration of the status quo ante), compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, and robust guarantees of non-repetition. From a normative perspective, the Turkic-Muslim population deported from Armenia remains under the protective umbrella of the 1907 Hague Regulations (IV) and the 1949 Geneva Convention (IV). While extant scholarship has extensively documented the historical and normative dimensions of deportation, a significant analytical lacuna persists regarding the specific international legal mechanisms required to operationalise a dignified return and ensure long-term security. This study seeks to address this gap by synthesising international legal norms, individual criminal accountability, and comparative state practices to propose a definitive framework for legal remedies and international protective instruments. Method: This study employs a legal-doctrinal and comparative-legal methodology, supplemented by a historical-legal review of archival sources to reconstruct the context and intent of the 1920, 1948–1956, and 1988 deportations. The research systematically interrogates international instruments and scholarly literature to define the parameters of deportation, genocide, and State responsibility under jus cogens norms. By synthesising international jurisprudence, including rulings from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), and the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission (EECC), with comparative reparations practices, the study proposes a remedial framework encompassing model treaties, monitoring systems, and domestic legislative measures. Results and Conclusions: The displaced Western Azerbaijani population maintains an inalienable right to a dignified return and holistic security under international law, predicated upon the jus cogens prohibition of forced displacement. Under the international legal regime of State responsibility, the breach of these peremptory norms requires a multi-layered remedial approach, encompassing restitutio in integrum, financial compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, and robust guarantees of non-repetition, as well as the rigorous prosecution of individuals for international crimes. Normatively, the Turkic-Muslim population expelled from Armenia remains under the continuous protection of both historical and contemporary instruments, bridging the gap between IHL and International Human Rights Law (IHRL). Practical enforcement of these rights may be sought through international judicial fora, such as the ICJ and the ECtHR, further bolstered by domestic legislative frameworks that accord formal recognition to their status as victims of genocidal intent. Collectively, these legal architectures provide a definitive and actionable basis for restoring historical rights, ensuring institutional accountability, and facilitating a safe, sustainable, and dignified repatriation to their ancestral homelands.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7169854401

DOI

10.33327/ajee-18-9.3-a0001987

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Juridictions étudiées — sources explicites

ET

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Territoire

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.33327/ajee-18-9.3-a0001987
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7169854401

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w152138660 · CITES
• openalex:w1529336916 · CITES
• openalex:w1575652035 · CITES
• openalex:w1976706431 · CITES
• openalex:w2125178332 · CITES
• openalex:w2166844546 · CITES
• openalex:w2480539965 · CITES
• openalex:w3092164279 · CITES
• openalex:w3110721479 · CITES
• openalex:w3121616732 · CITES
• openalex:w3161824791 · CITES
• openalex:w3165093723 · CITES
• openalex:w4256737198 · CITES
• openalex:w4361224215 · CITES
• openalex:w4380433299 · CITES
• openalex:w4388059354 · CITES
• openalex:w4388277002 · CITES
• openalex:w4408394879 · CITES
• openalex:w615362865 · CITES

0 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.