The draft law, prepared by the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP), “punishing anyone who denies the genocide with a year in jail and € 45,000 fine” will be on the agenda of the French Parliament on Thursday and it is considered Sarkozy’s new political maneuver. Obviously restraining people from discussing historical events freely, the so called draft bill is a direct dreadful interference to freedom of speech. Unfortunately as seen in other states in Europe, France had violated human rights law by restricting people from expressing their own ideas on Jewish massacre. However, it was accepted as a moral principle not to use upsetting and tragic events of history for political reasons or not to make them the means for political elections.
As the final move, Sarkozy aims to use his trump card- “massacre”- again which he frequently tries to use to protect his political reputation that hit rock bottom; therefore he turned the power of Armenian Diaspora into a good investment in political election. Furthermore, trying to harm Erdogan administration that threatens French interests in the Middle East and Africa as an important actor may be a significant target for Sarkozy. In contrast to the comments of some analysts, it seems hard for Sarkozy administration to prevent the draft bill from being discussed at the Parliamentary. Therefore, a much more determinant political will can be seen behind the approach showed in spite of destroying their political and economic relations with Turkey. Considering the EU regulations, it is considered a low possibility for the economic relations between Turkey and France to result in crisis.
Closer to 2015 -100th anniversary of 1915 incidents- a serious campaign has started particularly in Europe. When taken into account, it is seen that we can witness similar attempts in other states besides France. While some have chosen to ban the denial of massacre by considering it a hate speech, the boundaries of the freedom of speech are being limited dramatically. According to us, except the expressions directly based on hate speeches, interpreting and criticizing historical theses freely should be taken in the frame of freedom of speech and it should never be considered a crime. Otherwise it will be inevitable to have a mental syndrome that worries about various opinions to be expressed and leaves the door open to ancient dogmatism.
Once again France can risk bilateral relations due to 1915 incidents that have become the most important political means of Armenian Diaspora. On the other hand, not for moral but for political reasons the frequent repetition of these developments that also leaves Armenians in a difficult situation has been a great mishap. French politicians who demand objective historical researches on the incidents happened in the past, have been violating the freedom of expression that is one of the fundamental elements of human rights law.
For Turkey the best reaction to France and to the states where similar attempts will be, is to give the public opinion the opportunity to discuss various opinions and comments about 1915 incidents in a free atmosphere. Thus, insistently defending freedom of expression that has been tried to be restricted by western democracies, Turkey can take the lead in scientifically lightening genocide claims by easing the researches of historians and specialists.