Lawyer Harutyun Baghdasaryan spoke about the legal acts related to the territorial integrity of Armenia, which make it possible to affirm that in 2020 the declaration signed on November 9 is nothing other than a cease-fire agreement. fire, it was signed under threat and does not have the characteristics of an international legal agreement. Baghdasaryan recalled that during the formation of the concept of the democratic republic of Azerbaijan in June-July 1918, Artsakh was an independent administrative and political territory, declared on July 22 in 1918 in Shushi, during the inaugural assembly of the Armenians of Artsakh and had its National Council, its popular government and its armed forces.
Artsakh was recognized by the League of Nations as a disputed territory, it was not recognized as territory of Azerbaijan. Already on August 22, 1919, under Turkish-Azerbaijani threats, the 7th Assembly of the RA signed a peace treaty with Azerbaijan, according to which Artsakh was temporarily included under the jurisdiction of Azerbaijan until its final status be decided at the Paris Peace Conference, provided that the Azerbaijani armed forces do not enter Artsakh. However, on the night of March 22, 1920, Turkish-Azerbaijani forces invaded the capital Shushi, which at the time had a population of 60,000 (78 percent of them Armenians), destroyed and burned it, killing 35,000 Armenians in Artsakh, or approximately 20% of the population of Artsakh.
In 1920, by the special commission charged with determining the borders of Armenia at the Paris Peace Conference, on February 24, the document "Report and proposals of the Commission for determining the borders of Armenia" was presented, under which the signatures of the authorized representatives of the member states of the Council of the League of Nations - France, Great Britain, Italy and Japan - were posed.
In this report, the principles of border delimitation between the State of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan, the State of Armenia and the Republic of Georgia were clarified. In international law, an arbitral award is final and binding. It is not limited in time and its status does not depend on the future fate of the judgment. International law, in particular Article 81 of the Hague Convention (1907), which summarized and established the status of arbitral awards, does not provide for the annulment of the award at all. According to international law, the parties, agreeing to submit their dispute to the arbitral decision, accept once and for all that any decision of the arbitrator will be binding on their execution.
The refusal of either party to execute the arbitration will not affect the validity of the award. Accordingly, since the request for arbitration was filed not only by Armenia and Turkey, but also by 16 other countries, the decision is binding on all claimants: the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, France, Italy, Japan, Belgium, Greece, Poland, Portugal.
This article is consistent with international law defended by Western Armenia since its restructuring in Shushi on December 17, 2004.