Is the Denial of the “Armenian Genocide” an Obstacle to Turkey’s Accession to the EU?

  • Pierluigi SimoneEmail author
Part of the Studies in the History of Law and Justice book series (SHLJ, volume 15)


The persistent refusal of the Turkish government to qualify the Armenian massacres performed in 1915–1916, during the Ottoman Empire, as a genocide is here taken into consideration from the point of view of the ongoing accession process of Turkey to the European Union (EU). Even if the recognition of the “Armenian Genocide” as such does not pertain to Article 49 TEU, is not included in Article 2 TEU and does not constitute one of the so-called “Copenhagen criteria”, the criminalization in the Turkish legal order of any dissenting opinion on the matter could however indirectly affect the Copenhagen legal criteria (because of the compulsory nature of Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA) as well as Articles 2 and 49 TEU and the Copenhagen political criteria (because of the attenuation of the right of freedom of expression).


  1. Akçam T (2012) The Young Turk’s crime against humanity: the Armenian genocide and the ethnic cleansing in the Ottoman Empire. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Arikan A (2006) Turkey and the EU: an awkward candidate for EU membership? 2nd ed. Ashgate Publishing, Farnham, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
  3. Arvanitopoulos C (ed) (2009) Turkey’s accession to the European Union: an unusual candidacy. Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  4. Baghdjian KK (1987) La confiscation par le gouvernement turc des biens arméniens … dits “abandonnés”. Bibliothèque Nationale du Canada, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayraktar S, Seibel W (2004) Das türkische Tätertrauma. Der Massenmord an den Armeniern von 1915 bis 1917 und seine Leugnung. In: Giesen B, Schneider C (eds) Tätertrauma. UVK, Konstanz, pp 381–398Google Scholar
  6. Bloxham D (2005) The great game of genocide: imperialism, nationalism and the destruction of the Ottoman Armenians. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borgna G (2015) Il genocidio armeno (non) passa in giudicato: in margine al caso Perinçek. Diritti umani e diritto internazionale 9:697–704Google Scholar
  8. Bryce J, Toynbee A, Sarafian A (eds) (2000) The treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915–1916: documents presented to Viscount Grey of Falloden. Princeton, GomidasGoogle Scholar
  9. Dadrian VN (2003) The history of the Armenian genocide: ethnic conflict from the Balkans to Anatolia to the Caucasus, 6th edn. Berghahn Books, New York, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. Della Morte G (2016) Bilanciamento tra libertà di espressione e tutela della dignità del popolo armeno nella sentenza Perinçek c. Svizzera della Corte europea dei diritti umani. Rivista di diritto internazionale 99:183–189Google Scholar
  11. de Waal T (2015) Great Catastrophe: Armenians and Turks in the shadow of genocide. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Engert S (2016) Turkey–Armenia: from denial to excuse? In: Daase C, Engert S, Horelt M-A, Renner J, Strassner R (eds) Apology and reconciliation in international relations. The importance of being sorry. Routledge, Abingdon, New York, pp 218–236Google Scholar
  13. Fischer KH (2010) Der Vertrag von Lissabon. Text und Kommentar zum Europäischen Reformvertrag. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, Baden–BadenGoogle Scholar
  14. Flores M (2015) Il genocidio degli Armeni, 2a edizione. Il Mulino, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  15. Garman JJ (2008) The European Union combats racism and xenophobia by forbidding expression: an analysis of the framework decision. University of Toledo Law Review 39:843–860Google Scholar
  16. Gingeras R (2016) Fall of the Sultanate: the great war and the end of the Ottoman Empire, 1908–1922. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Giuva L (2013) Il diritto alla memoria e alle memorie. In: Melograni PS (ed) Manuale dei diritti fondamentali e desiderabili. Mondadori, Milano, pp 113–115Google Scholar
  18. Göçek FM (2015) Denial of violence: Ottoman past, Turkish present and collective violence against the Armenians, 1789–2009. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Hovannisian R (ed) (1992) The Armenian genocide: history, politics, ethics. St. Martin’s Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Kevorkian R (2011) The Armenian genocide: a complete history. I.B. Tauris, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Lekka A (2007) Legislative provisions of the Ottoman/Turkish Governments regarding minorities and their properties. Mediterr Q 18:135–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Melson R (1996) Revolution and genocide: on the origins of the Armenian genocide and the holocaust. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  23. Mitsilegas V (2009a) EU Criminal Law. Hart Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. Mitsilegas V (2009b) The third wave of third pillar law: which direction for EU Criminal Justice? Eur Law Rev 34:523–560Google Scholar
  25. Müftüler Baç M (2016) Divergent pathways: Turkey and the European Union. Re-thinking the dynamics of Turkish–European Union relations. Barbara Buldrich Publishers, LeverkusenGoogle Scholar
  26. Nas Ç, Özer Y (eds) (2012) Turkey and the European Union: processes of Europeanisation. Ashgate Publishing, Farnham, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
  27. Osiel MJ (2005) Politiche della punizione, memoria collettiva e diritto internazionale. In: Baldissarra L, Pezzino P (eds) Giudicare e punire. I processi per crimini di guerra tra diritto e politica. L’ancora del Mediterraneo, Napoli, pp 105–118Google Scholar
  28. Pingel I (2010) De Rome à Lisbonne: Commentaire article par article des traités UE et CE, 2ème éd. Dalloz, Bruxelles: Bruylant, Bâle: Helbing Lichtenhahn Verlag, ParisGoogle Scholar
  29. Priollaud F-X, Siritzky D (2008) Le traité de Lisbonne: Commentaire, article par article, des nouveaux traités européens (TUE et TFUE). La Documentation française, ParisGoogle Scholar
  30. Renauld B (2010) La décision–cadre 2008/913/JAI du Conseil de l’Union Européenne: du nouveau en matière de lutte contre le racisme? Revue trimestrielle des droits de l’homme 81:119–140Google Scholar
  31. Souleimanov E, Ehrmann M (2014) The issue of the recognition of the Armenian genocide as a political phenomenon. Middle East Rev Int Affairs 18:25–37Google Scholar
  32. Suny RG (2015) “They can live in the desert but nowhere else”: a history of the Armenian genocide. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Taubira C (2006) Le droit à la memoire. Cités 25:164–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tuncel TK (2015) The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights Grand Chamber on Perinçek v. Switzerland Case in perspective: 1. preliminary remarks; 2. three disqualified arguments and “the prevention of disorder”. Center of Eurasian Studies/Avrasya İncelemeleri Merkezi ( Scholar
  35. von Bogdandy A, Kottmann M, Antpöhler C, Dickschen J, Hentrei S, Smrkolj M (2012) Reverse Solange-protecting the essence of fundamental rights against EU Member States. Common Market Law Rev 49:489–519Google Scholar
  36. Voorhoof D (2014) Criminal conviction for denying the existence of the Armenian “genocide” violates freedom of expression. Strasbourg Observers ( Scholar
  37. Voorhoof D (2015) Criminal conviction for denying the Armenian genocide in breach with freedom of expression, Grand Chamber confirms. Strasbourg Observers ( Scholar
  38. Wilson RJ (2014) Restoration of historical memory and dignity for victims of the Armenian genocide: a human rights law approach to effective reparations. Int Crim Law Rev 14:332–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Rome “Tor Vergata”RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations