The recent Armenian court ruling linked to Samvel Shahramanyan, the last representative of the now-defunct Armenian separatist administration in Karabakh, has sparked intense debate not because of its legal substance, but because of the way it has been politically framed and publicly weaponised. Although formally a domestic judicial matter, the ruling has been portrayed by certain actors as reopening questions that, in reality, have long been settled both on the ground and under international law.

This controversy has unfolded alongside street rallies by Karabakh Armenians in Yerevan, deliberately timed to coincide with the visit of US Vice President JD Vance. The synchronisation added a symbolic and emotional layer, prompting speculation about intent, political signalling and the broader impact on the fragile Armenia–Azerbaijan normalisation process.

According to Armenian activist and public figure Ishkhan Verdyan, much of the uproar stems from a fundamental misinterpretation of the case itself. As he spoke to AzerNEWS, the lawsuit filed by Shahramanyan was not about borders, sovereignty or Azerbaijan at all.

“Since this is a rather sensitive case, it's worth taking a closer look at the very essence of what happened. Samvel Shakhramanyan filed a lawsuit in a Yerevan court over the inclusion of language in Armenian textbooks stating that the so-called Karabakh (Artsakh) Republic ceased to exist with his signature. The essence of the lawsuit was to remove his name from the textbooks.”

The court rejected the claim, ruling that the textbooks did not contradict established facts and reflected the generally accepted position as of 2023. Verdyan stresses that the ruling did not touch on questions of sovereignty or interstate legality.

“The court rejected Shahramanyan's claim, stating that the textbooks' content did not contradict established facts and was consistent with the generally accepted position as of 2023.”

The controversy, he argues, arose from selective reading of the........

© AzerNews