According to Article 6 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide,

genocide can only be determined by a court decision. However, Armenian genocide

claimants have refrained from applying to international courts as required. However,

many national and international courts have determined that the allegations in question

have no legal basis. The court decisions summarized in this section, which were filed

indirectly, clearly reject Armenian genocide allegations.

The most prominent of these is the acquittal decision of the British Crown Prosecutor’s

Office regarding the Malta Exiles in 1921, six years after the 1915 deportation. After

the acceptance of Türkiye’s EU candidate status, these allegations were rejected by the

first instance and Grand Chamber decisions filed by Armenians in the Court of Justice

of EU. According to the first instance and Grand Chamber decisions of the European

Court of Human Rights in the Perinçek-Switzerland case, it was stated that denying the

Armenian genocide allegations cannot be a crime because there is no final court decision

on this issue. The decisions of the French Constitutional Council summarized above are

important in terms of impartiality and legality in judicial decisions, despite the strong

Armenian lobby and anti-Türkiye sentiment, even though they are decisions of a national

court outside Türkiye. A similar situation also applies to the British Crown Prosecutor’s

decision regarding the Maltese exiles. The Court of Justice of the European Union and

the ECHR are international judicial bodies, and both are the courts of societies where

anti-Türkiye sentiment and the Armenian lobby are significantly active. All these courts

rejected the Armenian genocide allegations and not any court decision was given to the contrary.