PARIS—French President Nicolas Sarkozy will immediately submit a new draft of a law punishing denial of the Armenian genocide if France’s top judicial body rejects it, two ministers told AFP Wednesday.
“The president told us in cabinet that he would immediately submit a new draft if there is a rejection by the Constitutional Council” of a bill approved recently by the French parliament, said one of the ministers, who spoke on condition of anonymity, reported AFP.
Another minister said Sarkozy had also criticized those in cabinet who had opposed the bill, saying they “did not see past the ends of their noses.”
He said a rejection of the bill by the Constitutional Council could open the door to questioning a law that penalizes denial of the Holocaust.
After being approved by the National Assembly and Senate, the law was put on hold Tuesday after politicians opposed to the legislation demanded that its constitutionality be examined.
Two separate groups of French politicians who oppose the legislation – from both the Senate and the lower house – said they had formally requested the Constitutional Council examine the law.
The groups said they each had gathered more than the minimum 60 signatures required to ask the council to test the law’s constitutionality.
The council is obliged to deliver its judgment within a month, but this can be reduced to eight days if the government deems the matter urgent.
Despite government backing of the law, at least two ministers, Foreign Minister Alain Juppe and Agriculture Minister Bruno Le Maire, had spoken out against the bill.
“French President Sarkozy could have signed, and turned into a law, the bill that criminalizes the denial of genocides [including the Armenian Genocide], but he preferred to wait until the statutory deadline, and this enabled for the bill’s opponents to get active and appeal to the Constitutional Council,” said a statement political affairs office of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Bureau.
There are three options that the Constitutional Council could consider in addressing the Genocide bill.
The Council could rule that the resolution as approved is consistent with the constitution and thus pave the way for a presidential signature. The Council could determine that portions of the bill are not consistent with the French Constitution. In case, the bill will be returned to the National Assembly, to amend it and make it consistent with the Constitution. This option could cause problems, since the National Assembly will go on vacation, in one month, to prepare for the presidential elections.
A third option would be to find the resolution entirely unconstitutional, in which case Sarkozy would have to re-introduce the matter in the National Assembly and the process would begin anew.
The president cannot sign the bill until the Constitutional Council reaches a decision.
Funy he could sign the law before they toolk it to the court and no one would be able to do anything even if all 213 or more senators signed that court complaint.
He had 4 days to sign he didn’t and now Nicolas Sarkozy will immediately submit a new draft of a law punishing denial of the Armenian genocide if France’s top judicial body rejects it.
I don’t know what game is he playing?
He’s playing and election year game. The fact that he did not sign the bill immediately is to allow the bill’s opponents to appeal it to the Constitutional Council therefore making Turkey happy, as he did. Remember there are 550,000 turks living in France. If I were a French citizens, I would not vote for him only becasue he did not sign the bill into law immediately. This is a political game. He does not really care about the Armenian Genocide (it’s sick but all politicians will use our tragedies when it suits them) but that’s my opinion.
PplMy opinion is Sarkozy screwing 10 million Armenian world wide.
Let see what he did.
1) He forced the bill to the Senate and it passed.
2) He could sign the law next day on Jen 24 or on 5 th day after Bill got approved so he didn’t,
waited untill some 73 senators including from his party send it to the court.
3)He has ability sign it now wich will stop courts involvement and he is not doing that.
4)He has right to ask that court do hurry it in 8 days.Is not doing that.
5) Instead all that if court rejects the bill he is willing to propose new bill .
But don’t forget! by that time senat is going to the brake and then there is presidential election, so there wouldn’t be any time to deal with genocide criminalization Bill.
By doing this he gained international rating, he would be man of his word a front of Armenians and could say you know Armenians I would take care that when I am President next time.
I love Sarkozy. It’s good to see a politician sticking to their word. Now if only Obama wasn’t such a liar and a coward then maybe we can see the Genocide recognized in the U.S., and maybe see a law like this passed there. If this bill has taught us anything it’s that Turkey’s threats are empty. They’re all bark and no bite!!!
Harut its not that Obama doesnt want to sign the genocide bill it is the politician that are selling us the Armenian people out, look at it for a minute you actually thought the protocol was signed with no money changing hands, cmon you can do better then that buddy, they sold the Genocide to many times brother it is what it is and yes its like that, politicians back home are bought and paid for my brother all we are doing is going back and forth getting happy for a minute that some one actually cares about us, no my brother our own ploiticians dont even wanne hear us out, just like the old saying goes vereve nerkevin chi uzum lsi-nerkevnel verevin chi tesnum vor asi.
Mr.Sarkozy France lower house and senate please don’t play ping-pong with Armanian
genocide i don’t know how some house and senate member they can stop the majority
vote.my BIG question is the majority have the right to take the genocide bill to top
court too and say the both houses vote passed the bill if not please the whole thing is a jock
Sarkozy is up to something…!!! I get an impression that he tries to kill the Armenian Genocide issue once and for all. Let’s not forget how 100 years ago they have used the Armenian card against the turks.
Ok.. so Sarkozy had the opportunity to sign the bill .. but yet he did not.. and waited until the last minute.. and why may i ask? now the game is on.. surprise surprise…
One chievemnt as benefit from the debate is that Turkey popularized the Genocide in the entire world more than before.
Harout is right. Turkey ,the bully of Europe, is all bark and no bite.
,
HAROUT:
DID YOU READ THE ARTICLE? SARKOZY HAD (((((FOUR))))) DAYS TO SIGN THE BILL INTO LAW BUT DID NOT. HOW IS HE STICKING TO HIS WORD? USE YOUR GOD-GIVEN BRAIN. HE IS A POLITICIAN AND IS TAKING THE FRENCH ARMENIANS AS SUCKERS.
WAIT BEFORE YOU “LOVE SARKOZY”. UNBELIEVABLE.
This is a psychological drama between the truth of AG and Turkish officials!! The more Turks warn others the more people of the world will learn about AG. Armenian Genocide recognition getting closer and closer by entire European countries, and Turks have no other choice but to accept the reality of The Christian Genocide Of Ottoman Turkey!!
Atlas Shrugs: Armenian Genocide: Jihad in Turkey
I hope not but— Well, if he has to redraft it….in such case the law could name the reason for having such a law. This would be the aggressive and racial motivated denial of the genocide by Turkey on the highest level and exporting of the state sponsored denial policy to France
Genocide is the highest form of racism, that means denial or justification of a well good reported and documented genocide is equal to racism too… systematic denial of Armenian genocide is being sponsored and orchestrated(!) by the criminal actor state ( Turkish government) itself , while this is not the case with other know genocides. Therefore such a law can not be against foredoom of speech
Since EU countries have a similar anti racism law , I would predict that the Constitutional Council will approve the law
Sarkozy Is A Person Of Strong Charcter, the good side of the objections of some is bringing more media coverage and more people are learning about the Armenia Genocide
i agree with the french presidant he should wait get it debated if not passed he will redraft it very wise presidant vivesarkozy vive france
I SAY AGAIN , OUR ARMENIAN STRUGGLE FOR JUSTICE WILL NEVER STOPS … THE TURKISH NIGHTMARE IS NOT ARMENIANS PROBLEM !! ARANTS HUSAHADUTYAN HAYER HARACH !!!!
If any one on this site knows about Khalifa Umar or Omar…
When he arrived to Jerusalem he refuse to enter the Church there so his followers will not change it to mosque…
Read this understand Islam…But Seljuks never applied it…
In 638 the Islamic Caliphate extended its dominion to Jerusalem.[89] With the Arab conquest, Jews were allowed back into the city.[90] The Rashidun caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab signed a treaty with Monophysite Christian Patriarch Sophronius, assuring him that Jerusalem’s Christian holy places and population would be protected under Muslim rule.[91] When led to pray at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the holiest site for Christians, the caliph Umar refused to pray in the church so that Muslims would not request converting the church to a mosque.[dubious – discuss] He prayed outside the church, where the Mosque of Umar (Omar) stands to this day, opposite the entrance to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb (Arabic: عمر بن الخطّاب; Transliteration: ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, c. 586–590 – 644( c. 2 November (Dhu al-Hijjah 26, 23 Hijri[2]), was a leading companion and adviser to the Islamic prophet Muhammad who later became the second Muslim Caliph after Muhammad’s death.
A dhimmī (Arabic: ذمي ḏimmī IPA: [ˈðɪmmiː]), (collectively أهل الذمة ahl al-ḏimmah/dhimmah, “the people of the dhimma”) is a non-Muslim subject of a state governed in accordance with sharia law. Linguistically, the word means “one whose responsibility has been taken”. This has to be understood in the context of the definition of state in Islam. Dhimma allows rights of residence in return for taxes.[2] According to scholars, Dhimmi’s have the same social responsibilities and rights as Muslims. They are excused or excluded from specific duties assigned to Muslims, and otherwise equal under the laws of property, contract and obligation.
Under sharia law, dhimmi status was originally afforded to Jews, Christians, and Sabians. The protected religions later came to include Zoroastrians, Mandaeans, Hindus and Buddhists. Eventually, the largest school of Islamic legal thought applied this term to all non-Muslims living in Islamic lands outside the sacred area surrounding Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
As an example of the distinctions between Muslims, dhimmis, and others, sharia law permits the consumption of pork and alcohol by non-Muslims living in Islamic countries, although they may not be openly displayed.These same commodities are expressly forbidden to Muslims. As another example of this, sharia law in present-day Saudi Arabia prescribes blood money to be paid for the death of a person caused by another. The amount payable for a Christian or Jew is half that for a male Muslim; but all others are valued at 1/16. However this is a minority view, and the largest school of legal thought in Islam i.e. the Hanafi school does not make any distinction between a non-Muslim dhimmi and a Muslim citizen.
Sarkozy’s concern is to secure, from the start, the support of the Constitutional court, since the existing law criminalizing the the denial of the Holocaust would be in jeopardy if the case for the Armenian Genocide is not set on solid legal bases. There are anti-Semites everywhere; France is no exception.
Sarkozys delay in signing the law has proven ill fated. The law will be torpedoe it. The constitutional court will declare it unconstitutional. They’ll have to start all over again. But elections are upon him and if he is not elected…..??