PACE Resolution No. 1900 “Definition of a Political Prisoner” as a Conglomerate of Illogicalities and Errors

Recently, there have been renewed attempts by certain “friends” of Azerbaijan to revive the long-standing and rather outdated issue of political prisoners, with the intention of applying it to individuals detained as a result of localized anti-terrorist measures aimed at restoring constitutional order throughout the entire territory of the state. This carries the familiar stench of the same intelligence-service cesspools, disguising their patrons’ business projects of interference in the internal affairs of self-sufficient states and peoples under the togas of human rights defenders, worn over the cloaks of crusaders. Since 2012, employing the same methodology of double standards, the scarecrow of PACE Resolution No. 1900 “Definition of a Political Prisoner” has been used for these purposes. However, Resolution No. 1900 (2012) “Definition of a Political Prisoner” and the Explanatory Memorandum thereto contain contradictions, illogicalities, and inaccuracies that preclude the application of this conglomerate for its intended purpose. The notions of “political reasons” and “political motives” require clarification, as the existing definitions are fraught with ambiguous interpretation. Despite repeatedly using the terms “evidence” and “burden of proof,” the drafters of both the Report and the Resolution ignore the provisions of national legal systems, reducing these concepts to an everyday, layperson’s level.