Official information regarding the relocation of Armenians remaining in Artsakh to Armenia does not reflect reality and served political and propaganda purposes. This was stated by the Human Rights Ombudsman of Artsakh, Gegham Stepanyan. According to him, the claim that these people were relocated to Armenia at their own request has no relation to reality.
According to Stepanyan, the first official information was spread through a Facebook post by the Minister of Social Protection, which stated that a group of people had requested the Republic of Armenia to organize their relocation. However, subsequent contacts with the relatives of these people and investigation of the facts showed that, in reality, no such request existed.
Relocation without information
The Ombudsman of Artsakh noted that the relocated individuals did not even know where they were being taken or for what purpose. They were simply told in the morning to get into the vehicles, without any explanation. Only when they arrived at the Hakari Bridge checkpoint and were taken out of the vehicles to sign documents did they realize that they were being relocated to the Republic of Armenia.
According to Stepanyan, at that moment at least one person — the well-known Mishik, who had previously been actively used by the Azerbaijani propaganda machine and often appeared in Azerbaijani courts and media — refused to relocate and stated that he wanted to stay in his home.
After the relocation, some people were placed in care centers, while others joined their families. Complete information is not yet available, but Stepanyan plans to hold personal meetings in the future to determine the actual conditions of their stay in Artsakh, especially after October 2023, when almost no Armenian population remained there.
From propaganda to isolation
Stepanyan observed that Azerbaijan’s attitude toward these individuals changed significantly over time. Initially, their presence was actively used by Baku to present to the international community that no forced displacement had occurred in Artsakh and that 120,000 Armenians left their homes voluntarily.
During this period, attempts were made to demonstrate “normal” treatment in order to convince both international delegations and external actors that Armenians could remain and live in Artsakh. However, following developments in the peace process, particularly since August 8 and in the subsequent period, this propaganda façade was no longer necessary.
According to Stepanyan, from September onwards, the attitude toward these people sharply deteriorated. Whereas previously they could maintain regular contact with family members, including with the support of the Red Cross, from September this possibility almost completely disappeared. All individuals were concentrated in one location — the “Dghyak” (“The Castle” ) hotel in Stepanakert, which, according to Stepanyan, had effectively been transformed into a detention facility under a free-movement restriction.
During their stay, individuals were under constant supervision; leaving the premises was only possible with permission or escort. Stepanyan believes that once their presence was no longer needed to prove or explain anything to anyone, the Azerbaijani side likely decided to relieve itself of this “burden” by coordinating their relocation with the Armenian side.
The real purpose of the controversial post
The Ombudsman of Artsakh emphasizes that public outrage over the phrasing of the social protection minister’s post is fully understandable, but the issue is not just about words. According to him, the post had a clear purpose — to assert that Azerbaijan did not expel these people, but that they supposedly relocated at their own request.
Stepanyan does not rule out that the request for such phrasing could have come directly from the Azerbaijani side. Otherwise, he says, it is difficult to explain why the statement was made not by the foreign affairs body, but by the minister of the social sector, even though it was obvious that such wording could offend the displaced individuals.
“When it became clear that these people were not relocated at their own request, but that a decision had been made on their behalf, the deeper purpose of the statement also became evident — to once again assert that what happened was not a forced displacement,” Stepanyan notes.