The Representetive of USGAM to Switzerland Mehmet Şükrü Güzel, Nominated for the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize.
Mr Şükrü Güzel, is also Policy Adviser on International Relations of Mapuche International Link, the Mapuche Human Rights Commission-Auspice Stella and the Mapuche Permanent Mission to the United Nations.
His Excellency Thorbjorn Jagland
Nobel Peace Prize Committee
Henrik Ibsens gate 51
0255 Oslo, NORWAY
Dear Chairman Jangland and Nobel Peace Prize Committee Members:
I am writing to respectfully recommend Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel for the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize for his work to prevent a potential civil war in Iraq as well as other potential civil wars of the same nature.
||Image: Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel with Her Excellency, the Mapuche Ambassador, Flor Rayen Calfunao Paillalef and on the left Count Mariqueo, the Charge d'affaires on International Relations of the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia.
Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel was born 06 July 1968 in Istanbul, Turkey, he graduated from the Istanbul University Economics Faculty in 1992, and in 2006 he settled in Geneva, Switzerland.
Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel is now Switzerland's representative of the Azerbaijan Turkish World Research Center, the International Science Academy and the main policy adviser on international relations for the Mapuche International link organization based in the United Kingdom. A volunteer worker for the Mapuche Human Rights Commission Auspice Stella and the Mapuche Permanent Mission to the United Nations. Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel is an academic and Switzerland's representative of the Center for International Strategy and Security Studies in Turkey. He is also the coauthor of a book with Dr. Ahmet Tetik on “War Crimes against the Ottomans 1911-1921” published in 2013. Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel gave an exceptional petition to the United Nations Human Rights Commission on October 2, 2013. In his petition, he pointed out that in the reports of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to the Security Council of the United Nations on Iraq, there lay a potential civil war risk in Iraq, between the central government and the regional government, due to disputes over territorial issues.
In his petition, he also specified that territorial disputes may arise in Iraq in relation to article 140 of the 2005 constitution of Iraq which, before the Constitution was not an issue. Considering the referendum in Kirkuk and other disputed territories to determine the will of their citizens, he indicated that Article 140 of Iraq's new constitution is null under international law, and that this could cause civil war in Iraq.
In his petition, he stated that the legal Declaration of Independence of the Kingdom of Iraq, 30 May 1932, was a constitutional international legal instrument which was based on the political equality of minorities in Iraq through state minority protection regime within the country. Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Declaration dated 30 May 1932, specified that all Iraqi nationals are equal before the law and with the right to enjoy the same civil and political rights without distinction to race, language or religion. Article 4, paragraph 2 of the Declaration specified that the electoral system guaranteed equitable representation to racial, religious and linguistic minorities in Iraq. Article 4 paragraph 1 and article 4 paragraph 2 is in Chapter 1 of the 30 May 1932 Declaration of the Iraqi Kingdom.
In his petition, Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel specified that in Chapter 1, Article 1 of the Declaration specified that for protection of minorities in Iraq the stipulations in the chapter were recognized as fundamental laws of Iraq, and no law, regulation or official action could conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor any law, regulation or official action now or in the future could prevail over them.
In his petition, he specified that in Article 10 of Chapter 1 of the Declaration specified that any difference of opinion as to questions of law, or fact, arising out of these articles between Iraq and any Member of the League represented on the Council, shall be to be a dispute of an international considered character under Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations and that such dispute shall, if the other party thereto demands, be referred to the Permanent Court of International Justice. The decision of the Permanent Court being final and having have the same force and effect as an award under Article 13 of the Covenant.
In his petition, he specified that after the dissolution of the League of Nations, the United Nations Economic and Social Council studied the minority protection regime of the League of Nations “Study of the Legal Validity of the Undertakings Concerning Minorities“ 7 April 1950, E/CN.4/367. In this report conclusions were reached for each country separately whether minority regime is rebus sic stantibus or not and for Iraq, specified that "I. As regards ordinary causes of the extinction of obligations. Since Iraq was bound by a Declaration made before the Council of the League of Nations, the dissolution of the latter suspended the obligation, which would return into force only if the United Nations decided to take the place of the League of Nations. II. As regards changes of circumstances, there seems to be no special circumstance affecting the position of Iraq". Even if the United Nations did not take under its guarantee the minority protection regime of Iraq established by the 30 May 1932 Declaration, the Economic and Social Council decided no special circumstances affecting the position of Iraq for his minority protection regime.
The Secretary-General of the United Nations in his memorandum dated 27 March 1951, E/CN.4/367/ Add.1, paragraph 5 specified that 1939 and 1947 circumstances as a whole changed to such an extent that generally speaking the system should be considered as having ceased to exist. Because of the complexity of the problem and the diversity of the minorities, the Secretariat preferred not to formulate such a conclusion that would exclude completely any possible exception. However the Secretariat did not wish to suggest that former enemy States are under any less obligation than other States. If the peace treaties are interpreted in the manner their authors considered that the conquered States are no longer bound by their previous obligations concerning minorities, the same reasons are valid a fortiori for States which have fought alongside the United Nations. The Secretary-General of the United Nations mentioned the minority protection regime of the League of Nations ceased to exist for the states who took part in the 2nd World War and added the United Nations preferred not to formulate a conclusion which would exclude any possible exception and the validity of minority protection regime.
Iraq is one of the original founders of United Nations with its· Declaration of Independence of 30 May 1932, in Chapter 1, Article 1 of the Declaration specified that for the protection of minorities in Iraq the stipulations in the chapter were recognized as fundamental laws of Iraq, and no law, regulation or official action could conflict or interfere with these stipulations, and that no law, regulation or official action in the present or in the future could prevail over them.
In his petition, Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel indicated that a referendum or a potential internal civil war risk could affect the continuation of the acquired rights of all the minorities in Iraq.
Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel appealed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations in his report to Security Council, to request an advisory opinion for legal status of the minority protection regime in Iraq to prevent a potential civil war in conformity with Chapter 1, Article 10 of the 30 May 1932 Declaration "any difference of opinion as to questions of law or fact arising out of these articles between Iraq and any Member of the League represented on the Council shall be held to be a dispute of an international character under Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. Any such dispute shall, if the other party thereto demands, be referred to the Permanent Court of International Justice. The decision of the Permanent Court shall be final and shall have the same force and effect as an award under Article 13 of the Covenant".
In fact, the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice may well prevent a future civil war in Iraq.
Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel's contribution for peace and security in the world deserves international recognition, as conferred by the Nobel Peace Prize, which aims cit ensuring lasting peace furthered by such an award. I therefore nominate Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel for the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize.
I respectfully recommend to you that you invest the above mentioned case with the acknowledged grandeur of the Nobel Peace Prize of 2014. Mr. Mehmet Sukru Guzel would bear this honor with grace and humility.
Thank you for your consideration of this nomination. It would be an honor to provide you with additional information, or to answer any questions you may have.
Very truly yours
Source: Center for International Strategy and Security Studies
Back to top