Intervening In Genocide Case: The Massachussettes Case
INTERVENING IN GENOCIDE CASE: THE MASSACHUSSETTES CASE
By Christopher Loh/ Staff Writer
Watertown TAB & Press, MA
Jan 13 2006
A concerned group of Armenian-Americans has filed a motion to intervene
in a lawsuit concerning the state's curriculum and teaching of the
1915 deportation and murder of 1.5 million Armenians from Turkey
during World War I.
Controversy swirls around the event as people argue whether or not
it constitutes genocide.
The maternal 98-year-old grandmother of Geri Lyn Ajemian, director of
Instructional Services at Marlborough Public Schools, is a descendant
of the killings.
"I have a special interest and training in history and history
education," said Ajemian, who holds a doctoral degree from Harvard
University on the philosophical foundations of history. "In my
doctoral dissertation, I focused on the habits of mind, the methods
of inquiry and the central concepts that structure history as an
academic subject. These same guiding principles 'frame' the state
curriculum frameworks."
Ajemian said she felt "compelled" to lend her experience in curriculum
development and her understanding of the frameworks to the intervening
motion.
The group filing for intervention includes Boston University President
emeritus Dr. Aram Chobanian, Geri Lynn Ajemian, Zori Babroudi a
student at Lincoln-Sudbury High School, Armine Dedkian, Loretta
Gelenian, survivor John Kasparian, Shaunt Keshishian, a student
at Lincoln-Sudbury High School, Heather Krafian and the Armenian
American Assembly.
The lawsuit filed by Lincoln-Sudbury High School history teacher
Bill Schechter and senior Ted Griswold against the state regards
the Department of Education's curriculum guide concerning inclusion
of the Turkish perspective in the teaching of the 1915 slayings of
approximately 1.5 million Armenians during their deportation from
Turkey.
Griswold, founder of the high school's American Civil Liberties Union
chapter, and Schechter argue the Turkish perspective should be included
in teachings.
Malick Ghachem, lawyer for Griswold and Schechter, said he has filed
a complaint against the group's motion to intervene.
Arnold Rosenfeld, a lawyer representing the intervening group, said
they will respond to Griswold's and Schechter's objection, at which
point the judge should respond.
"The judge can schedule an oral argument," Griswold said. "But that
is not required, but it's up to him."
"Under the rules of the court and case law, somebody who has an
interest in the case can file a motion to intervene, you have to show
certain requirements to intervene," Rosenfeld said.
These requirements include the ability to not impede in the case's
progress as well as present the interests of another party not
already represented. In other words the interests of the state do not
necessarily represent the interests of the Rosenfeld's group and the
Armenian American Assembly.
Rosenfeld said that the group he represents, along with the Armenian
American Assembly, all have an interest in the case.
"Because the Armenian Genocide, that's required to be taught under
state law, shouldn't be taught improperly," he said.
Rosenfeld said along with the motion to intervene, the group, in
conjunction with the attorney general's office, has filed a motion
of dismissal.
"We're preparing our response by Feb. 6," Ghachem said. "There will
most certainly be an oral argument on the motion to dismiss."
"The plaintiffs [Griswold and Schechter] are suggesting in their
claim that the state has to include the Turkish point of view, which
is that it [the Armenian genocide] didn't happen," Rosenfeld said,
"which we think doesn't make any sense."
Rosenfeld said the group's argument to dismiss the case is well
founded.
"Essentially there is no First Amendment right on their part,"
Rosenfeld said of Griswold and Schechter. "They've manufactured a
case where one doesn't exist. We're very confident that the motion
to dismiss will be successful. We have an excellent legal argument,
and so does the attorney general's office. I don't think they have a
legal argument at all. I think it's manufactured. It's based on what
they'd like the law to be, but it isn't."
"Inclusion of Turkish denials of the Armenian Genocide within state
curriculum guides would not, as the plaintiffs claim, provide a more
objective foundation for the teaching and learning of history within
our school classrooms," Ajemian said. "Instead, it would present a
distorted view of the nature of historical inquiry and the factual
record of events in 1915."
INTERVENING IN GENOCIDE CASE: THE MASSACHUSSETTES CASE
By Christopher Loh/ Staff Writer
Watertown TAB & Press, MA
Jan 13 2006
A concerned group of Armenian-Americans has filed a motion to intervene
in a lawsuit concerning the state's curriculum and teaching of the
1915 deportation and murder of 1.5 million Armenians from Turkey
during World War I.
Controversy swirls around the event as people argue whether or not
it constitutes genocide.
The maternal 98-year-old grandmother of Geri Lyn Ajemian, director of
Instructional Services at Marlborough Public Schools, is a descendant
of the killings.
"I have a special interest and training in history and history
education," said Ajemian, who holds a doctoral degree from Harvard
University on the philosophical foundations of history. "In my
doctoral dissertation, I focused on the habits of mind, the methods
of inquiry and the central concepts that structure history as an
academic subject. These same guiding principles 'frame' the state
curriculum frameworks."
Ajemian said she felt "compelled" to lend her experience in curriculum
development and her understanding of the frameworks to the intervening
motion.
The group filing for intervention includes Boston University President
emeritus Dr. Aram Chobanian, Geri Lynn Ajemian, Zori Babroudi a
student at Lincoln-Sudbury High School, Armine Dedkian, Loretta
Gelenian, survivor John Kasparian, Shaunt Keshishian, a student
at Lincoln-Sudbury High School, Heather Krafian and the Armenian
American Assembly.
The lawsuit filed by Lincoln-Sudbury High School history teacher
Bill Schechter and senior Ted Griswold against the state regards
the Department of Education's curriculum guide concerning inclusion
of the Turkish perspective in the teaching of the 1915 slayings of
approximately 1.5 million Armenians during their deportation from
Turkey.
Griswold, founder of the high school's American Civil Liberties Union
chapter, and Schechter argue the Turkish perspective should be included
in teachings.
Malick Ghachem, lawyer for Griswold and Schechter, said he has filed
a complaint against the group's motion to intervene.
Arnold Rosenfeld, a lawyer representing the intervening group, said
they will respond to Griswold's and Schechter's objection, at which
point the judge should respond.
"The judge can schedule an oral argument," Griswold said. "But that
is not required, but it's up to him."
"Under the rules of the court and case law, somebody who has an
interest in the case can file a motion to intervene, you have to show
certain requirements to intervene," Rosenfeld said.
These requirements include the ability to not impede in the case's
progress as well as present the interests of another party not
already represented. In other words the interests of the state do not
necessarily represent the interests of the Rosenfeld's group and the
Armenian American Assembly.
Rosenfeld said that the group he represents, along with the Armenian
American Assembly, all have an interest in the case.
"Because the Armenian Genocide, that's required to be taught under
state law, shouldn't be taught improperly," he said.
Rosenfeld said along with the motion to intervene, the group, in
conjunction with the attorney general's office, has filed a motion
of dismissal.
"We're preparing our response by Feb. 6," Ghachem said. "There will
most certainly be an oral argument on the motion to dismiss."
"The plaintiffs [Griswold and Schechter] are suggesting in their
claim that the state has to include the Turkish point of view, which
is that it [the Armenian genocide] didn't happen," Rosenfeld said,
"which we think doesn't make any sense."
Rosenfeld said the group's argument to dismiss the case is well
founded.
"Essentially there is no First Amendment right on their part,"
Rosenfeld said of Griswold and Schechter. "They've manufactured a
case where one doesn't exist. We're very confident that the motion
to dismiss will be successful. We have an excellent legal argument,
and so does the attorney general's office. I don't think they have a
legal argument at all. I think it's manufactured. It's based on what
they'd like the law to be, but it isn't."
"Inclusion of Turkish denials of the Armenian Genocide within state
curriculum guides would not, as the plaintiffs claim, provide a more
objective foundation for the teaching and learning of history within
our school classrooms," Ajemian said. "Instead, it would present a
distorted view of the nature of historical inquiry and the factual
record of events in 1915."
Comment