London: A call has been made to Ambassador Fergus Auld to address and halt a recent provocation. The appeal suggests that immediate action is necessary to handle the situation effectively. According to Azerbaijan State News Agency, the demand for intervention reflects growing concerns about the potential implications of the provocation. Stakeholders are urging Ambassador Auld to engage promptly to prevent any escalation. The situation requires careful management to maintain stability and order. A group of NGO leaders from Azerbaijan has addressed an open letter to the Speaker of the House of Commons of the British Parliament, Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Lords, Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, the President of the International Bar Association, Claudio Visco, and the British Ambassador to Azerbaijan, Fergus Auld.AZERTAC presents the letter:'Dear Speaker of the House of Commons of the British Parliament Lindsay Hoyle, Speaker of the House of Lords Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, President of the Internatio nal Bar Association Claudio Visco, and Ambassador of the United Kingdom to Azerbaijan Fergus Auld!We, a group of Azerbaijan's civil society representatives specializing in human rights and freedoms, as well as cultural heritage, are appealing to you because of the overt disrespect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan by a number of members of the British Parliament and the leadership of the Institute of Human Rights of the International Bar Association, who have launched a political campaign against our country on the basis of unverified and unconfirmed information.They have announced an inquiry into the 'destruction of Armenian cultural heritage in Nagorno-Karabakh.'First and foremost, it should be noted that there is no territorial unit called 'Nagorno-Karabakh' in Azerbaijan. The Garabagh region is a sovereign territory of Azerbaijan, and this is unequivocally recognized as such by the international community, including Great Britain itself. Therefore, the term 'Nagorno-Karabakh' use d in the inquiry is legally and historically incorrect, and its use is unacceptable. This is a dirty political campaign directed against the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the state of Azerbaijan. Such an approach is already clear evidence that the inquiry does not meet the criteria of objectivity and legal validity.The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has ended, as both countries have made great progress in the peace process. The text of the peace treaty is now ready and was initialed during the Washington summit held on August 8 last year. It is clear that the peace treaty to be signed covers the issues on the agenda between the two countries. This being the case, the launch of such an inquiry by actors outside the region raises serious questions about its main intentions and goals. The initiative aims to disrupt the process of normalization between the two countries, undermine trust, and revive separatist tendencies by inciting sentiments of revenge. This should not be in the interest of t he British government, which has supported the normalization process between Azerbaijan and Armenia from the very beginning and has already established a strategic partnership with both countries. Then whose interests does this initiative, which British parliament members have joined, serve?The content and form of the questions of the inquiry clearly reveal that it does not aim to conduct an objective investigation. Instead of serving to determine facts in a neutral manner, the questions suggest that a violation has already 'occurred.' Anyone looking at the questions can clearly see that the inquiry is a biased scenario aimed at creating a false impression in the international community and based on the political orders of certain interest groups.The composition of the panel and the controversial and prejudiced activities of the individuals represented on it in the past raise serious questions over their neutrality in this process. The British MPs represented on the panel have consistently demonstrated an ant i-Azerbaijani position over the past decades. Interestingly, the panel does not include any MPs with a neutral position on the subject other than those who have traditionally supported Armenia's aggression and policy of occupation against Azerbaijan in the past. Under such circumstances, who can ever have any hopes for the objectivity of the inquiry? It is clear that the goal here is not to reach an objective legal conclusion, but to weaken the British government's support for normalization efforts by keeping the existing biased position active in the British Parliament.Additionally, in the initial stage of the inquiry, no official Azerbaijani institution was contacted, and the information collected was not verified or confirmed. In the second stage, inquiry questions are answered only by email, which raises legitimate questions about the transparency of the entire process.At the first hearing of the inquiry in the British Parliament due on February 25, the 'Center for Justice and Truth' NGO is expected to pr esent a relevant report at the invitation of the International Bar Association's Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI). The report posted on the CFJT website extensively distorts the history of the region, shows it through the prism of separatism, and questions the fact that Garabagh is Azerbaijani territory. The fact that IBAHRI turned to such a biased organization for the first hearing in Parliament once again reveals the general purpose of the inquiry.During the 30 years of occupation, the Armenian authorities systematically destroyed, desecrated, and changed the origin of hundreds of cultural, religious, and historical heritage items belonging to the Azerbaijani people in Garabagh and East Zangezur, as well as in Armenia itself. Also, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, and crimes against humanity have been committed against the Azerbaijani people. Why doesn't IBAHRI pay attention to the aforementioned violations of international law? Is such an approach consistent with the principles of legal objectivity and imparti ality?It is worth emphasizing in particular that IBAHRI declares on its official website that the rule of law and the preparation of impartial reports in the field of international fact-finding are its guiding principles. If IBAHRI does not stop the current inquiry and does not act in accordance with these principles, then it should remove these provisions from its official website.We demand that the activities of the authors of this inquiry be investigated within the framework of the relevant ethical mechanisms of the British Parliament as a step that sabotages the British government's official foreign policy course towards the region, and we strongly condemn this biased approach as a precedent for turning the law into an instrument for political ends.We demand that the inquiry process be immediately stopped!We call on the British Ambassador to Azerbaijan, Fergus Auld, to investigate the matter without delay and take action to stop this provocation. We are ready to meet with Ambassador Fergus Auld on this is sue.Signatures:1. Amir Aliyev - Chairman of the 'Center for the Promotion of Human Rights' Public Union2. Rizvan Nabiyev - Member of the Board of Directors of the 'Legal Analysis and Research' Public Union3. Novella Jafarova - Chairperson of the 'Azerbaijan Women's Rights Society named after D. Aliyeva' Public Union4. Saadat Bananyarli - Chairperson of the 'Azerbaijan National Division of the International Human Rights Society' Public Union5. Saida Gojamanli - Chairperson of the 'Protection of Human Rights and Legality' Public Union6. Alimammad Nuriyev - Head of the Constitutional Research Foundation7. Zaur Ibrahimli - Member of the Board of Directors of the Azerbaijan National NGO Forum8. Oghuz Mammadov - Chairman of the 'Zangi - Study of Historical Heritage' Public Union9. Dilgam Ahmad - Chairman of the 'Chapar' National Heritage Research Center Public Union10. Fariz Khalilli - Chairman of the 'Miras' Public Union for the Support in the Study of Cultural Heritage11. Khalid Kazimov - Chairman of the "Regiona l Human Rights and Media Center" Public Union12. Irada Rzazada - Chairperson of the Public Union "For the Social Well-being of Citizens.'