Droits de l'Homme / Human Rights

La Turquie condamnée pour violation de la liberté syndicale

La Turquie a été condamnée mardi par la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme (CEDH) pour ne pas avoir reconnu la personnalité juridique d'un syndicat de fonctionnaires.

Les requérants, deux Turcs âgés respectivement de 55 et de 48 ans, étaient à l'époque des faits membres de l'organisation syndicale Tüm Bel Sen. En 1993, le syndicat conclut avec une commune une convention collective destinée à encadrer les conditions de travail dans les services municipaux.

Estimant par la suite que la municipalité ne tenait pas ses engagements, le syndicat saisit les juridictions civiles turques qui lui donnèrent raison.

Toutefois, en 1995, la Cour de cassation jugea que le syndicat était dépourvu de personnalité juridique et qu'il n'était donc pas habilité à conclure de conventions collectives.

Dans son arrêt, la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme a estimé que l'annulation de la convention collective conclue, et appliquée pendant deux ans entre le syndicat et l'administration constituait une ingérence dans la liberté d'association des requérants.

Les juges ont souligné qu'en refusant de reconnaître la personnalité juridique du syndicat, la Turquie avait manqué à son obligation de garantir la liberté de réunion. Ils ont donc conclu à l'unanimité à la violation de l'article 11.

Ils ont alloué aux requérants 20.000 euros pour dommage moral. (AFP, 21 nov 2006)

Prisons: Des manifestants occupent le bureau de l'AP à Ankara

Une vingtaine de manifestants dénonçant le régime carcéral turc ont accupé lundi matin les locaux de l'agence de presse américaine Associated Press à Ankara, a indiqué à l'AFP un journaliste de l'agence.

Les manifestants, membres de l'organisation de défense des prisonniers (Tayad), ont fait irruption dans le bureau situé dans le quartier résidentiel de Kavaklidere.

Ils ont déployé des banderoles sur le balcon dénonçant les prisons dites de type F où sont incarcérés notamment les détenus condamnés pour des crimes terroristes.

La police anti-émeutes turque est intervenue pour mettre fin à l'occupation pendant plus d'une heure. Les policiers ont fait usage de gaz lacrymogène pour déloger 29 activistes qui s'étaient retranchés dans le bureau de l'AP.

La porte qu'ils avaient verrouillée a été enfoncée et les manifestants interpellés au cours d'une intervention musclée.

Une journaliste de l'agence et trois autres employés se trouvaient dans l'appartement lors de l'incident.

Les activistes se sont relayés sur le balcon pour crier des slogans hostiles aux prisons au régime renforcé dites de type F où sont incarcérés notamment les détenus d'extrême-gauche condamnés pour des crimes terroristes.

Ils ont également déployé une banderole géante sur lequel on pouvait lire "Non à l'isolement".

La Turquie a adopté en 2000 ce nouveau système carcéral remplaçant les vastes dortoirs de plusieurs dizaines de détenus, où les mutineries et prises d'otages étaient fréquentes, par des cellules individuelles ou pour trois personnes.

Ces nouvelles conditions renforcent l'isolement des détenus et les rendent plus vulnérables à d'éventuels mauvais traitements des gardes, affirment leurs détracteurs.

Un mouvement de grève de la faim de parents ou proches de détenus pour protester contre ces établissements a fait près d'une centaine de morts. (AFP, 20 nov 2006)

Mise en cause du régime d'isolement dans les prisons turques

Un avocat turc, Me Behic Asci, mène depuis plus de deux cents jours, à Istanbul, ce qu'il appelle un "jeûne jusqu'à la mort" pour dénoncer les conditions de détention, en Turquie, de certains de ses clients. Emprisonnés dans des établissements dits de "type F", ils sont soumis à un isolement quasi complet.

Son combat a été relayé à Bruxelles par deux membres du barreau belge, Me Georges-Henri Beauthier et Me Jan Fermon. Ils viennent de rendre un rapport sur ce conflit après avoir effectué eux-mêmes une mission sur place, les 21 et 22 octobre, pour le compte de la Fédération internationale des droits de l'homme (FIDH), la Ligue belge des droits de l'homme et l'Association internationale des juristes démocrates. Leur rapport détaille une situation qui, pour l'instant, selon eux, semble indifférer tant les autorités turques que les institutions européennes.

Me Asci et des organisations turques, citées dans le rapport, appellent à une mobilisation du Parlement européen et du Conseil de l'Europe pour faire cesser une pratique qui, estiment-ils, pourrait être un autre obstacle à l'entrée de la Turquie dans l'Union.

"Vie en danger"

Selon eux, c'est en 2000, à l'issue d'une série d'incidents violents, que le gouvernement turc a décidé d'interner des prisonniers - souvent des condamnés pour délit politique - dans des prisons de "type F", conformes, selon Ankara, aux standards des prisons européennes. Dans ces centres, les détenus sont soumis à un régime strict d'isolement, ne pouvant se retrouver, brièvement, qu'à la bibliothèque. Une discipline militaire est appliquée et les contacts entre gardiens et prisonniers sont rares. L'interdiction des visites familiales est un moyen de rétorsion souvent utilisé.

Deux mille prisonniers, au total, seraient soumis à ce régime que Mes Beauthier et Fermon décrivent comme contraire à l'article 8 de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme, qui porte sur le respect de la vie privée et familiale. 122 personnes seraient mortes, depuis six ans, pour avoir fait la grève de la faim en vue de dénoncer cette situation. Fin 2000, une révolte des détenus a été matée violemment, causant la mort de vingt-huit d'entre eux.

Les avocats turcs, les défenseurs des droits de l'homme et l'ordre des médecins d'Istanbul - qui veut enquêter sur les effets de l'isolement sur la santé - se heurtent au silence des autorités. Ces dernières ont refusé de rencontrer la mission belge.

Dans leur rapport, les deux avocats se distancient de la méthode de combat utilisée par Me Asci mais, expliquent-ils, les organisations internationales qui les ont mandatés "ne peuvent rester indifférentes devant la détermination d'un avocat qui met sa vie en danger pour protester contre les conditions de détention de ses clients". Me Asci demande pour ceux-ci des cellules de deux personnes, un accès aux espaces communautaires et un contact social avec un nombre raisonnable de personnes.  (Le Monde, Jean-Pierre Stroobants, 20 novembre 2006)

"Erdogan Discussing 301 With Wrong People"

Coming together with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan a few days ago in the wake of a consultative meeting last week, representatives of employers' unions and a group of trade unions have failed to produce a multiparty draft proposing amendments to Turkey's controversial Penal Code article 301.

The failure has prompted the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (TIHV), Initiative for Freedom of Expression and other civil society organizations to issue statements stressing that the PM is seeking discussions with the wrong people and on the wrong platform.

In the words of Contemporary Jurists Association (CHD) Chair Huseyin Y. Bicen, "Just as it was the case at the preparatory phase of the Turkish Penal Code, the Anti-Terror Law and the criminal proceeding laws, 301 is also being discussed on the wrong platform and with the wrong people".

Yurdatapan: The address should be law and human rights circles

Initiative for Freedom of Expression spokesperson Sanar Yurdatapan said, "If the government is going to consult with the civil society on an issue, it should meet with the NGOs working on that issue. Whereas when one mentions NGOs, they regard it as the TUSIAD, TISK and the unions only to be polite".

Referring to article 301 covering offences of "denigration" of Turkishness, the state and republic, Yurdatapan said "The punishment of such an insult should at the most be shamed by the society and not being taken seriously. It should not be a trial and imprisoned".

Yurdatapan said he believed not only article 301 but articles 299 and 300 of the Penal Code should also be abolished.

Onen: We want to work together

TIHV Executive Board Chair Yavuz Onen meanwhile sent a letter to Prime Minister Erdogan expressing "a desire to work together with the government" on this issue.

Onen said in his letter, "Our organization that has an important accumulation of data on the issue of human rights would like to emphasize once more that it will support all steps to be taken for the democratization of Turkey and that it is open to all kinds of discussions".

Amendments expected

Following PM Erdogan's recent meeting with trade and employers union representatives where he was quoted as welcoming any proposal on amendments to article 301 from these circles, an effort was made over the weekend to draw a multiparty draft to submit to the government.

No draft came out of a scheduled meeting but it has been reported the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) is looking for possible amendments to the controversial article, primarily to deal with its ambiguity.

The target, reportedly, is to narrow down the scope of the law where anyone can be put on trial for "denigrating Turkishness" which is regarded as a too general concept.

Under discussion is the possibility of changing the term to "denigrating the Turkish nation". (BIA, November 14, 2006)

La Turquie condamnée pour la mutation d'un fonctionnaire

La Cour européenne des Droits de l'Homme a condamné mardi la Turquie pour atteinte à la liberté de réunion et d'association d'un fonctionnaire qui avait été muté en raison de son activité syndicale.

Metin Turan, qui se voit allouer 2.500 euros pour dommage moral, était fonctionnaire à la direction du ministère des Travaux publics à Tunceli lorsqu'il fonda en août 2001 le syndicat Enerji-Yapi Yol Sen, rattaché à la Fédération des syndicats du secteur public (KESK).
 En octobre, le préfet de la région soumise à l'état d'urgence demanda sa mutation dans une autre région. Il faisait valoir que M. Turan avait assisté à l'enterrement d'un membre du Parti des travailleurs du Kurdistan (PKK -séparatiste kurde), prononcé un discours à l'occasion de la journée internationale de la femme et participé à une action de débrayage.

Selon le préfet, l'intéressé avait continuellement participé aux actions préparées par le KESK, ce qu'il considéra comme dangereux et constituant une atteinte à l'ordre public. Le 15 mars 2002, M. Turan fut muté à Yozgat.

Les juges de Strasbourg ont reconnu que le statut de fonctionnaire prévoyait la possibilité de mutation selon les besoins du service public. Mais ils ont estimé que la décision de mutation du fonctionnaire avait été prise "en raison de son appartenance syndicale", ce qui peut être considéré comme "une ingérence des autorités dans le droit à exercer ses activités syndicales". (AFP, 14 nov 2006)

21 interpellations lors d'une manifestation anti-nucléaire de Greenpeace

La police a interpellé 21 membres de Greenpeace mardi à Ankara alors qu'ils manifestaient devant le parlement contre les projets nucléaires du gouvernement, a indiqué à l'AFP une porte-parole de l'organisation écologiste.

Les manifestants portant des blousons noir avec des symboles de l'energie nucléaire et faisant le mort sur les escaliers de l'entrée du complexe ont été placés en garde à vue par la police anti-émeutes pour organisation de manifestation illégale, a précisé la porte-parole, Hilal Atici.

"L'énergie nucléaire tue", proclamait une banderole déployée par les militants.

Inquiète d'une possible pénurie d'énergie et désireuse de réduire sa dépendance énergétique (surtout vis-à-vis du gaz naturel fourni par la Russie et l'Iran), Ankara prévoit la construction de trois centrales nucléaires d'une capacité d'environ 5.000 mégawatts qui devraient entrer en service en 2012.

La construction de la première centrale à Sinop (nord), au bord de la mer Noire, doit commencer en 2007, mais les projets du gouvernement ont provoqué de vives critiques de la part de la population locale et des organisations turques de défense de l'environnement. (AFP, 14 nov 2006)

Detentions During Anti-YOK Protests

Police and paramilitary gendarme forces detained tens of protestors throughout Turkey during a two-day nation-wide protest of the country's Supreme Board of Education (YOK).

The November 6-7 protests marked the 25th anniversary of YOK which is regarded as a remnant of the post 1980 military coup era with control over the country's higher education policy and appointments.

Demonstrations in Istanbul, Ankara, Adana, Bursa, Izmir, Kutahya, Eskisehir and Kocaeli led to intervention while in the Black Sea port city of Trabzon, street fighting between protesters and gendarme troops, some of them shielded with special body armor, resulted with 18 placed under custody.

In capital Ankara, students gathering at Kurtulus square staged a silent march to Mithatpasa Bridge where they were stopped at a police barricade. A large number of students were placed under custody after a scuffle with the police and an attempt to cross through. No immediate figures were available as to how many were placed under custody and how many were wounded.

A number of democratic mass organizations, political party and union representative alongside university students met at the Kadikoy square on November 6 where they marched, in a group of about a thousand, to the Iskele square. Boasting a wide placard in front of them, the demonstrator's demands were clear: "We want equal, scientific, democratic education in the mother tongue against YOK, education at a fee and against investigations". Accompanying the demand was another placard: "We want freedom, brotherhood and a future against imperialist occupation and operations". Following the meeting police detained 6 of the protestors on grounds of shouting "illegal slogans".

In a separate meeting on the European side of the city, a 200-strong group of students gathered in front of the Istanbul University Beyazit campus where, despite heavy security measures, they staged another protest. "We are rebelling against imperialist occupation and education at a fee" said one leading placard as the group marched to the education faculty.

The meeting in Beyazit followed a similar demonstration at the Faculty of Literature on the same grounds where, led by the Communist Party of Turkey (TKP) and members of the Anarchist Block, students marched to the University central building wearing "zombie masks" as well as primary school aprons before stripping them off and setting fire to a set of diplomas.

In the western port city of Izmir, YOK was protested by a 100-strong student group who gathered at the Faculty of Literature of the Aegean University and claiming that the Higher Education Board was in an attempt to silence opposition students through investigations, vouched to raise their voice until the structure was abolished. The group dispersed without an incident as heavy security measures were taken outside.

In the central Turkish city of Eskisehir, the YOK protest was limited to a group of 20 students from the Anatolian University Students Collectives Group who marched to the rectory building where they read a press statement.

Kocaeli witnessed two demonstrations where students protested YOK initially during an organized march in the town center that was surrounded by heavy security.

Speaking on behalf of the group, Mert Temiz said "Today exactly 25 years ago those who staged the 12 September coup entered the universities with their bloody boots. The mark of the pressure that was left on the university was YOK. For 25 years this has been a shadow over universities. And for 25 years the universities are breaking away from the people, step by step, being marketed... YOK came to universities wearing military boots, we will get rid of it with a rebellion".

The second demonstration in Kocaeli was held in the evening hours where a group consisting of the Democratic Youth Movement and KOU attempted to stage a march to the Anitpark. Police blocked the way to the park where students stopped, read a press statement and dispersed.

Other protests were also held in Adana, Kutahya and Bursa where students demanded an end to YOK and scientific, democratic, autonomic education without fees. (BIA News Center, November 8, 2006)

9-month human rights record judged dark by the IHD

Turkey's human rights record has dramatically changed for the worse in the last nine months this year," Turkey's Human Rights Association (IHD) reported on over the weekend.

Disclosing the findings of monthly human rights violations reports at a press conference at the group's headquarters, group's head Yusuf Alatas said that the country's record is not encouraging in terms of right to live and freedom of speech.

He also added that violations of women rights and freedom of expression as well as torture are other critical issues reports over which indicated a downturn trend in the country.

"The first nine months of the country is a lost period regarding human rights," Alatas said.

The country went back especially in terms of ethnic, religious, ideological and sexual discrimination, he explained and expressed his worry over the situation as human rights activists. "We have to make public the truth, we can't escape from this responsibility," he added.

The violations are mostly because of the lack of determination to establish state of law and participatory democracy, claimed Alatas adding that the wide-spread ignorance over the discrimination against minorities is also tragic.

Clashes, violence claim scores of lives

According to the figures of the first nine months, 297 people died including 180 security officers in clashes between the army and the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). The clashes also claimed two civilian lives. 32 people dies due to landmines and other explosives, while 17 deaths remained unsolved.

36 people died from extrajudicial killing, the report said.

The report which distinguished honor killings from other ways of violence against the women said that some 25 women as well as 26 men and 3 children were killed in the name of honor. Some 150 cases are reported as domestic violence.

Some 308 people faced legal prosecution regarding freedom of expression and 261 of them stood trial. While 58 people were acquitted, 134 people were sentenced.

IHD goes with current head

IHD also held its general congress to determine its new head over the weekend but decided to go with its current head and maintain its emphasis on peace and the resolution of the Kurdish problem.

Yusuf Alatas, current head of the group, didn't face a challenge in the congress which focused on technical changes on its bylaws and slight changes in the administration.

The general congress of the group was held at Kocatepe Culture Center with the participation of several human rights activists and group members. President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan as well as several other prominent politicians were also invited to the congress, but the congress saw considerably low participation from the politicians.

The group will concentrate on efforts for a lasting peace in the society in general and between Kurds and Turks in particular, said Alatas in his speech at the congress.

The first day of the congress became a platform for discussions over human rights violations, democratization process and the Kurdish problem. (The New Anatolian, 6 November 2006)

Possibilities of prosecuting Turkish leaders for crimes against humanity

The Kurdish site Kurdmedia has published a series of articles on the possibilities of prosecuting Turkish leaders for crimes against humanity and war crimes.  You can find all chapters of this research written by Karim Salih by clicking the following web pages.

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13525
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13531
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13537
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13547
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13554
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13560
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13565
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13573
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13574

Below is the first chapter:

A critical analysis of the possibilities of prosecuting Turkish leaders
for crimes against humanity and war crimes since the military coup in 1980 - Part I

“I have the conviction that as long as a nation does the best for its own interests, and succeeds, the world admires it and thinks it moral.” [1] - Talaat Pasha, the architect of the Armenian destruction (1915-1922), in 1915

Abstract

The 1980 military coup has been considered by many Turkish academics and human rights groups a turning point in the Turkish history in terms of both the scale and the extent of brutality of human rights abuses. The atrocities perpetrated against Kurdish civilians, according to Turkish and international human rights defenders, have increased since 1984 under the guise of legitimacy of addressing security concerns.

I intend to explore and catalogue a possible international case against Turkish political and military leaders for injuries inflicted on the Kurdish civilians in Turkey since the 1980 coup. I will discus the criticisms of partiality and prejudice that arise with arbitrary decisions to prosecute crimes against international law committed in some internal armed conflicts but not others of arguably equal brutality. I will contend that bringing into justice those suspected of international crimes and establishment of a realistic picture, based on the historical facts of past deeds are critical preconditions for achieving an everlasting and just peace, and the development of democratic society that could advance the cause of democracy and human rights not only in Turkey but in the whole of West Asia.

Why this paper?

On November 9, 2005, the suspected bombers of a bookstore in Semdinli in Turkey’s Kurdish southeast were apprehended on the scene by the surviving victims and their arms and identity cards that belonged to Turkish security forces were published by Kurdish activists on the internet on the same day. Unlike previous similar bombings against institutions and individuals who asserted their Kurdish identity, this incident attracted domestic and international attention and deepened the controversy of who wields the real power in Turkey.

When Turkish authorities in April 2006, in a bid to defuse the tension between the government and the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK), released the suspected bombers and dismissed the prosecutor who prosecuted them, former President Suleyman Demirel stated that Turkey had not changed very much since the 1980 coup, explaining that “There is the state and there is the deep state ... When a small difficulty occurs, the civilian state steps back and the deep state becomes the generator (of decisions).”

Until Turkey succeeds in reining in the military and eliminating torture, the Kurdish population and the other Anatolian minorities seems are destined to encounter more of the Turkish deep state institutions than the legitimate state.

I believe that opening up debate over the criminal liability under international law for forced disappearances, torture and extra judicial killings, though understandably taboo in Turkey (for a society structured along authoritarian lines, such a debate raises fears of potentially destabilizing consequences), it may help the cause of democracy and human rights that so far countless of Anatolians have lost their lives on its course.

Introduction

In contrast to the 1974 Greek transition from seven year military dictatorship to democracy which accompanied criminal prosecutions of the junta leaders for torture and other crimes, [2] in Turkey the leaders of the 12 September 1980 not only remained unprosecuted after three years of direct military rule, but retained influence over the political administration through the National Security Council (Milli Güvenlik Kurulu - MGK) which they had entrenched in the 1982 Constitution of the Republic of Turkey. [3] Twenty six years on and the unresolved legacy of the coup is increasingly reported to provoke vile crimes [4] amid accusations, from impartial bodies, of military disrespecting the legal order. [5]

This paper will attempt to reach prima facie conclusions on criminal liability in international law for alleged wrongs committed since 1980 in Turkey as well as to assess the available prosecutorial options and the possibilities of enforcement.

Following presenting a brief historical overview of the modern republic of Turkey, ideas and practices of Kemalism, Turkey’s official ideology since 1923, will be examined with some focus on international indifference toward the plight of Armenians until 1923 and the Kurds thereafter as well as a particular interest in military’s role in the politics leading up to the 1980 coup. Starting with a brief presentation of human rights record during the three years following the 1980 coup, Part II will review the evidence documented by independent bodies regarding destruction of villages and forced displacement, torture, and extra-judicial executions and forced disappearances respectively emphasising in particular on the alleged involvement of state. This will be followed by a brief appraisal of Turkey’s international obligations.

Part III will examine the relevant rules of international law on crimes against humanity following an assessment of the conceptual evolution of these crimes and the early failings. Next, the concept of war crimes in internal armed conflicts will be discussed. The status of crime of torture as a discrete crime under international law will be analysed. Part IV will attempt to apply the relevant provisions of law to a selection of the available evidence in relation to crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture respectively. The requirement of the legality principle will be thoroughly analysed, employing the ICTY and ICTR jurisprudence as well as judgments by national courts when appropriate. Part V will explore the possible venues for accountability, evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of each option of a special court in Turkey, the ICC and an ad hoc international criminal tribunal respectively.

Finally, Part V will attempt to critically analyse the possibilities of enforcing international criminal law especially in the case of a NATO ally like Turkey. This paper will expound a view that pursuing criminal accountability for serious violations of international law, though not a panacea, is morally and legally imperative and would contribute to international peace and security in the long run. It will be contended that biased selective enforcement of international criminal law on arbitrary basis questions the generality of the law which is a prerequisite to its legitimacy.

I. The creation of the Republic of Turkey

After the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the World War I, the Peace Treaty of Sèvres was signed in August 1920 which provided for the dismantling of the Empire and the formation of Armenian [6] and Kurdish states along a Turkish republic. [7] The modern “Turkey”, led by Mustafa Kemal (surnamed Atatürk “Father of the Turks” in 1934), [8] “smashed its way” [9] out of Sèvres and into modern nation-statehood in 1923 in Anatolia [10] where Greeks, Armenians, Kurds and Assyrians had coexisted for millennia. [11]

On the way to nationhood, the Turkish nationalists Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), who ruled from 1913 to the collapse of Empire in 1918, engaged in the destruction of the Armenians in 1915-17 that resulted in the death of up to one and half million Armenians, almost half of the population. [12] After the war was ended, the British High Commissioner, in January 1919, informed the Turkish Foreign Minister that Great Britain is “resolved to have proper punishment inflicted on those responsible for the Armenian massacres”. [13] Ottoman court-martials, in deed, tried a number of persons and found, in absentia, some Young Turk leaders including Talaat Pasha guilty of “the organization and execution of the crime of massacre" against the Armenian population under Articles 45 and 170 of the Ottoman Penal Code. [14]

Rejecting capitulation of the Ottoman sultan to the Great Britain, Mustafa Kemal established a counter-government in Ankara in April 1919 and a parliament, named “Grand National Assembly of Turkey Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi – TBMM” in April 1920. [15] Following the withdrawal of French troops from Cilicia in May 1922, [16] the Greek forces were repelled and the city of Smyrna (present-day Izmir) in September 1922 was captured by Kemal troops. [17] According to some accounts, 200.000 of its indigenous Greek population and Armenian “refugees” were massacred and the city was later set alight. [18]

After his military triumph, Kemal was able to influence the provisions of the Treaty of Lausanne (24 July 1923) [19] which replaced the Sèvres Treaty. [20] The new Treaty not only made no reference to autonomous Armenia or Kurdistan but contained a ‘Declaration of Amnesty’ for all offences committed between 1 August 1914 and 20 November 1922. [21] The CUP members, including those convicted for the mass killing of Armenians by the Istanbul authorities in 1918-1920, had already been granted a general amnesty by the Ankara government of Mustafa Kemal on 31 March 1923. [22] Many of the CUP members became ardent Kemalists and some served as ministers in the modern Republic of Turkey which was officially proclaimed on 29 October 1923. [23]

Kemalism: changing society in short order

The ideology of Kemalism has been enshrined in 1982 Constitution as sacrosanct[24] which cannot be amended; [25] even proposals to do so may constitute a criminal offence. [26] According to Randal, like Italian fascism, Kemalism was characterised by a pivotal feature of the urge to transform and modernise what they saw as a “corrupt society” through the power of the state to enforce, be it violently, “an exclusive racialism”. [27] To modernise the “corrupt” Ottoman society, Kemal imposed radical social, legal, and political reforms that included outlawing the traditional dress code, changing from Arabic to Latin script and adopting new civil and penal codes based on European models. [28]

Turkification, expressed by Kemal as “How happy I am to be a Turk”, [29] was imposed on the whole population, regardless of their ethnic roots, language, culture, and religious practices. [30] Even until early 1990s, school children were taught "Universal Turkish History" and its complement "Sun Language Theory", according which, all peoples and world civilisations originated from the Turks, and Turkish language was the first spoken language in the development of mankind and is the source of all existing world languages. [31]

The Kurds in Anatolia, who at present account for over half of the Kurds worldwide and up to a quarter of Turkey’s population, [32] supported Kemal’s nationalist army in 1919-23 war on promises of “equality” and “a meaningful autonomy” in the new state. [33] As soon as the new borders of Turkey were secured in the Treaty of Lausanne, Kemal began to expel Kurdish members of the government and TBMM. [34] In March 1924, measures were issued proscribing Kurdish political, educational and cultural associations, and banning Kurdish language in a clear breach of Articles 38, 39 of the Treaty of Lausanne. [35] The wards “Kurd” and “Kurdistan” were banned as the Kurds came to be called "mountain Turks" and the Kurdish names of over 20,000 settlements were replaced with Turkish names. [36]

The Kemalist leaders tried little to hide the ultra nationalist drive behind the imposition of Turkification on the Anatolian ethnic communities. In 1925, the Turkish Prime Minister Ismet Pasha (surnamed “Inonu” in 1934) [37] , publicly stated “[w]e are openly nationalist… Besides the Turkish majority, none of the other elements shall have any impact. We shall, at any price, Turkicize those who live in our country, and destroy those who rise up against the Turks and Turkdom.” [38] The suppression of resistance to Turkification culminated in the Dersim massacre of 1937-38, [39] which according to Bruinessen, “undoubtedly, was massive, indiscriminate, and excessively brutal”. [40] According to eye-witness accounts many tribes of Dersim, including those who surrendered, [41] as well as the population of some villages and bigger settlements were annihilated. [42] These accounts have, according to Bruinessen, been confirmed by documents published by the War History Department, which give a detailed account of the military operations. [43]

Similar to Armenian massacres in 1915-22, this large scale mass-murder did not go unnoticed in the West. [44] However in both cases, much like the genocide of the Jews in 1939-45, the West did not raise a finger in support of the vulnerable groups. If one reason of western indifference to the atrocities perpetrated by the Turkish armed forces had been purely political, viz., Turkey was wanted to serve as a bulwark against Bolshevism; the other may have been what Leo Kuper called the “sovereign right to commit genocide” within the national borders. [45] It is not a surprise that the western states paid admiration and more attention to the secularist nature of the Kemalist regime rather than its domestic brutal practices.

Militarism and democracy

Twelve years after the death of the “Eternal Leader”, [46] Turkey held its first open elections which led to the victory of the opposition Democratic Party. [47] The Turkish army, which traditionally proclaims itself as “the protector of the State” and the “custodian of the Ataturk ideology”, [48] overthrew the elected government of Adnan Menderes in May 1960 and executed him along with two of his cabinet members in September. [51] The generals, driven by the statist ideology of Kemalism, brought down another elected government in 1971. [50]

In the mid 1970s, political violence between the left and right movements was on the rise. Much of the violence was carried out by “Grey Wolves” the armed wing of the “Nationalist Action Party (MHP)”, headed by Alparslan Turkes, a leader of the 1960 coup. Martial law was imposed on much of the South-east where the left, despite army support to MHP, was particularly strong. [52]

Justifying intervention on the basis of restoring order and ending “civil war”, [54] Turkish armed forces led by its commander, General Kenan Evren, deposed the elected government on 12 September 1980. [54] The army abrogated the constitution, closed down the parliament and all political parties, and imposed martial law throughout the country. [55] (http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13525)

NOTES:

1. Quoted in Dadrian, Vahakn N., The History of the Armenian Genocide: Ethnic Conflict from the Balkans to Anatolia to the Caucasus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. 383.
2. Kritz, Neil J., “Where We Are and How We Got Here: An Overview of Developments in the Search for Justice and Reconciliation”, in Alice H. Henkin (Ed.), The Legacy of Abuse: Confronting the Past and Facing the Future (Washington DC: Aspen Institute, 2002), pp. 21-46, at 24, 26. For an extensive analysis, see Roehrig, Terence, The Prosecution of Former Military Leaders in Newly Democratic Nations: The Cases of Argentina, Greece, and South Africa (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland and Co., 2002), pp. 1-29, 116-185.
3. The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, available at the official website of the Turkish parliament, Article 118 (As amended on 17 October2001), , (last visited 30 August 2006).
4. Turkish Daily News, Editorial, “Kurdish impasse key factor in rising rate of lynchings”, TDN Ankara, 18 September 2006 (Turkish Daily News – TDN asserts that “politicians, some of Turkey's most renowned academics, civil society representatives…” shared the assessment that the legacy of the 1980 coup “has much to do” with the rising scale of lynching and attempted lynching “directed either at people of Kurdish origin or those who have been outspoken in their defense of the Kurdish cause”).
5. Turkish Daily News, Editorial, “Kretschmer: Military does not respect legal order”, TDN Ankara, 23 September 2006 (the EU representative in Turkey, focusing on the “dominance of the Turkish military's role in politics”, blamed the army ad security organs for “playing their own games, outside the control of the civilian authorities, disrespecting the legal and institutional order”).
6. The Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated Powers and Turkey (Signed at Sèvres August 10, 1920), Section VI, Articles 88-93, available at , (last visited 12 August 2006).
7. Ibid, Section 111, Articles 63-65.
8. The Surname Law, November 1934; see, Yildiz, K and G Fryer, The Kurds: Culture and Language Rights (London: KHRP, August 2004), pp. 16-7.
9. Levene, Mark “Creating a Modern ‘Zone of Genocide’: The Impact of Nation and State-Formation on Eastern Anatolia, 1878-1923”, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Volume 12, No.3, 1998, pp 393-433, at 433; Levene, Mark, “Why Is the Twentieth Century the Century of Genocide”, Journal of World History, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2000, pp. 305-36, at 336.
10. “Anatolia” is roughly the Asian part of the modern Republic of Turkey, east of the Sea of Marmara, while the European part of modern Turkey is part of Eastern Thrace. See Library of Congress, Federal Research Division, “Country Profile: Turkey”, January 2006, , (last visited 08 August 2006). The word “Anatolia” will be used when necessary for its lack of ethnic connotation in lieu of “Turkey” in this paper,
11. McDowall, David, A Modern History of the Kurds (London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 1997).
12. Dadrian, 1995, p. 382.
13. The Foreign Office, 371/4174/118377 (folio 253), cited in Schabas, William, Genocide in International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 21.
14. Ibid.
15. McDowall, David, The Kurds, a Nation Denied (London: Minority Rights Publications, 1992), p. 32.
16. Ibid.
17. Dadrian, 1995, p. 271.
18. Horton, George, The Blight of Asia (New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1926).
19. The Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, July 24, 1923, , (last visited 14 September 2006).
20. For an extensive analysis of the Western indifference towards the suffering Armenians and their cooperation with the nascent Kemalism, see generally, Bloxham, Donald, The Great Game of Genocide: Imperialism, Nationalism, and the Destruction of the Ottoman Armenians (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).
21. Supra, note 19, Article 140.
22. Hofmann, Tessa, “Annihilation, Impunity, Denial: The Case Study of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire (1915/16) and Genocide Research in Comparison”, University of Tokyo, 27 March 2004.
23. Ibid.
24. Article 2 of The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, supra note 3, proclaims Turkey a “democratic, secular, and social state governed by the rule of law....loyal to the nationalism of Ataturk”.
25. Article 4, ibid, declares that Article 2 “cannot be amended nor can its amendment be put forward.”
26. Under the law to protect Ataturk (No. 5816 - 1951).
27. Randal, Johnathan, After Such Knowledge, What Forgiveness: My Encounters with Kurdistan (New York: Westview, 1999), p. 252.
28. McDowall, 1992, pp. 4-5.
29. Randal, 1999, p. 267, p. 258; Kendal, 1980, p. 67.
30. Randal, 1999, p. 267.
31. Kendal, 1980, p. 68, and the list of references; Gerger, Haluk, “Crisis in Turkey”, Middle East Research Associates (MERA), Occasional Paper No. 28, December 1997.
32. See, e.g., Michael Gunter, “Why Kurdish Statehood is Unlikely?” Middle East Policy Vol. XI No 1 Spring 2004. The CIA estimate of Kurdish percentage in Turkey is 20%; see United States Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook: Turkey, updated on 7 September, 2006, , (last visited 12 August 2006).
33. Olson, Robert, “Kurds and Turks: Two Documents concerning Kurdish Autonomy in 1922 and 1923”, Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 15, Winter 1991, pp. 20-31.
34. McDowall 1997, p. 198-200.
35. McDowall 1997, p. 200; for details see Yildiz and Fryer, 2004, p.23. See Articles 38, 39 of the Lausanne Treaty, supra note 19.
36. McDowall 1997, p. 200; As early as 2005, Turkey changed the scientific Latin names of certain animals to remove reference to “Kurdistan” and “Armenia”; see, BBC News, “Turkey renames 'divisive' animals”, 8 March 2005.
37. Ismet Inonu became the first Prime Minister of Turkey in November 1923 and, after the death of Kemal Ataturk, became President from November 1938 to May 1950. After the 1960 military coup he served again as Prime Minister in November 1961- February 1965.
38. Address to the Türk Ocaklari in Ankara, 21 April 1925. Quoted in Bruinessen, Martin van, "Genocide in Kurdistan? The Suppression of the Dersim Rebellion in Turkey (1937-38) and the chemical war against the Iraqi Kurds (1988)", in George J. Andreopoulos (Ed.), Conceptual and Historical Dimensions of Genocide (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994), pp. 141-170, 145, citing Güney Aslan, Üniformali kasaplar (Butchers in uniform), (Istanbul: Pencere Yayinlari, 1990).
39. Bruinessen, 1994.
40. Ibid.
41. Ibid; Kendal, [cf. Nezan], “Kurdistan in Turkey”, in Gérard Chaliand (Ed.), People without a Country: The Kurds and Kurdistan (London: Zed Books, 1980), pp. 47-106, p. 67; McDowall, 1997,p. 208; Dr. Sivan, Kürt millet hareketleri ve Irak'ta Kürdistan ihtilali [Kurdish national movements and the revolution of Kurdistan in Iraq], (Stockholm, 1975), quoted in Bruinessen, 1994: (“[w]omen and children of [the tribes who surrendered] were locked into hayshed and burnt alive”).
42. M. Nuri Dersimi, Kürdistan tarihinde Dersim [Dersim in the history of Kurdistan], (Aleppo, 1952). Quoted in Bruinessen, 1994: (“the inhabitants of Hozat town...men, women and children, were brought near the military camp outside Hozat and killed by machine gun”).
43. Bruinessen, 1994.
44. Report from the Pro-Consul in Trebizond to Sir Percy Loraine, ‘Memorandum on military operations in Dersim, 27 September 1938’ (Great Britain, Public Records Office, FO 371/21925, Document E5961/69/44), quoted in McDowall, 1997, p. 209; and Bruinessen, 1994 (in one paragraph the British report reads: “the military authorities have used methods similar to those used against the Armenians during the Great War: thousands of Kurds including women and children were slain, others, mostly children, were thrown into the Euphrates… It is now stated that the Kurdish question no longer exists in Turkey”).
45. Leo Kuper, “The Sovereign Territorial State: The Right to Genocide”, in R.P. Claude and B.H. Weston (Eds.), Human Rights in the World Community (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989), pp. 56-64.
46. Ataturk was referred to as “Ebedi Sef” meaning the Eternal Leader; see, Kendal, 1980, p. 71.
47. Ibid, p. 78.
48. On the role of military in Turkish politics, see, Rouleau, Eric, “Military with Political Power: Turkey’s Modern Pashas”, Le Monde Diplomatique, September 2000; Ozcan, Gencer, “The Military and the Making of Foreign Policy in Turkey”, in Kirisci, Kemal and Barry Rubin, (Eds.): Turkey in World Politics: An Emerging Multiregional Power, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2001), pp. 16-20.
49. Kendal, 1980, p. 79.
50. Gerger, 1997
51. Ibid.
52. Ibid.
53. See the Preamble to 1982 Constitution, supra note 3, before it was amended in June 1995: “Following the operation carried out on 12 September 1980 by the Turkish Armed Forces in response to a call from the Turkish Nation, of which they form an inseparable part, at a time when the approach of a separatist, destructive and bloody civil war unprecedented in the Republican era threatened the integrity of the eternal Turkish Nation and motherland and the existence of the sacred Turkish State.”, the full online text is available at , (last visited 12 September 2006).
54. United Kingdom Home Office, “Country Report: Turkey”, Country Information and Policy Unit, October 2003, para. 4.1 [hereinafter UK HO 2003].
55. Ibid

Human Rights defender wins case against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that Turkey violated the right to privacy of a human rights lawyer whose premises were searched and whose private professional materials were seized without the requisite authorization.

The case is interesting, according to human rights defenders, because it urges Turkey to revise practices such as frequent house and office searches and property seizure used against human rights defenders.

"This judgment casts a huge doubt on one of Turkey's routine practice of taking cases against human rights defenders and harassing them by making searches of their homes and business premises," Orhan Kemal Cengiz, legal representative of the applicant before the European court and president of the Human Rights Agenda Association, told the Turkish Daily News.

"I believe this jurisprudence will provide human rights defenders with more protection," he added. "This case shows that it is high time to think about the rights of human rights defenders."

Taner Kılıç, a Turkish national who was born in 1969 and who lives in Aegean province of Izmir, is a lawyer and a board member of the Izmir branch of the Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed Peoples (MAZLUM-DER). In June 1999 the now-defunct Ankara State Security Court issued a warrant authorizing the search of the headquarters and branches of MAZLUM-DER in order to collect evidence concerning certain acts by the association, allegedly carried out against the "integrity of the country and the secular regime."

Maintaining that the situation was urgent, the public prosecutor extended the scope of the search warrant and ordered the search of the homes and offices of the association's general director and board members.

Subsequently, when communicating the search orders issued by the State Security Court and the public prosecutor to the governors, the undersecretary of the Ministry of the Interior specified that not only the homes and offices of the general director and board members should be searched but also the premises of all branch board members.

During the search of Kılıç's home, the police confiscated two videotapes and photocopied various documents taken from his office. Kılıç complained about the search and the seizure of his property.

The European court found that the search and seizures were extensive and that private professional materials were taken without special authorization. Kılıç was awarded 2,000 euros for non-pecuniary damages and 1,000 euros for costs and expenses.

"It has been confirmed with the verdict issued by an important court like the European court that this arbitrary practice against MAZLUM-DER is illegal," Kılıç told the TDN. "I don't know what sort of an "evidence of crime' with regard to MAZLUM-DER the state is searching for in a drawer in my bedroom that I put my underwear in. I also don't think those who did so know," he added.

Kılıç described the search of his house as a dishonorable act and said those who carry out such searches on behalf of the state should bear the consequences of what they do. (Turkish Daily News, November 5, 2006)

TIHV's 2-month evaluation of human rights in Turkey

The President of the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (TIHV) Yavuz Önen has issued the following declaration on the sitatution of human rights in Turkey:

In the last two months (September-October 2006) the agenda of Turkey was full with national and international developments concerning human rights and democracy.

Since the draft progress report to be announced on 8 November by European Commission deals with critical issues like Armenian question, Kurdish question, Cyprus question, freedom of expression including Article 301 TPC, intervention of Turkish Army into social and daily life the report was widely discussed by all social parties of Turkey.

Commander of Turkish Army (TSK) Yasar Büyükanit made a general announcement on the status of TSK after the statement of Dr. Hansjörg Kretschmer on TSK, the report of General Staff of the Netherlands and Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs on TSK, the report of Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV) under the title “Security Sector and Democratic Oversight”. Büyükanit stressed that TSK was tried to be eroded as if TSK was against the European Union. He also added that EU had a special and confidential agenda concerning Turkey.

With the announcement of Büyükanit EU was taken into target by TSK during the membership process for the first time. Büyükanit clearly declared that TSK was suspicious about EU and the members of EU, was seeing them as enemies.

In last two months the Government, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Justice and Development Party (AKP) were keenly criticised by State President, opposition political parties-especially by CHP, and TSK concerning headscarves, frauds, misuse of authority and fundamentalism. When TSK pointed fundamentalism as a threat against democratic and secular republic, the possible intervention of the army was also discussed.

Another important development during this period is the meeting of Recep Tayyip Erdogan with the US President G. W. Bush. After the meeting the discussion on the intervention of TSK against PKK in Northern Iraq was ended and for the solution of the question a new formula was introduced. The representatives of three countries, Iraq, US and Turkey, would work together for the solution. While having problems or at least tense relation with EU and its members TSK and AKP, two important actor of nationalsts movement in Turkey, had interestingly good relation with US. Members of US government and army frequently visited Turkey in this period of time.

Pope 16. Benedictus was widely criticised and reacted for making a link between terrorism and Islam. Especially Islamist groups staged demonstrations. The acceptance of the law on Armenian Genocide in the French Parliament was also widely reacted in Turkey. The demonstration were widespread and reactionary.

All the above-mentioned developments in Turkey had also raised the nationalist and even racist movements which already started to raise in the last 2 years. The agenda of the last months also affected the policies of all parties from left to right. Under this circumstances writer Orhan Pamuk was easily criticised when the Nobel Prize was awarded to him.

Although sending troops to Lebanon was protested after the experiences of Afghanistan and Iraq, the protests were not effective and were not supported by masses.

Human rights defenders, associations, foundations and other social parties were not included in the discussions concerning the relation with EU and international relations in general. Since the officials, government, TSK, National Security Council and representatives of the business world are regarding themselves as the only actor of social and political life the remaining parties were not allowed to raise their voice about their ideas on issues related to the circumstances in Turkey. Writers, thinkers, representatives of minorities, members of opposition parties and those persons who revealed their ideas were prosecuted of especially according to the Article 301 TPC, related articles of Law on Fight Against Terrorism. Daily papers and journals were temporarily banned from publication. Many papers, journals, and books including daily Özgür Gündem and weekly Özgür Halk were seized. Reaching some internet sites were prevented. The case against Ilmiye Cig represents the pressure on freedom of expression: Public Prosecutor in Beyoglu launched a court case against sumerologist Muazzez Ilmiye Çig and director of Çag ve Analiz Publishing Ismet Ögütücü in connection with the book of Cig with the title “My Reactions as a Citizen”. The indictment wanted the defendants to be sentenced according to the Article 216/2 (inciting people hatred and enmity) and increase of the sentence according to the Article 218 (article for increasing sentences committed by means of press). The book is a compilation of Cig’s letters to Recep Tayyip Erdogan when he had been Istanbul mayor and articles published in 1997 in the journal “Bilim ve Ütopya”. Cig alleges in the book that headscarf was used in the past to distinguish women from each other. She gives the example that bitches during Sumer period were using headscarves and Prophet Mohammed also wanted females in his family to use headscarves to be distinguished.

During the operation conducted in September in seven cities many persons were detained and arrested on the allegations of “being member of Marxist Leninist Communist Party (MLKP)” and “having organised bomb attacks”. Within this operation investigations were started against mediaorganisations and legal organisations.

Kurdish question and possibility peace were also two important topics in the last two months. The families of the soldiers who died during clashes said in summery that they would not say “Long Live the Homeland”. Their expressions were widely discussed. The sayings of the families were on one hand against the war itself and on the other hand a reaction against the saying of Recep Tayyip Erdogan that the army was not a place to lie down. Unfortunately the scream of those families was regarded as an attempt of “treachery” and as cooperation with PKK. The bomb explosion in Diyarbakir which occurred during the discussions and led death of 11 persons sharply showed that those parties which are benefiting from the war were still strong n the country.

Another important issue was the cease-fire declaration by PKK. After the declaration Abdullah Öcalan announced that cease-fire would continue at least until the end of May 2007. But the government did not respond the attempt to solve the problem peacefully. True Path Party President Memmet Agar, who was the General Security Director between 1993-1995 and was also responsible from extra-judicial killings and killings by unidentified assailants during the period, made an announcement concerning the discussions and said that they should participate politics on the plateau instead of fighting on mountains. Relying on his position and past the discussions on his call were also made people to think that this was some kind of prearranged argument.

Despite the adjustment laws for EU torture and ill-treatment are still serious facts in Turkey and they are ongoing practices.

Lynching which was introduced by nationalists into daily life was also started to be used by Islamists. Murderer of a sect leader was lynched after the killing in the mosque. Religious violence also targeted those persons who did not fasten during Ramadan month.

The problems related to international relations did not only negatively affect government and officials but also both civil parties and social conditions. The reactions parallel to the policies of government were mainly raised by the political parties and related organisations which are effective and dominant on political and social life. These developments incited xenophobia on the one hand and alienated people from democracy, peace and human rights. Defending human rights was not in the agenda of government and did not find a social support. While discussing most important issues for the future of Turkey on media human rights struggle and journalism of human rights were not taken into consideration. TV channels, mass media, papers did not want to put human rights and related issues to the front.

83rd anniversary of the foundation of Republic was celebrated under the threat of xenophobia, separatism and fundamentalism. The ceremony organised in the Atatürk’s Mausoleum turned into a show of strength by the groups against fundamentalism. After 83 years a consensus could not be established on democracy, peace and secularism. (TIHV, November 2, 2006)

Quelle version du nationalisme turc est en vigueur en Turquie?

En Turquie, il est évident que le nationalisme monte, on en discute pour savoir ce que va apporter ce nationalisme, en bien ou en mal. Ce serait utile de comprendre tout d’abord de quel nationalisme on parle.

Comment comprendre les chroniqueurs des journaux et les commentateurs de la télé d’un pays qui a défini la nation sur la base de la citoyenneté, et qui n’arrivent pas à admettre que quelqu’un qui est naturalisé turc ne soit pas considéré comme « Turc » et « National ». L’article 66 de la Constitution définit la règle suivante : « Ceux qui sont liés à l’Etat turc par des liens de Citoyenneté sont Turcs » alors que dans les livres scolaires on peut voir autre chose.

Nation, Nation–Etat, c’est un fait moderne et politique, c’est en construisant l’identité nationale que l’individu se sent partie intégrante de la Nation. Sur le sujet il existe de nombreuses oeuvres de littérature académique.

Quand on regarde à travers le prisme de cette littérature on voit très facilement tout le mécanisme qui produit toujours et à nouveau notre identité nationale, c’est à dire les télés, les journaux, les discussions politiques, les produits populaires et culturels et les livres scolaires et plein d’autres choses.

Quand vous parcourez les livres de littérature et linguistique du Ministère de l‘Education nationale pour les lycées en classes 1, 2, et 3, et quand vous posez la question "quel nationalisme ?", c’est facile de comprendre pourquoi un Turc naturalisé n’est pas « un vrai Turc ». Dans ces livres, la définition du « Turc » est différente de celle de la Constitution.

« La Nation turque gardera depuis le début jusqu’à l'éternité son caractère national » ceci existe dans les livres scolaires. On peut multiplier les exemples comme ça, et plus on multiplie les exemples, plus le fait d’être Turc s'éloigne de la compréhension de l'idée de citoyenneté.

(Radikal, Ercan Bilgiç, 30 octobre 2006 © Traduction/Résumé: N.T pour le Collectif VAN, November 3, 2006)

TIHV Condemns Attack on Lawyers in Istanbul

The Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (TIHV) has publicly condemned an attack by policemen staged on Wednesday, November 1, on approximately 30 lawyers who gathered at the Istanbul Justice Hall to file a suit against Justice Minister Cemil Cicek.

The lawyers were at the Justice Hall to file for damages against Cicek for what they said was his insistent ignorance of the hunger strike of attorney Bahic Asci that has entered its 212th consecutive day to improve conditions in Turkey's F-type maximum security prisons.

Attacked and beaten by police officers as they gathered to file their case, some of the lawyers were injured and attempts were made to detain them.

In a written statement he issued, TIHV Executive Board Chair Yavuz Onen said "We condemn this terrible incident where the law has been trampled, where the execution of a lawyers profession and the right to seek justice have been prevented and where events have reached the point of beating up lawyers inside of the Justice Hall." He called for appropriate measures to be taken.

Onen said the lawyers were beaten, that they were insulted and some had physically been dragged out of the building and thrown on the sidewalk. He said a number of lawyers including Ebru Timtek, Naciye Demir and Guray Dag had been injured in the incident and attempts had been made to detain the group.

Onen added that in order to prevent further access to the building, the police had barricaded the Justice Hall in the aftermath of the incident and left the premises only under subsequent instructions from the prosecutor's office.

Referring to the attack as "an incident which has never before been seen" Onen recalled that the rights of lawyers, inclusive of what could be done with their possessions and how they were allowed to fulfill their duties, were guaranteed under the law.

"It is not possible to find any resemblance to a state of law in the arbitrary behavior of the police inside the Justice Hall" Onen said. "Also, the very fact that the prosecutor intervened and the lawyers filed their complaint [afterwards] shows the incident itself was not outside of the law but that the police prevention was illegal". (BIA News Center, November 3, 2006)

Women Harassed and Raped In Detention

A recent study of violence against women by state security forces has shown that at least 70 women were raped while under detention between 1997 and 2006 while 166 others were sexually harassed.

The total number of women who have sought legal support and assistance in this period is 236.

A report issued by the Judicial Assistance Project for Sexual Harassment and Rape Under Detention said that only two of the 236 applications made for support came from Germany while the rest of the incidents were recorded in Turkey.

30 women who faced harassment and rape have so far left Turkey.

The project's lawyer Eren Keskin told bianet that harassment and rape were specifically employed as deterrent methods in east and southeast Turkey while kidnapping of women concentrated in the cities of Tatvan and Mardin.

Keskin acknowledged that women subject to this form of violence had "great difficulties" in applying for judicial aid and said that as most women faced such incidents at very young ages, there was a need for a new institution other than the coroner's office, which could deal with psychological reports.

The Project's report also covered the case of a 14-year-old girl who was killed on grounds of "honor" by relatives following being raped while under detention.

The report said women were being kidnapped by security forces and subjected to violence. 11 victims of kidnap were raped, it said, while 8 pregnant women had miscarriages due to torture. The number of women who were tortured with their children aged 3 to 10 was listed as seven.

According to the report, most of the victims are aged over 18. 38 victims were reportedly aged 10 to 18 while 198 of the victims were aged between 18 and 67.

The police, said the report, were at top of the list of those committing the offences. In 184 incidents it was the police responsible for the violence while 55 showed the gendarme and soldiers as responsible. Para-military Village Guards were responsible for 13 incidents.

An ethnicity detail of the report showed that 187 of the complainants were Kurdish women. Of the women harassed and raped, 206 said they were detained for "political reasons".

The report said 30 women had made applications based on judicial reasons, 8 for rape and 22 for sexual harassment. It added that 91 court cases were underway in relation to rape and harassment under detention while 14 cases had already been concluded by the European Court of Human Rights. (BIA News Center, Ayca ORER, November 2, 2006)

Deputies meet with activists on F-type prisons

The group from the Association of Aid and Solidarity for Prisoners' Families (TAYAD), headed by Mehmet Guvel, asked for support from deputies to end a hunger strike involving prisoners and their relatives that has claimed 122 lives so far.

The hunger strike, started to protest F-type prisons, which isolate prisoners by keeping them in individual cells, has been overlooked by Justice Minister Cemil Cicek as he has repeatedly said he views the action as an offense. The ministry and other officials are working to improve the conditions in prisons and there is no reason for such a show of protest, says Cicek, adding that those on the hunger strike are doing so for political reasons.

F-type prisons, introduced by then former Justice Minister Hikmet Sami Turk of the previous government, have been strongly criticized by both domestic and international human rights activists for restricting rights of prisoners and confining them to isolation.

A group of intellectuals recently sent a package of petitions and shirts printed with images of F-type prisons to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, Justice Minister Cemil Cicek, and other Cabinet members and deputies to attract attention to conditions in the prisons.

The TAYAD members, at a meeting with ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party Hakkari Deputy Mustafa Zeydan, Bingol Deputy Abdurrahman Anik, main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) Balikesir Deputy Sedat Pekel and Motherland Party (ANAVATAN) Mersin Deputy Huseyin Guler, said that the matter should be brought to Parliament at once to stop the loss of life.

The group's leader said that they will continue meetings this week and will submit a report on the problems in the country's F-type prisons.

TAYAD is known to be a fiercely leftist group and has been accused of looking on the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) favorably and was subjected to cooperative attacks in northwestern Turkey a couple of months ago because of its alleged support for the terror group.

It made the headlines with news stories related to the rising nationalist wave in response to an escalation of articulation of separatist claims by the PKK supporters. (The New Anatolian, November 3, 2006)

La Turquie condamnée à Strasbourg pour mauvais traitements

La Turquie a été condamnée mardi par la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme pour mauvais traitements infligés à une femme placée en garde à vue pour son appartenance à un parti illégal.

Dilek Yilmaz avait été placée en garde à vue en octobre 1995 en raison de son appartenance au parti communiste marxiste-léniniste MLKP. En mars 1997, elle avait été condamnée à trois ans et neuf mois d'emprisonnement pour aide et assistance à une organisation illégale.

Au cinquième jour de sa garde à vue, un médecin avait constaté une ecchymose sur le coude gauche de Mme Yilmaz. Cette dernière a déclaré dans sa requête devant la CEDH avoir été suspendue par les bras, soumise à des électrochocs, arrosée d'eau froide et avoir été victime d'attouchements.

Le 13 janvier 2000, le procureur de la République a rendu une ordonnance de non-lieu au sujet des 12 policiers responsables de la garde à vue, en raison d'une insuffisance de preuves.

Selon l'arrêt rendu mardi, en l'absence d'explication plausible de la part du gouvernement turc, la Cour estime que la Turquie porte la responsabilité de la blessure constatée sur le corps de la requérante.

Elle a dès lors jugé que la Turquie avait violé l'article 3 (interdiction des traitements inhumains ou dégradants) de la Convention européenne des Droits de l'Homme et alloué à la requérante 4.000 euros pour dommage moral. (AFP, 1er nov 2006)

Pression sur les médias / Pressure on the Media

World musicians met in Istanbul against censorship

Over 50 musician, musicologist, composer and producer from 22 countries met in Freemuse 3rd. International Conference on Music and Censorship, at Istanbul Bilgi University.

Musicians from the USA, Afghanistan, Algeria, Australia, Ivory Coast, Cuba, South Africa, Sweden, Belarussia and China told the accounts of censorship in their countries while academics shared their research and observations.

At the session on "Turkey: Crossing the Bridges", writer Vedat Türkali, musicians Attila Özdemiroğlu, Ali Rıza Binboğa, Hakkı Bulut, Selda Bağcan, Grup Yorum, Elif Kaya, Ayfer Düztaş, Ferhat Tunç, Gülten Kaya, Selda Yeşiltepe, Istanbul University GSK Band, Ali Kocatepe, Hasan Saltık and Bülent Forta told the conference their experiences of censorship.

The conference was held in collaboration with Freedom of Expression Association, PEN Turkey and Pera Festival, where joint global strategies against censorship was discussed.

"Stop Censorship in Art Initiative" set up by numerous artists read out a joint declaration at the conference. Artists stated that they were against censorship, retailiation and self-censor and from then on «Repression or censorship to one of us will find us all against it». (www.antenna-tr.org, November 30, 2006)

A newspaper seized, a Kurdish journalist sentenced

Istanbul 12th. High Criminal Court which had ordered the closing down of “Ülkede Özgür Gündem” daily for 15 days issued a confiscation order for Toplumsal Demokrasi paper’s yesterday and the day before issues.

The court stated that the report on yesterday’s issue on PKK was a propaganda for the porganisation.

In Mardin Kızıltepe, police confiscated the ID and the papers of a distributor Çiğdem Fidan.

The police also raided “Ülkede Özgür Gündem” paper’s Kızıltepe office.

Kurdish daily Azadiya Welat's editor Hamdullah Yılmaz received in two separate cases a total of 4 year and 3 months prison sentence. Yılmaz protested the sentences.

Azadiya Welat began it life on 15 August 2006 and it was the first Kurdish daily in Turkey. Tens of cases have been opened against Welat in 3 months. Diyarbakır 4th. High Criminal Court sentenced Yılmaz in two cases to 4 years of imprisonment.

Yılmaz said that their main aim was to develop Kurdish press and publishing, providing news in Kurdish for Kurdish people. Yılmaz also said many of their reports were translated wrongly which were then used to support conviction. (www.antenna-tr.org, November 30, 2006)

International organizations' call for repealing laws that penalise expression

In recent days, the European Commission has demanded that Turkey meet commitments it has made, including the opening of its airports and ports to Cypriot traffic, and to improve human rights, including the right to freedom of expression - specifically by amending or repealing Article 301, under which numerous writers, journalists and publishers have been brought to court since it was promulgated in June 2005. The European Commission demands that these changes be made before the next European Council summit that will be held on 15 December. However, they will need to have been put in place by the Turkish authorities in the first week of December to enable the Commission to prepare its report on Turkey's accession to the Council.

In light of these developments, the International Publishers Association (IPA), International PEN and ARTICLE 19 are calling on the Turkish authorities not only to amend, but to repeal Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code and all other legislation that penalises the exercising of the right to freedom of expression in a country where dozens of writers, publishers and journalists continue to be prosecuted for what they write and publish.

The three organizations,

- observing that Article 301 of the new Turkish Penal Code is used to suppress the right to freedom of expression, as spelled out in the UN International Covenant Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), to which Turkey is a party
- considering that defamation and/or insult laws cannot be justified if their purpose or effect is to protect the "reputations" of entities other than those which have the right to sue and to be sued
- supporting the ECHR case-law, according to which defamation laws cannot be justified if their effect or purpose is to prevent legitimate criticism of officials or the exposure of official wrongdoing or corruption

urge the Turkish authorities to:

1. Abolish Article 301 of the Penal Code entirely;

2. Remove once and for all any articles that can be used to suppress the rights as enshrined under Article 19 of the ICCPR and Article 10 of the ECHR.

This resolution was adopted by ARTICLE 19, International PEN and the International Publishers Association (IPA) on 24 November 2006. (WiPC/IFEX, 24 November 2006)

Professor Yayla hauled to the dock for criticism of Atatürk

A professor hauled to the dock for criticism of Turkey's founder was defended by a group of supportive students Sunday who gathered on a cold morning in normally hectic Sirkeci, wearing masks of the academic as they posted a carton of gags to the university who suspended last week.

"We are here to defend Professor Atilla Yayla's freedom of speech," said one young defender, Soner Tunç. "His only 'crime' is to think heretically."

Yayla, a professor of political thought at Gazi University and a renowned defender of liberalism, criticized Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and Kemalism in a speech he gave at a conference in İzmir a week ago. He was swiftly suspended by Dr. Kadri Yamaç, Gazi University's rector and quickly became the subject of both vigorous attacks and a lively defense in Turkey's media.

"We are sending this to Dr. Yamaç," Tunç said of the gag tape they mailed from the post, "so that he can use it in the future whenever he wants to censor the ideas of the scholars in his university by forcing them to shut up." The small group of about 10 protestors posed for cameras wearing masks of Yayla with his mouth gagged in black wrapping tape.

The problems began when the "heretic" argued that the era of Mustafa Kemal was "a period of regression, not progress." He also criticized the abundance of photos and statues of Mustafa Kemal all around Turkey and warned that Turkey couldn't continue like this in its EU-driven process of democratization and liberalization. "Europeans will ask us," said Yayla, "why this man's photos and statues are everywhere."

These words created a spontaneous uproar in the Turkish media. Yeni Asır, an Izmir-based daily, put Professor Yayla's photo on its first page with a single-word headline: "Traitor." Many other newspapers and columnists denounced Professor Yayla for defining Kemalism as "regression" and for daring to refer to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk disrespectfully as "this man." In Turkey, the appropriate way to refer to Atatürk is to use titles like "Our Forefather" or "the Exalted Leader."

Subsequently, Yamaç held a press conference at which he described Yayla as "a man who lacks manners to such a degree that he talks about Atatürk as 'this man'," and announced that he would no longer be allowed to teach at the university. Yamaç also revealed that an official investigation of Yayla had been initiated by the university administration after his controversial comments and because "he traveled to Izmir without permission." Academics here must take leave from the state-appointed university administration in order to travel outside their university's city limits. The rule is commonly ignored, but it is sometimes used to harass scholars seen as traveling to make trouble.

The Turkish press reports that a public prosecutor has also initiated an investigation into Yayla's "heretical" thoughts. It is therefore possible that Yayla will join the group of Turkish intellectuals like Orhan Pamuk or Elif Şafak, tried for insulting "Turkishness" and its sacred pillars.

However Professor Yayla stands firm behind his views. He said his accusers were trying to "counter ideas with bullets" and challenged Turkey's Kemalists to discuss the legacy of Atatürk with him in a fair intellectual debate. "Galileo was persecuted for speaking out, too," Yayla said. "The reaction I am getting only shows the lack of freedom of thought in Turkey."

Many liberal commentators in the Turkish press and several human rights organizations have declared support for Professor Ya