Droits de l'Homme / Human Rights

L'UE et des ONG signalent une recrudescence de la torture en Turquie

L'Union européenne et plusieurs associations de défense des droits de l'homme ont fait état mercredi d'une recrudescence récente des cas de torture et de mauvais traitements en Turquie.

Un certain nombre de réformes entreprises par la Turquie en 2003, avant le lancement de négociations d'adhésion avec l'UE, ont eu "des effets très positifs", a déclaré Ulrike Hauer, chef adjoint de la délégation de l'UE à Ankara, au cours d'une conférence de presse dans une prison proche de la capitale.

"Néanmoins, des cas de tortures et de mauvais traitements sont encore rapportés, en particulier pendant les arrestations hors des centres de détention et dans le contexte de manifestations", a-t-elle poursuivi.

"Ce mouvement a été encore plus exacerbé par le vote en juin 2007 d'une nouvelle loi sur la police élargissant les pouvoirs en matière d'arrestation et de fouille", a ajouté la fonctionnaire européenne.

S'exprimant au cours de la même conférence de presse, des militants des principales organisations de droits de l'homme en Turquie ont dressé le même constat, affirmant que les promesses gouvernementales d'une "tolérance zéro" à l'égard de la torture avaient fait long feu.

La progression des actes de torture et des mauvais traitements a été significative en 2007, ont-ils dit, déplorant que les cas de torture ne fassent pas l'objet d'enquêtes suffisantes et que les quelques agents éventuellement condamnés le soient souvent pour abus de pouvoir plutôt que pour torture.

"Il n'y a pas de volonté sérieuse sur le terrain", a estimé Emel Kurma, de l'ONG de défense des droits de l'homme Helsinki Citizens Assembly. "Il y a un réflexe étatiste qui cherche à protéger l'image du pays et un manque de courage face à la réalité".

Selon les statistiques de la Fondation des droits de l'homme, le nombre de plaintes pour des cas de torture ou de mauvais traitements est passé de 222 en 2006 à 310 en 2007.

La Turquie a entamé en 2005 des négociations d'adhésion avec l'UE après avoir mené une série de réformes de mise à niveau avec l'acquis démocratique européen. Le gouvernement est depuis régulièrement critiqué pour un ralentissement supposé des réformes. (AFP, 25 juin 2008)

“Back to Life” Case Barred by the Statue of Limitations

Trial of gendarme officers who took part in “Back to Life” operation which killed 12 and injured 55 people in Bayrampaşa Prison has been closed due to time limit. In the case against around 1600 public officials on the charge of ‘mistreating the convicts and misconduct,’ neither statements of all suspects have been taken nor the evidence have been collected.

Judge of the case had been changed for 11 times. Judge Ali Belen who has heard the case for the second time yesterday said that the statutory time limit to conclude the case was out.

Lawyer Kavili said, “My client was insulted, gassed, attacked by clubs which amounted to torture and mistreatment. It is a crime against humanity hence statutory time limit cannot be applied in this case.”

Kavili said that the indictment was not prepared carefully and the number of the suspects is not known for sure.
Judge Belen closed the case saying that the statutory time limit was up on 19 June 2008. Lawyer Ömer Kavili said they would appeal.

‘Back to Life’ operation was launched on 19 December 2000 to end hunger strike of the prisoners to stop F-type isolation system. Over 10 thousand security officers took part in the operation in 20 different prisons. Two soldiers and 30 prisoners were killed.

Majorité favorable à la torture en Inde, Nigeria, Turquie et Thaïlande

Une majorité d'habitants en Inde, Nigeria, Turquie et Thaïlande se disent favorables à la torture sur des terroristes, tandis que l'opinion y est majoritairement opposée dans quatorze autres pays ayant participé à une enquête dont les résultats ont été publiés mardi.

Le sondage, conduit dans 19 pays au total, montre qu'une majorité de personnes interrogées en Espagne, Grande-Bretagne, France, Mexique, Chine, Pologne, Indonésie, Ukraine et dans les territoires palestiniens, soutiennent une interdiction totale de la torture.

Dans cinq pays (Azerbaïdjan, Egypte, Etats-Unis, Russie et Iran), les opposants à la torture sont légèrement supérieurs à ceux qui y sont favorables dans certaines conditions.

Mais en Inde (59%), au Nigeria (54%), en Turquie (51%) et en Thaïlande (44%), ceux favorisant la torture sur les terroristes sont plus nombreux que ceux qui y sont opposés. La Corée du Sud est partagée sur la question.

L'enquête a été publiée à l'approche de la Journée internationale des victimes de la torture, le 26 juin, par WorldPublicopinion.org, un projet de recherche à l'échelle mondiale mené par l'université du Maryland (est).
 
"L'idée que la torture pratiquée par les gouvernements est quelque chose de négatif est largement partagée aux quatre coins du monde", a commenté Steven Kull, responsable de WorldPublicOpinion.org. "Même dans le cas de scénarios avec des terroristes ayant des informations qui pourraient sauver des vies innocentes, la torture est rejetée dans la plupart des pays", a-t-il ajouté.

Mais Yvonne Terlingen, représentante d'Amnesty International à l'ONU a estimé "extrêmement choquant" que "seulement la moitié de ceux interrogés dans le sondage (...) pensent que la torture doit être interdite".

La loi internationale interdit la torture. La semaine dernière, le Conseil des droits de l'Homme de l'ONU à Genève a adopté une résolution réaffirmant l'interdiction totale de la torture. Seuls 145 des 192 membres de l'ONU sont signataires de l'interdiction. (AFP, 24 juin 2008)

La chanteuse transsexuelle Bülent Ersoy poursuivie pour un appel pacifiste

Depuis vingt-cinq ans, Bülent Ersoy, chanteuse transsexuelle à la voix d'or, a habitué les Turcs à ses caprices et ses coups de gueule. Véritable icône nationale, vénérée d'un bout à l'autre du pays dans les milieux populaires, cette diva du show-business turc âgée de 56 ans est poursuivie par la justice, depuis mercredi 18 juin, et risque un an et demi de prison pour avoir lancé un vibrant appel au pacifisme en direct à la télévision, au nom des mères turques.

Fin février, alors que les troupes lançaient l'assaut contre les rebelles kurdes du PKK dans les montagnes enneigées du Kurdistan irakien, une vague de patriotisme envahit la Turquie. Prenant tout le monde à contre-pied, en pleine retransmission de la version turque de la "Star Academy", qu'elle coprésentait, Bülent Ersoy déclara : "Je ne suis pas une mère et ne le serai jamais", mais que, si elle avait eu des fils, elle aurait refusé de les envoyer "à la tombe".

"Nos enfants continuent d'aller là-bas, il y a des larmes, du sang et des funérailles et nous continuons à propager les mêmes clichés. Pourquoi ne trouvons-nous pas une solution ?" lança-t-elle devant une assistance médusée. Les clichés en question sont ces slogans nationalistes et vengeurs qui galvanisent les foules aux obsèques de "soldats martyrs".

Dès le lendemain, le procureur du tribunal de Bakirköy, à Istanbul, ouvrait des poursuites contre la chanteuse, pour "incitation à la haine contre les forces armées" et dénigrement du service militaire. Un crime passible de trois ans de prison.

Institution intouchable en Turquie, l'armée joue un rôle central sur la scène politique et maintient l'unité de la nation par la conscription, obligatoire pour tous les hommes. "Chaque Turc est né soldat", dit le proverbe. L'objection de conscience est aussi passible d'une peine de prison, mais des voix commencent à s'élever au sein de la société turque contre la propagande militariste et va-t-en-guerre des généraux.

En pleine répétition d'un concert à Bodrum, mercredi, Bülent Ersoy ne s'est pas présentée au tribunal, qui a reporté sa décision à fin septembre. Les démêlés de la chanteuse avec la justice turque ont commencé dans les années 1980, après le putsch militaire. En 1981, alors que sévit la junte de Kenan Evren, Bülent Ersoy est encore un homme, un chanteur d'arabesk à la voix sirupeuse. Sans se cacher, il change de sexe mais pas de prénom. Accusée par le régime de "déviance sociale", la diva est interdite de scène jusqu'en 1988 et plonge dans la dépression.

Réhabilitée depuis, elle a surtout fait parler d'elle pour ses mariages rocambolesques et ses divorces fracassants : l'un avec un homme vingt ans plus jeune qu'elle, l'autre avec un candidat de l'émission de télé-réalité. (Le Monde, Guillaume Perrier, 22 juin 2008)

Closure Case to Student Union

Istanbul Governor’s office filed a closure case against the first student union in Turkey “Genç-Sen." Trial will begin on 10 July.

It was argued for students that “they are not in labour-capital relationship” and “law do not define such sector” and “only employers and employees are entitled to set up unions.”

President of Trade Union Confederation (DİSK) Süleyman Çelebi will hold a press meeting on the issue on 24 June. (antenna-tr.org, June 21, 2008)

Disparition, suicide et torture : la Turquie condamnée à Strasbourg

La Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme (CEDH) a condamné la Turquie mardi à Strasbourg dans trois affaires différentes impliquant une disparition, des tortures, un assassinat et un suicide dans l'armée.

La Cour estime à l'unanimité que la Turquie n'a pas mené d'enquête adéquate après la disparition d'Izzetin Yildirim, président d'une fondation culturelle, qui apparaît avoir été torturé avant d'être assassiné.

La CEDH alloue 12.000 euros à chacun des sept requérants qui sont les frères, la soeur et la mère de la victime, ainsi que 6.000 euros conjointement 6.000 pour frais et dépens.

Dans une seconde affaire, la Cour a conclu à l'unanimité à une violation du droit à la vie après le décès de Masallah Yilmaz, un appelé de l'armée turque âgé de 20 ans qui s'est suicidé sous les yeux de son supérieur qui l'avait brutalisé.

La Cour alloue 3.000 euros au père du jeune soldat pour préjudice matériel, 12.000 euros pour préjudice moral et 408 euros pour frais et dépens.

La CEDH a en outre condamné la Turquie à l'unanimité dans une affaire de traitements jugés inhumains et dégradants infligés à Umar Karatepe et Sevil Ulas, lors de leur arrestation par la police alors qu'ils se rendaient à un rassemblement organisé par un parti politique.

La Cour alloue à chacun des requérants 5.000 euros pour préjudice moral. (AFP, 17 juin 2008)

Union Member Writes About Mines, Goes On Trial For 301

Kilis 2nd Court of First Instance sent Kıyasettin Aslan’s file to the Ministry of Justice in accordance with the revised article 301 of the Turkish Penal Law (TCK). The union member Aslan has been on trial for his article titled “Mayın” (Mine), which he wrote for the newspaper “Yerel Kent”.  

The court has been trying Aslan, who is the Kilis Provincial Representative for the Office Workers Union affiliated with the Confederation of Public Employees Trade Unions (KESK), for the crime of “openly denigrating the armed forces”, asking for the sentence of two years in prison. However, it stopped the process in the third hearing of the case yesterday.

“Every year children, women, people from all ages die because of the mines”

Waiting for the permission to prosecute, the court will continue the proceedings according to the reply it will receive.

The union member, whose article was published in the newspaper “Yerel Kent”, had said that “Every year children, women, people from all ages die or get permanently incapacitated because of the mines Turkey planted.”

Despite objections from the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the Republican People’s Party (CHP), the Turkish Parliament (TBMM) passed the bill to revise Article 301 with 250 votes against 65 on April 29. The president Gül ratified the change on May 7.

According to the new form of Article 301:

“The person who denigrates openly the Turkish Nation, the State of the Turkish Republic or the Grand Assembly of Turkey and the judicial institutions of the State shall be punishable by imprisonment from 6 months to 2 years. The persons who denigrate the military and police organizations of the State will too receive the same punishment.

Expressions of thought with the intention to critique shall not constitute a crime.

The prosecution under this article will require the approval of the Ministry of Justice.”

The investigations and the cases will be taken to the Criminal Court of Peace

According to the new arrangement, the permission to open a case will be given by the Ministry of Justice. It is expected that as the revision goes into effect, the investigations that were opened since “they contained judgments to the advantage of the culprit” and the cases that were finalized will be taken up again.

Since the punishment time was lowered from three years to two years, the new cases will be in the jurisdiction of the Criminal Court of Peace and the cases that are still open at the Criminal Court of First Instance will be transferred accordingly. (BIA, Erol ÖNDEROĞLU, June 12, 2008)

I am being listened, you are being listened, he is listening…

It has been revealed that the Security General Directory has been following all phone, sms, e-mail and Internet communications of 70 million people through a decision of Ankara High Criminal Court Num. 11 which they renewed every three months. Security General Directory stated that they did not “listen” but “watched” by a three month court decision. Under the order of Ankara High Criminal Court Num.11 Security Intelligence Department receives all records of all phone and Internet correspondence in Turkey.

Special court decision needed for "Listening" but mass permission is enough for "watching."

As Vatan newspaper reported that police follows all phone conversations, sms, e-mails and fax messages; Security General Directory made the following statement:

"Just as what happens in all democratic countries, Turkish Police Force too naturally  engages in all legal activities to prevent crime in the frame of its powers given by the laws and the Constitution. The referred court decision does not include listening. As known, individual court decisions are needed for each listening. Hence it can not be possible for us to listen the whole population in Turkey. Authorised units apply to courts in order to prevent terrorism and organised crime; if the courts grant permission than court decision is sent to Telecommunications Headquarters (TH). As reported in the newspaper the court granted the permission  for the referred application. The court decision was sent to the TH and it was proceeded. Statue 5397 grants such power to related authorities in the fight against illegal organisations in order to prevent crime. We would like to inform the public that the referred court decision does not include “listening” and we believe that such reports distorting legal decisions in a way to misinform citizens should be corrected."

Under the order of Ankara High Criminal Court Num.11 Security Intelligence Department receives all detailed records of all phone and Internet correspondence in Turkey.

The court granted the same authority to National Intelligence Organisation (MİT) but rejected the application of the Gendarme Forces as TH objected.
 
Lawyers Reacted: An intervention with no excuse

Members of legal profession protested the practice of listening all of Turkey under the decision of Ankara HCC Num.11. Legal experts noted that it was unacceptable to treat the whole population as suspects no matter what the nature of the crime was, and that violation of “privacy of personal life” one of the fundamental rights, in the name of preventing crime could not be accepted. The absence of a public counterpart makes the decision one way and arbitrary. Members of legal professions said:

Özdemir Özok (Head of Turkish Bar Associations): If you disregard personal rights and freedoms in the name of ‘public security’ you will turn the state ruled by law into a police state... Under contemporary law you can not turn people into suspects just like that. People have the right of not being stained. That is a dangerous move.

Prof. Dr. Gökhan Antalya (Dean of Marmara University Department of Law): Blocking the right to collective correspondence means blocking freedom of expression. Moreover what is being listen is not only the conversations but social relations are listened too. Every political force can use it against its opponents when in power. Political power can use such information to intimidate the others. There is nobody who can object to the practice in the name of the public which makes it a one way decision.

Prof. Dr. Necmi Yüzbaşıoğlu (Galatasaray University Department of Law): There is no doubt that it is an intervention in the privacy of personal life. This can not be reconciled with the 2001 dated reforms in the Constitution which secured privacy of homes, communication and personal life at the standards of European Human Rights Convention. The court decision should not be a general one. Intervention in private life in the name of fighting crime can not be accepted. This is an intervention into the core of fundamental rights and freedoms. This is and intervention with no excuse.

Prof. Dr. İbrahim Kaboğlu (Marmara University Department of Law): Article 22 of the Constitution which defines ‘freedom of communication’ states that the right to communicate can not be interfered with and prevented except through a court decision on the grounds of ‘national security, public order, prevention of crime, protection of the rights and freedom of others.’ Ankara Court’s decision is outside that because the decision regards the whole population. It has been said that it was not listening but watching. That does not remove Constitutional guarantee. This decision has to prove that; since the whole of Turkey is being watched; is national security and public order in danger in the whole of Turkey? Is it why the privacy of personal communication is being violated?

Erdal Doğan (Lawyer): …The court which made this decision committed a crime. Public is being listened in the name of public! And a judge decides that. One judge assumes that the whole public is criminal. He says you are potentially criminal and dangerous.

Prof. Dr. Ülkü Azrak (Maltepe University Department of Law): The court permitted that every single person who has a mobile phone and every single home with a line can be listened to. That is against the Constitution. This has nothing to do with watch for random crime. This means watching over and listening to the whole population. The court acted against the Constitution. The judge committed a professional crime. Judges and Prosecutors Higher Board should launch an investigation on the judge. Both a Constitutional crime and a professional crime. A judge can not make a decision against the Constitution. A small court in a justice hall makes a decision regarding the whole population. Can you imagine that?

Turgut Kazan (Former Head of İstanbul Bar): No touch of law here. So there is not much sense in making a legal assessment of it. If people can be listened to in such broad terms it means that we a have a state of fear. If there is a state of fear that is the end of law... If you say ‘I am going to listen to the whole population’ the whole population is under detention. That is a disaster. Law necessitates living in security. Can there be security under such circumstances?

Turgut Kazan (Former Head of İstanbul Bar): Judges can make such decisions so easily because they assume a role to themselves of protecting the state. There is no legal basis for that. That is a measure of police security. It is saddening that even that is being discussed.

Ergin Cinmen (Lawyer): ... A decision for the whole of Turkey! That is not possible. A court decision would not be necessary in that case. An explanation has to be made to the court as to why they want to listen. Court may say “no.” It is up to the court.

Bahri Bayram Belen (Lawyer): Nobody no state institution can listen to everybody with one court decision. That is against the privacy of personal life and freedom of communication in the Constitution and also the Penal Procedural Law. Such a decision is not possible... Such decisions are exceptions and they restrict the freedoms. If the decisions are wrong they can not even be used as evidence.

Sezgin Tanrıkulu (Head of Diyarbakır Bar): A decision for general listening or watching is not possible... 70 million people are victims of that decision.

Ümit Yavuz (Lawyer): It is against the Constitution. That decision is the violation of freedom of communication. A decision like that  can not be made about a crime which has not occurred but only assumed. Decision allowing the listening had to specify names. A decision for all is not possible. NGOs, bar associations, trade unions, all individuals can appeal against it. I guess İstanbul Bar is preparing to appeal.  (Freedom of Expression Weekly Bulletin, 6 June 2008)

Dikili Mayor Is On Trial For Providing Free Water

Dikili mayor Osman Özgüven and 14 other members of the municipal council were at the 1st Court of First Instance of Dikili yesterday (June 3), facing the charges of “misconduct in office” or “abuse of power.”

The reason behind the accusations Osman Özgüven, the mayor of a small town in İzmir province in western Turkey, is facing are the services he provides for his town, foremost among them is the free water.

 During his tenure Dikili Mayor Osman Özgüven from the Social Democrat People's Party (SHP) made public buses free, obliged bus drivers to drop students off at their homes, provided affordable health services at a municipal clinic, sold bread in municipal bakeries at low prices and did not charge households that use less than 10 tons of water a month.

In addition to the people of Dikili, representatives from many political parties and institutions were there to support the mayor.

Defending his position at the court, the mayor said that as one of the measures in helping prevent global warming, they did not charge people any water fee up to 10 tons and they charged the whole amount above this limit.

To encourage people, said Mayor Özgüven, they granted pardon for the interest payments of the water fees remained from the past administration. About municipality workers’ 50% water fee discount, he said “We wanted those people who are responsible for bringing water to the town to get their creation at lower prices. We did not violate the principle of equality.”   

He also added that the municipalities were elected bodies and determination of the rates for their services was their job and that they simply exercised their right.

His lawyer Arif Ali Cangı said in his client’s defense that municipalities are not businesses.

“Municipality work is a public service. This case is trying the concept of public service.”

After Cangı the other members of the municipal council spoke. The defense lawyers demanded an investigation to determine whether or not the services rendered by Dikili Municipality were municipality services. The court is adjourned for the testimonies of the other members of the municipal court and the completion of the missing parts.

Outside the courthouse, Dikili mayor Osman Özgüven said that their services were going to continue, indicating that municipalities were not businesses, they have been serving the people of Dikili and will continue serving. (BIA, June 5, 2008)

La Turquie condamnée pour le supplice de la "falaka"

Un adolescent turc, qui se plaignait d'avoir été frappé sur la plante des pieds par des policiers en guise de "bonne leçon", a obtenu mardi de la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme une condamnation de la Turquie pour mauvais traitements.

Le jeune Orhan Kur avait été arrêté par la police en juillet 1997, à l'âge de 17 ans, avec d'autres adolescents qui observaient une bagarre la nuit dans les rues d'Izmir.

Les policiers emmenèrent les jeunes au poste de police et les frappèrent à coups de matraque sur les mains, mais le jeune homme leur demanda de ne pas lui infliger le même traitement, ayant été récemment opéré des mains. Les policiers l'ont alors soumis à la falaka en guise de "bonne leçon" avant de le relâcher sans autre procédure.

Les médecins relevèrent le lendemain une ecchymose de 3 X 3 cm sur la plante de son pied gauche et des traces rougeâtres et violacées sur l'autre.

La Turquie a toujours nié que l'adolescent ait été emmené au poste de police et qu'il y ait subi des sévices.

Mais la Cour européenne a relevé dans son arrêt que la Turquie n'avait pu fournir aucune explication plausible quant à l'origine des blessures du requérant et qu'elle était donc bien responsable de ces blessures.

En outre, les juges européens ont condamné Ankara pour ne pas avoir sanctionné les policiers en cause, à l'issue d'une procédure pénale.

L'arrêt critique "l'impunité virtuelle" dont jouissent les policiers turcs en vertu d'un système pénal "qui manque nettement de rigueur et n'est pas apte à produire un effet dissuasif ou préventif". (AFP, 3 juin 2008)

They are listening the whole population!

It has been revealed that the Security Centre has been listening all phone and sms and e-mail correspondance of 70 million people by a decision of Ankara High Criminal Court Num.11. The security renewed the court order once in every three months. The security headquarters stated that they “did not listen” people they only “surveilled” the correspondance.

Ankara Court’s decision permits Security Intelligence Department to have Access to the recordings of all phone and Internet correspondance.

As Vatan newspaper reported that the correspondance of the whole population has been listened by the security, the security centre made a statement staying that they did not listen but folowed the correspondance.

Law experts said that treating the whole population as suspects could not be accepted:

Özdemir Özok (The head of Turkish Bar Assoc.): ‘If you disregard people’s private right and freedoms in the name of public security you will end up with a police state.

Prof. Dr. Gökhan Antalya (Marmara University): Prevention of the right to correspond means blocking freedom of expression.

Prof. Dr. Necmi Yüzbaşıoğlu (Galatasaray University): It is an intervention to the privacy of personal life. It can not be reconciled with European Human Rights Convention.

Prof. Dr. İbrahim Kaboğlu (Marmara University): Article 22 of the Constitution secures the “freedom to correspond”. Ankara Court’s decision is against that since it concenrs the whole population. (antenna-tr.org, June 3, 2008)

HRW dénonce l'interdiction d'une organisation turque d'homosexuels

L'organisation de défense des droits de l'Homme Human Rights Watch (HRW) a dénoncé l'interdiction d'une importante association turque de défense des droits des homosexuels, appelant le gouvernement turc au respect des droits individuels, selon un communiqué reçu mardi par l'AFP.

"La décision d'un tribunal turc de dissoudre Lambda (LGTB) montre que la répression officielle constitue une menace sérieuse pour les droits démocratiques et la liberté d'association", en Turquie qui aspire à intégrer l'Union européenne, souligne l'organisation.

Un procureur d'Istanbul a ordonné la semaine dernière la dissolution de LambdaIstanbul arguant du fait qu'elle violait une disposition de la constitution sur la protection de la famille et un article du code civil interdisant la constitution d'associations "ayant pour objectif d'enfreindre la loi et la moralité".

L'associations a annoncé qu'elle fera appel et qu'elle poursuivrait ses activités jusqu'à ce que la Cour d'appel ait statué.

Emma Sinclair-Webb, une responsable pour la Turquie de HRW, a dénoncé une décision "arbitraire" de la cour et s'est dite inquiète pour l'avenir de la société civile turque. "Si les autorités peuvent interdire une associations pour des raison de procédure alors toute la société civile est en danger", a-t-elle estimé.

Lambda, fondée en 1993, s'est constituée en association officiellement enregistrée en 2006.

Les relations homosexuelles n'ont jamais été criminalisées en Turquie alors que c'est le cas dans d'autres pays musulmans mais il n'existe pas de lois protégeant les droits des homosexuels qui peuvent faire l'objet de réactions de rejet importantes dans la vie quotidienne.

Les homosexuels turcs se montrent toutefois de plus en plus au grand jour depuis quelques années constituant des réseaux et organisant des manifestations publiques au cours desquelles ils s'expriment librement. (AFP, 3 juin 2008)

Pression sur les médias / Pressure on the Media

A Cypriot Journalist Receives The Courage In Journalism Award

Sevgül Uludağ, a journalist from Cyprus, who has been working towards alleviating the effects of the trauma the Cypriot societies are in and working for peace, will receive this year’s Courage in Journalism Award by the International Women’s Media Foundation. She has covered missing people and mass graves for both Turkish and Greek newspapers in Cyprus, receiving death threats and becoming target of the hate campaigns in the process.  

Bianet talked to her shortly after she learned that she was going to receive the award. Her voice sounded happy:

“I am pleased that the work I have been doing under very difficult and threatening conditions for years is recognized, because, so many times, it was very difficult to work under threat.”

About working under difficult conditions, she said:

“Sometimes you are all alone. Even those around you will tell you not to do what you are doing, to be careful, to quit. However, there is a work that needs to be done, an article that needs to be written. You go on. Sometimes many people support you, sometimes nobody does.”
It does not matter if there is an award, but it reenergizes you

Uludağ said that these kinds of international awards are helpful to increase the international visibility of a journalist and to expand the web of relationships. “At the end, one does journalism whether or not there is an award. This is not my first international award, but every time you receive an award it  reenergizes you, it lifts up your morale.”  (BIA, Tolga Korkut, June 27, 2008)

PACE Issues Statement on Zarakolu’s Condemnation under 301

Members of the  Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) issued a statement criticising the condemnation of Publisher Zarakolu under article 301 of TPC. MEPs also signed a petition to send a research commission to Turkey. 21 MEPs signed the petition. PACE chairing board will see into it.

International Publishers Association (IPA) condemned the condemnation of Zarakolu to whom they are planning to give an award on 18 September.

Why was he condemned?

Owner of Belge Publishing House Ragıp Zarakolu was tried over publishing a book by a British author George Jerjian “Truth will Set us Free”, on the charges of “insulting the State and the Republic” and “insulting the memory of Atatürk” and condemned under the first charge, article 301 on 17 June. The court gave him 5 months prison sentence and commuted it to a fine of 1400 liras. Zarakolu had said he would appeal and would not pay the fine. (antenna-tr.org, June 28, 2008)

Latest Trials of Freedom of Expression

- The case was opened upon publishing of George Jerjian´s book TRUTH WILL LIBERATE US, by BELGE publishing house. The owner of the Publishing House Ragıp Zarakolu has been charged with "insulting the state and the republic" and "Insulting the memory of Ataturk" under article 301 of TPC. The court condemned Zarakolu to 5 months prison sentence without asking permission of the Ministry of Justice under the new law.   It was then commuted to a fine of 1400 Liras. Zarakolu has been acquitted of "insulting the memory of Atatürk." Zarakolu will appeal and said he was against paying the fines in principle.

- The case is against the owner of Sorun Publishers Sirri Ozturk and writer Osman Tiftikci over the book ¨Evolution of the Army from Ottoman time to Today¨. (TPC 301) The court referred the case to Ministry of Justice due to the amendment in the law. Trial will continue depending on the answer of the Ministry.

- The owner of Tevn publishing house Mehdi Tanrıkulu who was condemned to 5 months prison sentence for writing a complaint letter in Kurdish, is now charged for writing his defence statement in Kurdish during the trial. (TPC 222) The next trial is on 7 October 2008 at 10:00.

- Former President Süleyman Demirel filed a complaint against journalist of Sabah newspaper Ergun Babahan over his column on 2 January 2007 where he wrote, "you have blood on your hands.” Babahan wrote that Demirel’s statement to Hürriyet newspaper about the execution of Deniz Gezmiş and his friends was a lie. Babahan wrote, "The blood of those three deaths is on your hands Mr Demirel. History will write this about you: Prime Minister and President who personally put efforts for the execution of three young people in the hands of the fascist regime." Babahan is charged with insult. (TPC 125). The next trial is on 23 July 2008, at 10:30.

- Şişli Criminal Court of First Instance Num.2 acquitted on 18 June, the license owner of Agos weekly Serkis Seropyan and editor Aris Nalcı of the charge "attempting to influence the outcome of a trial." The new prosecutor said “court rulings can be criticised too.” Intervening lawyers did not attend the trial in protest of Metin Aydın and Hakkı Yalçınkaya  on the grounds that they were biased against the suspects.

- Three children, members of Yenişehir Council Children’s Choir have been on trial over performing a march in Kurdish at a concert in the US on the charge of “terrorist propaganda.” The court acquitted them. The court issued an arrest order for the director of the choir Duygu Bayar who is still in the US. Yenişehir Council Children’s Choir attended the World Music Festival in San Francisco between 3-7 October 2007 and sang a march in Kurdish ¨Ey Raqip¨ (Hey Enemy) by an Iranian Kurdish poet of 1940s, Yunus Rauf Dildar.

- Publisher Mehdi Tanrıkulu has been condemned over a book “Kurdish Liberation Movement and PKK’s Role” by Dr. Ergun Sönmez since Sönmez lives in abroad. İstanbul High Criminal Court N°.14 gave Mehdi Tanrıkulu one year and six months prison sentence for “making propaganda for a terrorist organisation” under ATL.
 
NOTE: For general statistics on the cases of freedom of expression see http://www.antenna-tr.org/dunya/first_page_en.asp 
 
KHRP's Latest Issue of its Report on Freedom of Expression in Turkey

KHRP is pleased to announce the publication of issue 13 of its biannual Legal Review, and its latest Trial Observation Report, ‘Persecuting Publishers, Stifling Debate: Freedom of Expression in Turkey’.
 
KHRP’s Legal Review is the only existing legal journal covering significant legislative and policy developments in the Kurdish regions of Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Syria and the Caucuses and is essential reading for anyone interested in monitoring legal developments in these countries.
 
Covering the period from December 2007 to June 2008, the Review features news and updates from the Kurdish regions, and summaries and analysis of the most significant decisions of the ECtHR, ECJ and UK Courts. Uniquely, the journal covers new cases that have not yet reached any judicial decision, but nonetheless provide invaluable updates of the most recent allegations of human rights violations to be submitted to international courts and mechanisms. Articles in this issue address the implications of oil contracts in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, women and religious freedom, internally displaced women in Western Turkey and extra territorial acts in Iraq.

KHRP’s latest Trial Observation Report details the processes it observed during the final stages of the trial of Ahmet Önal, the Kurdish publisher, on 13 February 2008 in Istanbul. Mr. Önal’s trial concerned a paragraph in a book he published, Diaspora Kürtleri (Diaspora Kurds), which discussed the role and influence of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) amongst Kurds in the former Soviet Union.  This led to charges of his showing demonstrable support of an ‘armed terror organisation’.

The Report also places KHRP’s procedural observations in the context of Turkey’s obligations to ensure a fair trial for all its citizens, as well as the ongoing challenges to freedom of expression in Turkey and its bid to accede to the European Union. Although Mr. Önal was acquitted of his charges, the report reflects concerns that spurious charges and trials are being used in Turkey to obstruct the operation of publishing and journalism, and more broadly to inhibit public discussion of fundamental political, social or historical issues. As the Report details, several similar prosecutions of individuals who have exercised their right to freedom of speech are ongoing in Turkey, indicating the extent of the problem.

Free copies of both publications may be accessed and downloaded on KHRP’s website HERE. Printed copies are currently available for £10.00 + P&P through our online shop. (www.khrp.org, June 22, 2008)

International Writers And Publishers Condemn Zarakolu's sentencing

The International Publishers Association (IPA) and the Writers in Prison Committee of International PEN strongly condemn the sentencing of publisher Ragıp Zarakolu in Istanbul on 17 June for "insulting the State" (Article 301 TPC). They are especially alarmed that this is the first conviction since this article was slightly amended on 30 April 2008, after over 1,000 people, including hundreds of writers, publishers and journalists, have been brought to the courts in the three years since its inception in 2005.

IPA and PEN have been calling for the repeal of this law ever since it was presented in draft form, and are deeply disappointed that rather than remove this legislation, the amendments are simply cosmetic.

Around 29 writers and journalists are on trial today under Article 301. They are among a total of 79 charged under a range of laws that impinge on the right to free speech, including Article 318 that has led numerous commentators on conscientious objection to the courts, and a raft of articles under Anti Terror legislation and against "incitement" that have been used against writers on the Kurdish issues.

There is clearly much more to do to bring Turkey in line with its international requirements that safeguard free expression.

Ragıp Zarakolu, recipient of the 2008 IPA Freedom to Publish Prize and an Honorary Member of several PEN Centres worldwide has said that he will appeal the sentence and is determined to go as far as the European Court of Human Rights if need be. IPA and PEN support him in demanding that Publisher Zarakolu be acquitted in appeal and urge the Turkish Judiciary to complete this trial swiftly, efficiently, quickly and fairly.

The case leading to the conviction of Ragıp Zarakolu was initiated in December 2004 for the publication of London-based author George Jerjian's book entitled: The truth will set us free/Armenians and Turks reconciled. The first hearing of this case took place in Istanbul on 16 March 2005 and since then there have been more than ten hearings.

Ragıp Zarakolu was originally charged under Article 159 TPC, which criminalized acts that "insult or belittle" various state institutions . This article was abolished in 2005 and replaced with the now notorious Article 301. In some cases, defendants on trial under Article 159 benefited from the changes by having their cases closed, but this was not so for Zarakolu. Instead he found that his trial continued under the new law. When Article 301 was slightly amended on 30 April 2008, Zarakolu hoped that this time the case would be dropped, or at the very least referred to the Ministry of Justice for review as now provided under the amendments. However the judge ruled that as Zarakolu was tried under the old Penal Code Article 159, the new amendments do not pertain.

Observers believe that Zarakolu is being singled out by the more conservative elements of the judiciary because of his decades of struggle for freedom of expression, and particularly his promotion of minority rights. Throughout his life, Ragıp Zarakolu has been subjected to a series of long, time-consuming and expensive court hearings. The conduct of the trial in itself took the form of harassment and punishment against the defendant for daring to produce works, which touch on sensitive issues such as the Armenian question, Kurdish and minority rights.

The condemnation of Ragıp Zarakolu shows that the recent cosmetic change to Article 301 TPC was not enough to put an end to freedom of expression trials in Turkey. Turkish legislation (new Article 301, Law 5816 etc.) must be amended or repealed to meet international standards, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Ragıp Zarakolu will be awarded the 2008 IPA Freedom to Publish in Amsterdam on 18 September 2008 during the opening the opening ceremony of the International Seminar on Neo-censorship (18-20 September 2008). This seminar is part of the Amsterdam World Book Capital 2008 programme. For more about the seminar, please see: www.amsterdamworldbookcapital.com/index.cfm?page=agenda&y=2008&m=9&d=18

More about IPA and PEN:

IPA, established in Paris in 1896, represents the publishing industry worldwide through 65 national, regional and specialised publishers associations in 53 countries.

International PEN was founded in 1921 in London. It is represented worldwide through 140 centres in over 100 countries. Both organisations are accredited Non-Governmental Organisations enjoying consultative status to the United Nations and seek to promote and defend the fundamental freedoms to publish, to read and to write, defending the rights of authors and publishers to create and distribute intellectual works in complete freedom. (krikorian@internationalpublishers.org, June 18, 2008)

Le procès du journaliste Temel Demirer suspendu

La Cour Criminel n°2 de première instance d’Ankara a décidé de suspendre le procès Temel Demirer accusé en vertu des articles 216 et 301 du code pénal turc.

Le Procureur de la République Yucel Ildeniz a rappelé à la cour lors de l’audition du 15 mai que l’article 304 du Code pénal turc avait été amendé.

Le procureur a dit que l’enquête en vertu de l’article 301 était désormais soumise à la permission du Ministre de la Justice et qu’en l’occurrence une telle démarche devait être appliqué à Temel Demirer.

Selon Yucel Ildeniz ce n’est que si le Ministère approuvait le procès en vertu des articles 216 et 301 que ceux-ci continueraient sinon autrement le procès devra continuer qu’en vertu uniquement de l’article 216.

Yucel Demirer a pour sa part déclaré que rien n’avait changé avec le nouvel article 301 et qu’il n’aurait jamais dû être poursuivi en vertu de ces articles.

Le juge Mehmet Nuri Oztürk a suspendu le procès et renvoyé le dossier au Ministère de la Justice.

Temel Demirer a été accusé suite à son discours en adressant à la foule lors de l’assassinat de Hrant Dink. Temel Demirer avait dit « Hrant Dink n’a pas été seulement assassiné parce qu’il était arménien, mais parce qu’il a dit qu’il y avait eu un Génocide arménien en Turquie ». (Stéphane/armenews, 20 june 2008)

Objectionable Atatürk Videos Keep YouTube Inaccessible

YouTube.com, the biggest video sharing site on the internet, has been inaccessible to the people living in Turkey for two months due to the verdicts by three different Ankara courts.

The courts shut down the site because of the videos that are insulting to the memory of Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish Republic.

Turkey is not on RSF’s list of the Enemies of Internet

Turkey is not among the countries that are on the list of the Hostile Countries To The Internet kept by the international organization of Reporters Without Borders, which are Saudi Arabia, Belarus, Myanmar, China, North Korea, Egypt, Cuba, Ethiopia, Iran, Uzbekistan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan,  Vietnam, and Zimbabwe.

Turkey is one of the few countries, like China, Iran and Thailand, that have banned YouTube.
YouTube.com has been inaccessible since May 5

The latest decision to shut down YouTube came from the Ankara 1st Criminal Court of Peace on May 5, which the Ministry of Telecommunication implemented.

The internet site was also shut down once by the Ankara 11th Criminal Court of Peace on April 24 and another time by the Ankara 5th Criminal Court of Peace on April 30th.

The Prosecutor: We will not open it, unless they remove the video from the rest of the world

The Media Prosecutor of the Office of Ankara Public Prosecutor Nadi Türkaslan said that since these images were removed only from the Turkish database, they would open the site when they are removed from the rest of the world as well.

According to the report of Mutlu Yuca from Doğan News Agency, speaking at Bolu workshop, Türkaslan told the following:

“We do not have the right to restrict access to an internet site that makes the propaganda of the terrorist organization [PKK]. There are insults to the Prime Minister, the flag and the Chief of Staff. These videos are still there. But we do not have the right to prevent them. There are videos clearly insulting to the memory of Atatürk. We implement the law. The law has eight catalog sections. People make complaints to the Police or the Chief of Staff and they come to us.”  

Lawyer Özgür Eralp from the Information Processing Center of Ankara Bar and Füsun Nebil, the general manager of turk.internet.com, were also present at the Abant meeting that Ankara Bar and turk.internet.com organized to discuss the prohibitions on internet access.
 
Nebil explained the problems with the Law 5651

According to Yasemin Arpa from NTV, Nebil gave a brief account of the closing down of the internet sites from the past to the present and described the fundamental problems:

“The concept of obscenity is not clear; rather than removing the objectionable content, they shut down the whole site; it is still questionable whether the authorization of the officials responsible for monitoring the internet is limited with the eight categories of crime definition; there are no specialized courts; the internet owners are not informed, they are not given the chance to defend themselves. (BIA, June 20, 2008)

“Not Liking Atatürk Is A Personal Preference, Not A Crime”

Organization of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed People (Mazlum Der) İstanbul branch organized a press release for Nuray Canan Bezirgan on Tuesday (June 17). Bezirgan is under investigation for saying during the TV show “Teke Tek” that she would say that she did not like Atatürk, the founder of Turkish Republic.
“Saying that I do not like is not an insult”

Reading the statement titled “Saying I do not like is not an insult” at the meeting where Bezirgan was present, Ayhan Küçük, the head of Mazlum Der Istanbul branch, said, “After Fatih Altaylı’s program another malicious and helpless discussion is started, this time against Bezirgan, who simply answered a question asked by Altaylı during the TV show; a lynch campaign is put into action.

Küçük said that discussions about headscarf, an important fundamental right, was being mislead with malicious questions and the public was being pulled into an unnecessary discussion as happened during the February 28 process many years ago and continued by making the following statement:

“The elitist bureaucratic mentality and its extensions in the media, who see in themselves the right to intervene in feelings, are covering up the real issues by keeping the public agenda busy with unnecessary discussions, as they have been doing for years.”
“To not like is a personal preference”

Küçük stated that defining the right to make a personal choice, something so natural and so much about one’s inner world, as an insult is an attempt to distort knowledge intentionally. He furthermore added that Bezirgan stated clearly that she did not have a personal problem with Atatürk, but with the obstacles and practices that were put in front of him in Atatürk’s name.   

According to the laws in effect that clearly state which actions are criminal, says Küçük, Bezirgan’s action cannot be construed as an insult and therefore a public apology is due for the expressions that have gone beyond criticizing her.

Bezirgan, who was at the press release as a guest and was not expected to speak, said, upon a question, that it was not her, but Altaylı himself who forced the Atatük-Humeyni comparison.

Answering a question about her immigration to Canada, she said that the issue was not whether to like or not, but how much freedom of expression was there.

Upon Bezirgan’s words during the TV show titled “Teke Tek” that if she knew she would not get into trouble, then she would say she did not like him, Beyoğlu prosecutor started an investigation under the second article of Law 5816, concerning “crimes against Atatürk”.

Law no. 5816, concerning the crime of insulting Atatürk, states: “Anyone who publicly insults or curses the memory of Atatürk shall be imprisoned with a sentence of between one and three years. … If the crimes outlined in the first article are committed by a group of two or more individuals, or publicly, or in public districts or by means of the press, the penalty imposed will be increased by a proportion of one half.” (BIA, Bawer Cakir, June 20, 2008)`

Publisher Zarakolu condemned without Ministry’s permission

Ragıp Zarakolu the owner of Belge publishers has been condemned under article 301 of TPC for publishing George Jerjian's "The truth will Set us free."  Istanbul Criminal Court of FI Num.2 decided not apply for permission from the Ministry of Justice on the grounds that the case was filed under former article 159.

Zarakolu was given 6 months prison sentence, which was the reduced to five months and commuted to a fine. Zarakolu will take the case to the appeal court. He said that he was in principle against paying fine for ideas.

Chairperson of Writers in Prison Committee of PEN Turkey Halil İbrahim Özcan attended the trial in solidarity. (antenna-tr.org, June 18, 2008)

Last Week’s trials of Freedom of Expression
 
- The case is against Kıyasettin Aslan, Kilis city representative of Office Workers Union, over an article he published in local Kent newspaper. The article was on landmines. He is charged with “insulting the army.” The court sent the case to the Ministry of Justice due to amendment in article 301 of TPC. Trial will continue if the Ministry gives permission..

- Kasım Çakan, the author of the book “Being demoted in the Army” and Mehdi Tanrukulu the owner of Tevn publishing House stand trial under ATL Article 7. Çakan and Tanrıkulu are charged with “making propaganda of terrorist organisations.”  The next hearing is set on 24 September 2008, at 09:00.

- University student Baran Tursun was shot dead by police in İzmir on 25 November 2007. Police said that Tursun had not obeyed the stop order. Baran Tursun´s family and the representatives of NGOs held a press meeting in HRA’s İzmir branch criticising the police. Mehmet, Şelale and Berin Tursun, and 7 rights defenders stand trial over that statement with the charge of "attempting to influence the judiciary" (TPC 277) and "insulting the police and the judiciary" (TPC 301). The case was sent to the Ministry of Justice due to amendment in article 301. Trial will continue if the Ministry gives permission.
 
NOTE: For general statistics on the cases of freedom of expression see http://www.antenna-tr.org/dunya/first_page_en.asp 

Prosecutor Investigates A TV Show For Defamation Atatürk

Beyoğlu Prosecutor has started an investigation concerning the remarks Nuray Bezirgan made about Atatürk in the television program titled “Teke Tek.” The other participant was Kevser Çakır. Prosecutor construed the remarks as insulting Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish Republic.

According to the report by the newspaper “Milliyet”, Nuray Bezirgan told the news director of Hilal TV, the journalist Arzu Erdoğral, that she was not an enemy of Atatürk and her words were twisted.”

The prosecutor bases his investigation on the second article of Law 5816, concerning “crimes against Atatürk” and it will be conducted by the Office of Media Prosecutor.

Law no. 5816, concerning the crime of insulting Atatürk, states: “Anyone who publicly insults or curses the memory of Atatürk shall be imprisoned with a sentence of between one and three years. … If the crimes outlined in the first article are committed by a group of two or more individuals, or publicly, or in public districts or by means of the press, the penalty imposed will be increased by a proportion of one half.”

The dialog between Fatih Altaylı and Nuray Bezirgan was the following:

Fatih Altaylı: Do you have a facebook site? Your friend Kevser has the pictures of Humeyni from the 1979 revolution in Iran. Is that right?

Kevser Çakır: Yes, there is one. Yes, I like and respect him.

Fatih Altaylı: But he is a Shiite. What do you like about Humeyni?

Kevser Çakır: It does not matter if he is a Shiite. To me, he is a Muslim. I like Humeyni.

Fatih Altaylı: But a regime of oppression exists in Iran.

Kevser Çakır: But I do not support the regime in Iran.

Fatih Altaylı: But its founder is Humeyni.

Kevser Çakır: This does not mean that Humeyni has similar opinions. I like Humeyni as a person.

Fatih Altaylı: Do you like him?

Nuray Bezirgan: Yes, I do.

Fatih Altaylı: Do you like Atatürk?

Nuray Bezirgan: Does the right not to like Atatürk exist? If I will not get into trouble, then I do not like him. I do not think that when Atatürk received his authorization from the Sultan, he did not receive to establish a secular Republic. The people fought for Islamic values at that time. In fact, the War of Independence started when the French soldiers touched Nene Hatun’s headscarf.

Fatih Altaylı: I think you confused Maraş with Erzurum.

Nuray Bezirgan: Whatever. The French soldiers try to remove a woman’s headscarf in Maraş. Sütçü İmam fires the first shot against this and the War of Independence starts. The bottom line is that the women who carry ammunition to the war front are the people of that era and when you study the sociological structure of those times, these are all Muslim people.

Fatih Altaylı: Then, why do you not like the person who organized the War of Independence as much as Humeyni? I am curious. If Atatürk did not exist then perhaps there would be English and French here now.

Nuray Bezirgan: If the English were here, I would have more rights now. In fact, the issue is this. If people are persecuting me in the name of the ideology of Atatürk, then you cannot expect met o like Atatürk.

Kevser Çakır: That is, all these things are happening since some people are constructing an ideology around this individual. He was a good soldier. We know this.

Fatih Altaylı: He is the reason that this country was cleared off enemies. Don’t you at least feel gratitude?

Kevser Çakır: We know he was a good soldier.

Fatih Altaylı: Is it not Atatürk who established the liberal Republic that you defend, the regime that enabled the will you represent become the political power today?

Nuray Bezirgan: The kind of party that defends my ideas cannot be established in Turkey. In fact, this is forbidden. When a party defends my ideas, it is shut down. The Muslims struggle day and night to get their rights. When the Parliament defines a freedom even a little bit, some people take away this, our freedoms, in the name of Atatürk, the Republic, democracy, something, whatever that may be.

I want a regime where I will have complete freedom, my rights and freedoms will not be restricted. For example, I believe that the reason that you feel uncomfortable facing a woman judge with a headscarf is essentially because the Republic that was established by Atatürk has been presenting us as a threat.

Fatih Altaylı: No, that is not it. It is because you say “you and we”.

You see different those who do not live or perceive Islam like you do. I feel uncomfortable when you, Recep Tayip Erdoğan and others say “you – them, we – them”.

Nuray Bezirgan: I am not concerned with why your belief is. This is not my concern. A person can have any religion s/he wishes to have or s/he can have no religion. This does not mean that I will see you as a second-class citizen. But Mr. Fatih, you say you would be uncomfortable facing a judge with a headscarf.

Fatih Altaylı: I do, because I think she would be prejudices.

Nuray Bezirgan: Certainly! I believe at the root of you prejudice is the impositions of the 85 year old secular system. We have never been free. We have never expressed ourselves. A judge with a headscarf has never tried you. That is why you think like this.

Fatih Altaylı: What do you want from the regime? What do you want other than having you university education and having a job in public service [with your headscarf]?

Nuray Bezirgan: I want to exist in social life with my headscarf. (BIA, June 13, 2008)

Gift Book Became a source of trouble for Beşikçi

Sociologist İsmail Beşikçi spent months to receive a box full of books sent from Sweden. Books were first sent to the Security Centre, some books were confiscated. Beşikçi wanted to take the rest then the post office asked to produce a receipt. Books were a present to him so he did not have a receipt. Beşikçi convinced that he would not able to get the books wanted to send them back to Sweden yet he was told that the two books were missing so the post office could not send them back.

Beşikçi’s two readers from Sweden sent sociologist İsmail Beşikçi around 80 books. Beşikçi received a note from the post office on 19 February. Beşikçi went to the Post office to collect the box but the workers opened the box in front of him and seeing that there were books in it decided to send the books to police to see if they were banned. Two weeks later he was called from the PO and was asked to collect his books.

Beşikçi was told that two books were confiscated but he could take the rest but was asked to produce a receipt for them. As he did not have a receipt he could not get the books and he was told that he could not send them back since two of them were missing. It took Beşikçi two months to get the books sent back to Sweden. (antenna-tr.org, June 10, 2008)

Freedom of Expression Panel: The Revised 301 Does Not Please Anyone

The Heinrich Böll Stiftung Foundation organized a panel in Taksim Hill Otel on June 6 to discuss the situation with the freedom of expression after the passing of the revised article 301 by the Parliament on April 29.

The title of the panel was “Are we closer to the freedom of expression with the 301 revision?” and was in two sessions.

There was consensus among the opinions presented at the panel that article 301, which has caused serious problems so far, should be removed.

Yurdatapan: The State cannot use 301 against its citizens

German ambassador Dr. Echart Cuntz and Gönenç Gürkaynak gave the presentations of “AB ve Almanya bakışıyla 301 reformu” (The 301 reform from the perspective of the EU and Germany) and “Anglo-Amerikan Hukuku ve 301. madde” (The Anglo-American Law and article 301), respectively, in the panel where the infamous article and the other legal regulations that restrict the freedom of expression were discussed.

Şanar Yurdatapan, the spokesperson of the Initiative Against Thought Crime, who has been concentrating on civil disobedience activities recently, said that article 301 should have already been removed, as it was against democratic principles for a state to threaten its own citizens, to whom it is obligated to serve,  with prison sentence for the words they said.

Uygun: It is not realistic to expect the removal of 301

Prof. Dr. Oktay Uygun of Law Department at İstanbul University stated that the judiciary was protected by the laws in Europe as well, and that this was normal to an extent. He recommended keeping the expression “publicly denigrating the judiciary” and lifting the protection on the other institutions. Uygun said “it is not realistic to expect the government remove 301.”

İlkiz: I am against the permission form the Ministry of Justice

Fikret İlkiz, the lawyer for İletişim Publications, indicated that although the Ministry of Justice stated in its circular dated to May 9, 2008 and registered under the number 18/1 that it required from the prosecutors who start 301 investigations to state their legal ground, the same ministry presented its decisions to those who asked for a trial permission without offering any legal ground in the past. He said this should stop.

İlkiz also added that “”I do not want the Ministry of Interior to give permission in a case in which I am on trial for the freedom of expression. Turkey must quit having a democracy discussion at every case that is opened.”

Önderoğlu: There are 301’s in the East

Erol Önderoğlu, the Bianet editor for the freedom of expression news, says that there are many regulations in the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) that cause problems such as article 125 for “insulting”, 220/8 for “making propaganda of an organization and its purpose”, article 257/1 for “misconduct in office”, article 222 for those who use Kurdish letters and speak Kurdish, article 288 for “attempting to influence a fair trial”, article 299 for “insulting the president”, and article 318 for “alienating people from military service”.

Önderoğlu says that these articles are used more often in eastern and southeastern Turkey. He also points out to the law suits against the caricaturists, the publication bans, the banning of books and internet sites such as youttube.com.

Cıngı: Social transformation is needed

Aydın Cıngı, the head of the Social Democracy Foundation (SODEV), stated that according to public opinion surveys such as Konda and ISSP,  the Turkish people are not comfortable with foreigners buying land in Turkey, believe that “Turks have no friends other than Turks”, think that the reforms demanded by the EU are the continuation of the Sevres Treaty of 1920, which had announced the fragmentation and end of the Ottoman Empire after the First World of War, and therefore it was necessary first to transform the society before the removal of articles like 301. (BIA, June 10, 2008)

YouTube bloqué depuis plus d’un mois en Turquie

Reporters sans frontières condamne le blocage du site de partage en ligne de vidéos YouTube.com depuis le 5 mai 2008, suite à trois décisions prises par le tribunal de police d’Ankara.

“YouTube n’est pas le seul site participatif bloqué dans le pays. Ces décisions prises par les autorités pour contrôler Internet constituent des atteintes graves à la liberté d’expression et d’information. Les internautes turcs ne peuvent plus partager leurs vidéos avec le monde extérieur, ni même les consulter. Nous réitérons notre appel aux autorités à faire preuve de discernement en demandant à YouTube de retirer seulement les vidéos incriminées. Le blocage du site dans sa totalité est inacceptable“, a déclaré l’organisation.

Dans deux de ses décisions rendues le 24 et le 30 avril, la 11e chambre du tribunal de police d’Ankara a demandé la suspension du site, sans en préciser le motif. Le 5 mai, la 5e chambre du tribunal a pris la même décision.

D’après YouTube, les responsables du site ont fait les démarches nécessaires pour que les vidéos incriminées soient retirées.

Depuis le 25 mars, le site de partage de photos Slide est aussi inaccessible suite à une décision du tribunal de Civril (sud-ouest d’Ankara) en raison de la publication de "photos et articles considérés comme insultants envers Atatürk". Google Groups, le site des groupes de discussion en ligne de Google, ne peut plus être consulté depuis le 10 avril suite à une plainte en diffamation du leader religieux Adnan Oktar.

En vertu de la loi 5651, relative à “l’organisation des publications en ligne et au combat contre les délits commis par le biais de ces publications“, appliquée depuis novembre 2007, il est possible pour un procureur, dans un délai de 24 heures, d’interdire l’accès à un site si son contenu est susceptible d’inciter au suicide, à la pédophilie, à l’usage de stupéfiant, à l’obscénité, à la prostitution et de contredire la loi d’Atatürk. (http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=27374)

Last week’s trials of freedom of expression
 
- Conscientious objector Halil Savda read out a press statement in support of Israeli soldiers Amir Paster and Itzik Shabbat who refused to take part in Israeli occupation of Lebanon and were given 28 days prison sentence each. Savda was charged with “alienating the people from military service” and was given 6 months prison sentence first, then the court reduced it to 5 months. Savda’s lawyers will appeal.

- DTP’s Kars city chairman Mahmut Alınak told Roj TV broadcasting in Kurdish, on 26 June 2007: "As long as the cross in Imralı stands, and Öcalan is on it..." Alınak is charged with “praising Abdullah Öcalan.” The court gave Alınak 25 days prison sentence then commuted it to 500 liras of fine.

- Alınak had two trials this week. Alınak stood trial over asking Kars Council to name streets after Deniz Gezmiş, Musa Anter and Vedat Aydın. Alınak was charged with 'praising crime and criminal.' Court gave him 25 days prison sentence and commuted it to 500 liras of fine. Alınak said about the both cases, that he was going to serve prison sentences. Alınak  will apply to the European Court.

- Yılmaz Çelik, Hizb-ut Tahrir’s representative of Turkey was charged with "leading a terrorist organisation." Çelik has been on remand. The trial will continue on 13 August 2008. (Freedom of Expression Weekly Bulletin, 6 June 2008)

2 journalists arrested, the number of journalists in prison climbed to 23

From Solidarity with the Arrested Journalists Platform (TGDP):

Hacı Boğatekin, the owner of Gerger Fırat newspaper and owner, and Ali Turgay, assistant editor of Yedincigün newspaper, have been arrested recently and the number of arrested journalists with them is 23.

On the other hand, the third hearing of the case of 23 regime opponent, journalist, author and socialists among whom İbrahim Çiçek, Chief Editor of newspaper Atılım; Sedat Şenoğlu General Coordinator of Atılım; Radio Free Chief Editor Füsun Erdoğan; Bayram Namaz and Ziya Ulusoy, authors of Atılım seen, will be held on 5-6 June.

Defendnts have been under arrest for 21 months from 8 September 2006. They can only have the chance of defence at this court hearing.

 In the accusation, 5 journalists and authors are wanted to be judged by life sentence in solitary confinement.

We invite national and international press organization, human rights associations, civil organizations, progressive parties to show sense and follow this big case, the application of Anti-Terror Law. (e-mail: tutuklugazeteciler@mynet.com, June 3, 2008)


Kurdish Question / Question kurde

Karayilan: Ankara s'est liguée avec Téhéran et Damas contre les Kurdes

Le principal commandant militaire du Parti des travailleurs du Kurdistan (PKK), Murat Karayilan, a appelé samedi la Turquie à négocier avec la guérilla plutôt que de chercher à former un front anti-kurde avec l'Iran et la Syrie.

"Nous espérons que la Turquie va arrêter sa politique agressive et mener des négociations démocratiques pour résoudre les problèmes", a déclaré à un journaliste de l'AFP le leader kurde, qui se cache dans les Monts Qandil, dans le nord de l'Irak.

La Turquie ne pourra être un pays "stable et démocratique tant qu'elle n'aura pas réglé le problème kurde", a estimé M. Karayilan.

L'armée turque a lancé plusieurs offensives sur les positions du PKK dans le nord de l'Irak depuis décembre. Le gouvernement turc affirme que 2.000 rebelles kurdes du PKK sont cachés de l'autre côté de sa frontière avec l'Irak.

M. Karayilan, qui dirige le PKK selon Ankara depuis la capture en 1999 d'Abdullah Öcalan, accusent la Syrie, la Turquie et l'Iran, trois pays où vivent des communautés kurdes, de s'être ligués contre le PKK et un groupe affilié basé dans le nord de l'Irak, le Pejak.

"Une alliance des ennemis des Kurdes s'est formée entre l'Iran, la Turquie et la Syrie", a déploré le responsable, reprochant aux trois pays d'empêcher l'émergence d'un "Kurdistan en Turquie, en Syrie et en Iran".

Selon lui, Téhéran et Ankara s'apprêtent à lancer de nouvelles attaques contre les rebelles kurdes.

"Nous ne sommes pas contre l'Iran. Nous ne lui avons pas déclaré la guerre. Il y a un parti kurde iranien, le Pejak, et ce parti est la cible de l'Iran. Il est donc bien obligé de se défendre", a estimé le leader séparatiste.

Le Pejak fait des incursions en Iran où ses combattants affrontent régulièrement les forces armées iraniennes.

Murat Karayilan a estimé en outre que les responsables politiques kurdes irakiens, comme le président Jalal Talabani et le président de la région autonome du Kurdistan irakien Massoud Barzani, pourraient apporter leur aide compte tenu de leurs relations privilégiées avec Washington.

"Nous souhaitons régler le problème kurde d'une manière pacifique (...) par des discussions dans une atmosphère démocratique. Barzani et Talabani peuvent jouer un rôle dans ce dossier et offrir un programme pour résoudre le problème", a-t-il affirmé.

"Je pense que leurs relations avec les Etats-Unis sont meilleures maintenant et s'ils veulent jouer un rôle, ils peuvent le faire et obtenir de bons résultats. Mais nous ne voyons aucune tentative (de leur part), et la politique contre le Kurdistan se poursuit", a-t-il ajouté. (AFP, 28 juin 2008)

DTP Van City Chairperson Faces 200 year Prison Sentence

Democratic Society Party’s (DTP) Van city Chair Abdurrahman Doğar was arrested and remanded in Van F Type prison after Newroz celebrations in Van. Two people were killed in the celebrations in Van where authorities attempted to ban Newroz. A case was filed against Doğar on the charges of "PKK/KONGRA-GEL membership ", "inciting to crime as part of the activities of terrorist organisation “and "Resisting public officials, harming public goods, inciting the crime of injuring." The prosecutor asked for 200 years prison sentence.

What does the Indictment says?

The indictment quotes Doğar saying “Everyone will take part in Newroz in their national costumes. Newroz is a rebellion against brutality, repression and torture... Everyone will speak in Kurdish in Newroz... "  (antenna-tr.org, June 28, 2008)

“Kurdish TV Channel” Becomes Possible On Paper

President Abdullah Gül signed into law the bill that makes Kurdish broadcasting on one of the state television (TRT) channels possible. This bill was already announced by Prime Minister Erdoğan during his Diyabakır trip.

Once Gül sends the signed "Law About Making A Change Regarding the Law of Turkish Radio and Television and the Law of the Founding of Televisions and Their Broadcasting” to the Prime Ministry and it is published in the Turkish Official Gazette, it will be possible to allocate one of the channels of TRT for Kurdish broadcasting. TRT already broadcasts in mother tongues during the weekdays.

TRT will start broadcasting in Kurdish after the preparations between the government and the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) are completed.
Broadcasting in mother tongue in TRT will expand

It is expected that TRT will increase its broadcasting in non-Turkish languages such as Kurdish, Arabic, Circassian, Zaza and Bosnians.

According to the law, after it is published in the Turkish Official Gazette and the necessary preparations are completed, TRT will be able to expand its broadcasting in mother tongues. It has already been doing limited broadcasting in mother tongues in TRT Radyo 1 and TRT 3, each day of the week allocated to a particular mother tongue. With this new law, it will be able to assign a whole channel to broadcasting in mother tongues.

After the 6th article of the new law had caused fierce discussions in the Turkish Parliament, the bill was taken into consideration as a whole on June 11. Later, the Parliament passed the bill.
 
The limited Kurdish broadcasting have not gone beyond TRT and Gün TV

Presently, TRT broadcasts in Bosnian on Mondays, in Arabic on Tuesdays, in Kırmanci on Wednesdays, in Circassian on Thursdays and in Zaza on Fridays, allocating half n hour for each.

The permission for broadcasting and publishing in different languages in local and national media was granted in 2004. On January 2004, the ‘Regulation About Radio And Television Broadcasting In Different Languages And Dialects That The Turkish Citizens Are Using Traditionally In Their Daily Lives’ was published.

After TRT started broadcasting in non-Turkish languages, four local media organizations asked for permission from RTÜK and started broadcasting in KuUrdish. However, only Gün TV continues broadcasting in Kurdish today.
TRT will be able to sell news and buy services from private organizations

Moreover, TRT will be able to make contracts, protocols and agreements with radio and television institutions and firms that broadcast in Turkey. Staying within the limits of the contracts made, TRT will be able to sell news and images to radios and television channels that broadcast regionally and nationally and buy services from them.

In contracts, protocols and agreements with international radio and television channels, the approval of the Prime Minister will be required.

The discussions in the Parliament were as fierce as the discussions during the proposal. Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), claimed in his announcement made previously that this law was a gesture to PKK’s mountain cadre. (BIA, June 26, 2008)

Manifestation devant le Conseil de l'Europe contre "l'isolement" d'Öcalan

Quelques centaines de Kurdes ont manifesté mercredi devant le siège du Conseil de l'Europe à Strasbourg pour alerter cette organisation sur les conditions d'incarcération d'Abdullah Öcalan, a constaté l'AFP.

Scandant "Turquie terroriste", 200 manifestants selon la police, 400 selon les organisateurs, se sont rassemblés derrière des banderoles "Traitement urgent pour Öcalan" et "Halte à la torture à Imrali", du nom de l'île abritant une prison de haute sécurité dont Öcalan est le seul pensionnaire depuis 1999.

L'ancien chef du Parti des travailleurs du Kurdistan (PKK) a été condamné à mort pour "séparatisme" en juin 1999, peine commuée en 2002 en prison à vie après l'abolition de la peine capitale.

Ses avocats ayant affirmé qu'il était victime d'un "empoisonnement", le Comité antitorture (CPT) du Conseil de l'Europe avait envoyé ses experts sur l'île en mai 2007.
 Les toxicologues mandatés avaient alors estimé que les concentrations de métaux lourds trouvés dans l'organisme du prisonnier n'étaient pas "dangereuses pour sa santé" et "probablement liées à ses conditions environnementales et à ses habitudes alimentaires".

Les médecins avaient en revanche constaté une dégradation de l'état mental du chef kurde depuis leurs visites en 2001 et 2003, évoquant un "stress chronique et un isolement social et émotionnel prolongé".

Le CPT a demandé en mars 2008 au gouvernement turc de mettre fin à l'isolement total d'Öcalan, jugé préjudiciable à sa santé mentale, mais la Turquie s'y refuse. (AFP, 25 juin 2008)

L'avocate Uçar en instruction pour avoir dit "Ca suffit" en kurde

L’avocate Canan Uçar en instruction judicaire en raison de son discours prononcé à l’occasion du meeting organisé pour la journée Mondiale de la Femme le 8 mars à Izmir. D’après la justice elle aurait fait de la « propagande pour organisation terroriste » en utilisant le mot 'Êdî Bes’ (ça suffit).

Uçar déclara « aucun pays de ce bas monde ne peut interdire 2 mots qui signifie ‘ça suffit’ pour la simple raison qu’une organisation l’utilise aussi. Cette interdiction n’est pas une interdiction qui peut ni être comprise ni reconnue par qui que se soit. Cette organisation dit également ‘république démocratique’ et elle reste derrière cette revendication. Alors il faudrait interdire également les mots ‘république démocratique’. Ceci est important dans le cadre de montrer au monde le point tragicomique de la mentalité qui dirige aujourd’hui la République Turque. ».

Uçar précisa qu’elle avait une réunion avec son comité de préparation en ajoutant : « Dans la réunion organisée nous avons tous à unanimité conclut que cette interdiction est incompréhensible et inacceptable en aucun cas. Pour ces raison lors du meeting nous avons portés des affiches portant les mots ‘ça suffit’ en différente langues comme l’anglais, le chinois, et le français et avec ceci nous avons satirisés cette interdiction. Dans le discours prononcé j’ai seulement parlé de la décision de la Cours de Lourde Peine de Van. Je n’ai rien dis d’autre. Après le discours prononcé la population présente a crié le slogan ‘Êdî Bes e’. Et monsieur le procureur pensant que je suis responsable des slogans dis par la population m’accuse de propagande pour organisation terroriste. Cette instruction est forcé ».

La procureur aurait demandé à maître Uçar « Savez vous que les mots ‘Êdî Bes’ sont le slogan de l’organisation et font part principale de la campagne conduite par l’organisation » à cela Uçar ajouta : « Ce n’est pas important que je le sache ou pas. Aujourd’hui cette organisation dit également ‘république démocratique’ et elle reste derrière sa revendication. Qu’allez vous faire à cela ? Alors il faudrait également interdire les mots ‘république démocratique’. Voilà, à ce moment il est important de voir à quel point de la mentalité qui dirige aujourd’hui la République Turque est tragicomique. Dans aucun pays du monde on interdit un mot parce qu’il est utilisé par une organisation. Nous pouvons très bien voir cette instruction comme pression envers la voix de la femme.

Parce que le 8 mars est une activité féminine, là bas les femmes se sont créer une tribune. Les femmes Turcs et Kurdes ont montrées à quel point elles sont pour la paix, pour le travail, pour le droit et les liberté, elles ont montrées leurs sentiments et leurs réflexions. Mais en fait cette instruction démontre que le meeting est en quelque sorte condamné.

Les femmes ses sont regroupées par leur propres forces à ce meeting d’où leurs objections et leurs voix ont été entendus. Mais cette instruction veut en fait mettre au silence la voix de la femme.»  (Kurdish Info – DIHA, June 24, 2008)

The Prosecutor Says Close The Democratic Society Party

In the closure case of the Democratic Society Party (DTP), the Supreme Court of Appeals Chief Prosecutor Yalçınkaya presented his oral explanation regarding why the DTP should be closed and he repeated his demand that this party should be closed and its administrators should be banned from political life.

Yalçınkaya left the court at 10.30, half an hour after his oral presentation.

DTP’s oral defense will be on September 16

The Constitutional Court had postponed the oral defense of the Democratic Society Party to September 16, accepting their request for extra time because of their busy schedule.

Following DTP’s oral defense, the rapporteur of the Constitutional Court will collect all the information and the documents about the case and write his/her report about the matter of substance of the case. While these procedures are taking place, both the Chief Prosecutor and the DTP will be able to present additional evidence or written additional defense.

After the report is presented to the eleven members of the Constitutional Court, the President of the Court Haşim Kılıç will determine a meeting day, on which the members of the court will start discussing the substance of the case.

The case will be decided by the eleven members. In case one of the members is missing or retired, the most senior of the four alternate members will replace the missing member.

According to the Constitution, a qualified majority is needed to close a political party. Therefore, 7 out of 11 members of the Constitutional Court must approve the closure decision.  (BIA, June 24, 2008)

If Your Name Is Kurdish Then You Cannot Enter Turkey

A German citizen child whose father is a political refugee was not allowed to enter Turkey because of the W letter in his name and sent back to Germany.

Submitting a motion of question, on June 15, the Democratic Society Party deputy Akın Birdal asked the authorities to explain the reason behind this action.

Although the seven year old Welat was sent back to Germany by plane, his mother Yadigar D. and her two other kids were allowed to enter the country.

There is no “forbidden name”

According to the Turkish Census Law that was in effect until 2006, the newborn could not be given names that were “not appropriate to our national culture, our code of ethics and our traditions or injures the public opinion.”

At that period, the Turkish Language Society (TDK) had prepared a “list of forbidden names”. There were 23 names on the list. Demonstrations were organized to protest this arrangement which was essentially targeted the Kurdish names.

In 2003, a new regulation, which was set up for the adaptation to the European Union, restricted the name banning only to those cases that offended the public morality, but added to this a requirement of “suitability to the Turkish alphabet.” Thus, the letters Q,W, X  were banned and names that included these letters.

There is no restriction regarding the names in the Census Law and the related regulation that went into effect in 2006.

On the other hand, the Chief of Staff asked its institutions not to use the letters Q, W and X.

The Implementation is against the Convention on the Rights of the Child

The 8th article of the United Nations  Convention on the Rights of the Child (ÇHS) states the following:

“1. States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference.

2. Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to re-esta