The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the situation in Iraq eleven years after the Gulf war, covering most of the aspects of the Iraqi issue. The resolution was passed with 354 votes in favour, 29 against with 31 abstentions, during the parliament's plenary meeting in Strasbourg on 16 May.
Regarding Iraq, the resolution holds “that the Iraqi government has continued, throughout the last eleven years, to increase its regime of terror against all levels of society, and to commit gross and massive human rights violations, including an active policy of persecution of the Kurdish, Turkmen and Assyrian populations in the north and of the Shi'i in the south, and particularly of the inhabitants of the Lower Mesopotamian Marshlands.”
It recalls “that consequent on the policy of Arabisation and ethnic cleansing in the (Kurdish) regions of Kirkuk, Sinjar, Mandali, Jalawla and Mossul controled by the Iraqi regime, over 800,000 displaced persons of Kurdish, Turkomen and Assyrian origins are at present in the three provinces of North Kurdistan”.
The European Parliament “urgently calls upon the Council and member States to take all necessary measures to ensure that the leaders of the Iraqi regime, responsible for serious violations of international law on humanitarian issues on the territory of Iraq or beyond, appear before an International ad hoc Tribunnal on Iraq”.
Regarding Iraqi Kurdistan, the resolution welcomes “the improvements already achieved in the three [Kurdish-administered] governorates in the North of Iraq as regards the development of civil society,which prove the potential of the Iraqi people”.
Regarding the UN Resolution 986, oil-for-food programme, the resolution assessed that the programme “has been effective only in the three governorates of North Iraq, where it has been directly managed by the United Nations; therefore concludes that the lack of effective implementation elsewhere in Iraq and the consequential shortages of food and medical supplies have been largely the responsibility of the Iraqi government”.
Finally the European Parliament “calls on the Council and the European Commission to draw up as soon as possible an active strategy covering the following measures :
In a resolution passed on 30 April and made public on 2 May, the Ministerial Committee of the Council of Europe, basing itself on the decision of the European Court for Human Rights, calls on Turkey to retry Leyla Zana and her frllow Members of Parliament of the Party for Democracy (DEP, banned) sentenced in 1994 to 15 years imprisonment “for Kurdish separatism”. The Ministerial Committee “earnestly invites” the Turkish authorities rapidly to correct the situation by taking “the necessary measures to reopen the proceedings incriminated by the Court in this case or other ad hoc measures to erase the consequences for the petitioners of the violations noted”.
Expressed in diplomatic and courteous terms it is, in fact, an injunction to Turkey to carry out the decision of the European Court as rapidly as possible. In the event of an excessive delay, the Committee could undertake sanctions going as far as suspending Turkey from the Council.
On 17 July 2001, the European Court had found Turkey guilty of an “inequitable trial” considering, in particular, that the Security Court, with an Army judge on the bench, could not be considered to be “an independent and impartial” court in the terms of the European Convention.
Her is the full text of the resolution [Interim Resolution ResDH(2002)59] adopted by the Ministerial Committee in the course of meeting 794 of the Representatives of Foreign Ministers of the 40 member countries of the Council of Europe :
“ The Committee of Ministers, having regard to the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”) of 17 July 2001 in the Sadak, Zana, Dicle and Dogan v. Turkey case (applications No. 29900/96 et al) transmitted the same date to the Committee for supervision of execution in accordance with Article 46 § 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”);
Recalling that, in that judgement, the Court found important violations of the applicants’ right, under the Convention, to a fair trial before the Ankara State Security Court, on account of:
- the lack of independence and impartiality of the tribunal due to the presence of a military judge on the bench of the State Security Court (violation of Article 6§1);
- the lack of timely information about the legal recharacterisation of the accusation brought against the applicants and lack of sufficient time and facilities to prepare the applicants’ defence (violation of Article 6§3 a and b taken together with Article 6§1);
- the impossibility for the applicants to examine or to have examined the witnesses who testified against them (violation of Article 6§3d taken together with Article 6§1);
Recalling that the applicants were convicted in 1994 to a 15-year prison term as result of these proceedings;
Stressing the obligation of every state, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by the judgements of the Court, including through the adoption of individual measures putting an end to the violations found and removing as far as possible their effects;
Recalling that the Turkish authorities have already taken certain general measures in order to prevent new similar violations, notably by abolishing the military judge on the state security courts (see Resolution DH (1999)555 in the case of Ciraklar against Turkey) and, recently, by ensuring constitutional protection for the right to fair trial (see the amendment to Article 36 of 17 October 2001);
Noting that further general measures are being taken in order to give full effect to the judgement of the Court;
Considering, however, that, in the present case, the adoption of individual measures, in addition to the payment of the just satisfaction, is also necessary in view of the extent of the violations found and the fact that the applicants continue to serve the heavy prison sentences imposed (cf. the Committee’s Recommendation DH(2000)2);
Noting the engagement of the Government of Turkey to take all measures required in order to ensure the reopening of judicial proceedings when this is necessary in order to abide by the judgements of the Court;
Strongly urges the Turkish authorities, without further delay, to respond to the Committee’s repeated demands that the said authorities urgently remedy the applicants’ situation and take the necessary measures in order to reopen the proceedings impugned by the Court in this case, or other ad hoc measures erasing the consequences for the applicants of the violations found;
Decides, in view of the urgency of the situation, to resume its control of the adoption of these individual measures, if necessary at each of its meetings. “
On 29 May 2002, the permanent Commission acting on behalf of the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Commissionpassed a resolution (recommendation 1563) on “The humanitarian situation of the displaced Kurdish population in Turkey”.
This Strasbourg Assembly, which represents about forty countries of Europe, declared it was deeply concerned by news that the Turkish Security Forces had recently forcibly evacuated some villages and hamlets. These actions should cease immediately. It also “firmly condemned the acts of violence and terrorism perpetrated byn the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) whichn had contributed to the displacement of the populations” and urged the last armed fighters of the region to cease all violence.
The Assembly stressed that “help aimed at reconstructing destroyed villages should enjoy a high priority. It should not be subject to the obligation to join the system of village guards or of declaring that the reason for the flight of displaced people was the fear inspired by the PKK.
“International humanitarian organisations should be able to have access to the region. The Assembly could not accept that respected organisations like Médecins sans Frontières be refused access on the grounds that they would support terrorism” the resolution remarked.
The Parliamentary Assembly consequently recommended to the Ministerial Committee that it urge Turkey to “lift the state of emergency still in vigour in four provinces as soon as possible”, “avoid any fresh evacuations of villages”, “ensure a civilian control of the military operations conducted in the region and make the Security Forces more answerable for their acts”, “to correctly carry out the verdicts of the European Court for Human Rights” and to “abolish the system of village guards”.
Finally, the Assembly firmly demanded that bothn parties start a dialogue to find a peaceful solutionto the Kurdish question which would respect the cultural and social rights of the Kurdish people.
A poster by Reporters sans Frontières (RSF) put up at St. Lazare Railway Station in Paris on the occasion of the International Press Freedom Day (3 May last) has provoke diplomatic tension between Paris and Ankara. The poster took the form of a map, showing where in the world the press was being restricted, with portraits of 38 “predators of press freedom”, including, especially, the Chief of Staff of the Turkish Armed Forces, General Huseyin Kivrikoglu.
The Turkish Minister of Defence threatened to freeze the military agreements with France. He added that the French military attaché had been summoned, on 7 May, to the Army Head Quarters to demand the withdrawal of the poster. “He was informed (…) that the insulting attitude towards General (Huseyin) Kivrikoglu had to stop” declared an official. In addition, the French Ambassador to Ankara was summoned to the Foreign Ministry a little later and was given to understand that the scandal of the portrait was an attack on Turkey’s image. The Turkish Head of State, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, “condemned with regret” the incident, considering that it showed that RSF did not understand Turkey.
Finally, in a communiqué published on 10 May, RSF announced that “the repeated actions of violent little factions have compelled those responsible for safety at Paris’s St.Lazare Station to withdraw (…) the portraits of the 38 “predators of Press freedom”… The violence of the reactions to the REF exhibition is evidence of what we have been denouncing for months — any attempt to criticise the Turkish Army provokes a brutal reaction from the authorities. The Turkish journalists who take such a risk are immediately taken to court and one of them, Fikret Baskaya, has, to date, been in prison for over a year for an article critical of the Army” declared Robert Ménard, General Secretary of RSF. “Turkey is supposed to be conforming to the democratic standards of the European Union, rather than exporting its rejection of free expression and criticism to the very capitals of the European Union” added Mr. Ménard.
Reporters sans Frontières noted that, on 9 May 2002, about thirty people had daubed red paint over the RSF’s exhibition world map after the Turkish authorities had demanded that the French government “punish” RSF. Travellers visiting the exhibition were pushed about and attacked with tear gas by the demonstrators. The latter, who were accompanied by a dozen Turkish journalists, again sprayed paint over the portraits of the 38 leaders denounced by RSF, and especially that of the Chief of Staff of the Turkish Armed Forces, Huseyin Kivrikoglu. RSF restored the exhibition as it was and filed a complaint for “deliberate dammage to private property”. Some demonstrators again attacked travellers visiting the exhibition in the morning of Friday 10 May which obliged the Station’s security service to dismantle the exhibition.
RSF recalls that, in Turkey, over fifty representative of the Press, of all political trends, were brought before the courts because of their writings in 2001 . All journalists who, in any way criticised the army were systematically harrassed. In the course of the first five months of 2002, new proceedings have been brought against journlaists. One of them, Erol Ozkoray, Editor in Chief of the quarterly review of political science and international relations, Idea Politika, is facing at least three trials, in particular because of one issue of his review in which the Army had been accused of trying to put a brake on the Turkey’s coming closer to the European Union. This legal harrassment has finally obliged Mr. Ozkoray to stop publishing his review… Another journalist, Fikret Baskaya, has been incarcerated since 29 June 2001 after having been sentenced to one year and four months jail for a single article, published on 1 June 1999, criticising the management of the Kurdish problem by the civil and military authorities.
No one knows what the European Union intends to do to defend the honour of its representative in Ankara agianst vicious attacks. A real lynching campaign has been launched against the E.U. representative for some months past in Turkey. After one campaign of abuse following the publication, in the Turkish press, of her (intercepted!) eMail, now some editorial writers close to the Army are openly threatening the European diplomat, who has, nevertheless, been very discrete — not to say indulgent — towards Ankara, on “sensitive” subjects like the Kurdish question. This time it is the President of the Turkish Committee of Journalist, the thick skinned Editorialist in Chief of the mass circulation Turkish daily Hurriyet who lines up the heavy artillery against the woman who has become the permanent Aunt Sally of the Turkish nationalist media and politicians. Here are some extracts from the vitriolic editorial published on the front page of Hurriyet on 8 May :
“The strongest remark one can make about an ambassador isd to tell him to “clear off”!”
“Mrs. Fogg has displayed such a dirty and rude performance during her period as representative (in Turkey) that no diplomatic respect towards her is now needed. She thus deserves a violent and intense reaction from Turkish public opinion such as has nver been shown to a diplomatic representative”
The reason for this open attack is, this time, due to remarks Ms. Fogg is said to have made in private conversation on the subject of Cyprus. According to Hurriyet, she is said to have “called upon the Cyprus Turks to revolt and free themselves from Turkish guardianship and from Rauf Denktas”. (Editor’s Note : Since the 1974 Turkish invasion, one half of the original Turkish Cypriot population of 120,000 has emigrated or sought asylum in Europe — largely in UK — and been replaced by “colonies” of mainland Turks. The largest Turkish Cypriot party is the Republican Party — in opposition !)
The other complaint about her is her wish to see a civilian take over as General Secretary of the National Security Council (MGK) (Editor’s Note : In fact a demand of the E.U. itself). “She meddles with everything!” rages the editorial writer who states that she should be “grabbed by the ear and thrown out” and that “she had better look out … She could well be the loser” he concluded.
On 2 May, in response to some of Washington’s ceoncerns, the European Union added 11 more groups to its list of terrorist organisations. Amongst these were the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the Turkish movement the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Front-Party (DHKP-C) whose members are on hunger strike for better detention conditions in Turkey … During a confidential meeting between diplomats of the Fifteen on 29 April, they agreed on the organisations to be added to the list, which has been sent to all European capitals for their final agreement. A key NATO ally and candidate for membership of the European Union, Turkey has thus been rewarded for its faithful adherence to all the US options, from the Gulf War to thye Afghan war. The Spanish Foreign Minister, Josep Piqué, said that other groups might be added to the list in coming weeks.
The PKK has changed its name to KADEK (Kurdish Party for Freedom and Democracy) and abandonned armed struggle but the European Union has accepted the line of Turkish Foreign Minister, Ismail Cem, that the nature of the organisation has in no way changed. For Osman Ocalan, Abdullah’s brother and leading member of the PKK, the decision by the Fifteen, that had not wanted to take this step last December, will lead to fresh clashes in Europe and will be indirectly to blame for them. “The inclusion of the PKK on its terrorist list will be seen as a declaration of war and we are preparing ourselves and we are preparing form the strongest resistence in this matter based on legitimate self-defence” he declared to the Kurdish Television chanel Medya-TV. “Let me stress that the countries of the European Unionwill be responsiblefor this war. The Kurdish people must know that Europe is responsible for this war” he added. Brussels stressed that the E.U. had, indeed, named the PKK and that KADEK was not on the black list because “it has only been in existence for a few days”.
The terrorist list drawn up on 27 December 2001,, after the 11 September attacks on the World Trade Centre, was updated to align it with that of the United States, in preparation for a US/EU Summit next Thursday in Washington. The summit will bring together President Bush, the European Commission President, Romano Prodi, and Spanish Premier Jose Maria Aznar who is currently filling the rotating Presidence of the E.U. It promises to be one of the tensest of recent years, despite close cooperation in the struggle against terrorism since 11 September.
The Turkish press greeted the placing of the PKK and DHKP-C on the E.U.’s terrorist list, calling on the Turkish government to accelerate the reforms required for E.U. membership — in particular the abolition of the death penalty, “The assassins are on the list” of the European Union, headlined the mass circulation daily Hurriyet. “The EU has finally corrected its mistake. The PKK and DHKP-C are on its list of terrorist organisations” headlined, for its part the popular daily Sabah that points out, in its editorial, that “Turkey must accelerateits reforms to open negotiations for membership. Capital punishment blocks Turkey’s way”. The editorial of the liberal daily Radikal, for its part, recalls that Turkey is the only member country of the Council of Europe that has retained the death penalty amongst its laws. “It is now up to Turkey to act. Capital Punishment and education in a language other than Turkish (Kurdish) must now be put on the agenda” of the government and Prime Minister Bülent Ecevit, it wrote
The terrorist list now carries 27 names, mostly of individuals, neartly all active in the Basque armed organisation ETA or of its political arm Batasuna, but also of organisations, of which ETA, the armed wing of the Palestinian Hamas and Islamic Jihad, somes Greek armed groups, The Irish Republican Army (IRA — not on the US list …) and a number of Northern Irish Protestant armed groups.
According to the Turkish press (cf. NTV of 6/5/02 and Milliyet 7/5/02) Ankara is preparing to submit to the United States and the European Union a detailed report on 17 organisations in Europe suspected by the Turkish authorities of “supporting the PKK”. Amongst the organisations cited are none other than “Médecin sans frontière”, that received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1999, “Reporters sans frontières” which, during its latest campaign had describede the Turkish Armed Forces Chief of Staff, Huseyin Kivrikoglu as an “enemy of freedom of the Press” the “Fondation France-Libertés”, the “World Federation of United-Cities” the Danish Helsinki Committee, public figures, members of parliament and many Kurdish organisations.
The information, originating fromthe Turkish Intelligence Services, points out that Turkey will launch a diplomatic offensive to demand “a stop to support for the PKK or for KADEK” by the organisations cited. The report in question will pinpoint some 450 organisations in Europe, described as “organs or supporters of the PKK” and demand that they be closed down.
The European Union, which has long remained blind to Turkish State terrorism, guilty of the destruction of over 4,000 Kurdish villages, the assassination 4,500 civilians by the security forces’ death squads on suspicion of “Kurdish nationalism” had, a few days ago, to please Ankara and Washington, placed on its terrorist black list, a PKK that gave up armed struggle in Turkey and all forms of violent action in Europe three years ago. Evidently that is not enough for Ankara, that wants to extend its conception of terrorism and of support for terrorism to the European Union by incriminating major European Human Rights organisations. If, despite all its efforts, the European Union does not succeed in Europeanising Turkey, it is to be feared that, in the present climate of security mania, Ankara may succeed by gradually Turkising its European partners…
The switchback evolution of the turkish political caste inits relations with the European Union resembles, in its contradictory movement the famous Turkish March (Mehter) in which the Janissaries took one step forward and two steps back to give the impression that they were moving. Thus, on the one hand, the Turkish Army is said to be ready to accept the abolition of the death sentence on condition that Parliament passes a law ensuring that the chief of the ex-PKK can never be released from prison.
Thus the Turkish daily, Hurriyet, announced that the Turkish Army had come out in favour of abolition on its front page withn the headline “This courageous step came from the Army”. The paper explained that, while the Turkish Prime was trying to get his main coalition partner, Devlet Bahçeli (head or the neo-fascist National Action Party) to take this “courageous step”, it was the Turkish Army that decided to break the silence on this subject by coming out in favourof abolition and for suppression of any possibility of an amnesty. The Turkish Army, which till now had publicly declared that, being “directly involved” it could not take sides in the matter, is said, by the paper, to have opted for a formula that would abolish the death penalty and replace it by life imprisonment without any possibility of conditional freedom or amnesty. The Army general who made this statement, still anonymous, stressed that the sensitivity of public opinion regarding the fate of Abdullah Ocalan should be taken into account and thus “apply the same fate as that of Rudolph Hess” to him.
On an official visit to China, Devlet Bahçeli, for his part, adopted a tougher line, stating from Pekin on 28 May, that whatever the decision of the European Human Rights Court might be on the Ocalan case, it should be rapidly put before the Turkish Parliament for it to decide. In reply to Bülent Ecevit, who had declared “I am waiting for a courageous step by Bahçeli on the question of the European Union” Bahçeli retorted that he had five conditions for the European Union : the transfer of Abdullah Ocalan to a type-F prison, the transfer of is case to the Turkish Parliament, the inclusion of KADEK (the ex-PKK, now Congress for Freedom and Deocracy in Kurdistan) on the ist of terrorist organisations, the capitulation of the leaders of that organisation and a public and convincing declaration by those leaders about the ending of terrorism and their loyalty to the Turkish Constitution. D. Bahçeli stated that it was only under those conditions that he would consider broadening the area of democracy and civic rights and freedoms.
The opinion of the influential Turkish Army is, however, likely to soften the attitude of the Turkish Right. Thus Tansu Çiller, head of the True Path Party (DYP) and former Prime Minister, who has hitherto displayed a very hard line on the subject to catch votes from the MHP’s electorate, has done an about turn by declaring that if the choice was “between Apo and the E.U. , we would chose the E.U.”
For its part, on 29 May, the powerful Turkish employers organisation TUSAID called on the government to abolish “as soon as possible” the death sentence and to grant cultural rights to the Kurds so as to be able to open negotiations with the European Union.
“The political parties and Parliament must face their responsibilities in this project, vital to the country’s future and do what is necessary in the way of joining the European Union” stressed this influential organisation. It indicated that reforms to conform to the Copenhagen criteria on Human Rights, in particdular the complete abolition of the death sentence and both teaching and a television in the Kurdish language must be passed as soon as possible.
The organisation considers that if Turkey does not carry out these reforms, the Fifteen will not set any date for starting negotiations for membership, demanded with such insistance by Ankara. “We will then be overtaken by other candidate countries and be left on our own” stresses TUSAID. It considers that the uncertainty with which Turkey would then be faced wouild considerably complicate the task of acheiving its economic objectives, a reference to the serious economic crisis that it has been going through since February 2001, despite massive aid from the IMF and the World Bank.
However, on 15 May, the Turkish Parliament adopted a very controversial Bill introducing penalties for propagating false information over the Internet and increasing the penalties for breaches of the existing legislation covering radio and television. Widely opposed in Turkey, particularly by the Turkish President, by half of Parliament, the journalists’ professional organisations as well as the local media and ONGs, who denounce the law’s encouragement of monopoly and its serious violations of freedom of the press, the Bill was adopted after a ten hour long stormy debate in the course of which government and opposition M.P.s almost came to blows. If the 292 M.P.s present (out of 550), 202 voted in favour, 87 against and 4 abstained.
President Ahmet Necdet Sezer had vetoed this law in June 2001, on the grounds that it was contrary to the democratic standards that Turkey had undertaken to observe, as part of its application to join the European Union, and also that it opened the way to political interference and to the formation of monopolies and cartels.
The new Act stipulates that spreading false information over the Internet will henceforth be punishable by fines that could go up to 100 billion Turkish lire (about $72,000 US). The authorities will no longer be able to suspend radio and TV networks or chanels, hitherto a frequent practice, and the media supervisory body, RTUK, will only ask them to apologise. But RTUK will be able to cancel the licences of networks that crticise “the unity of Turkey” and spread “subversive and separatist propaganda”.
Moreover, the new law represses the spreading of any information that would provoke “despair or demoralisation” — a vague concept that would certainly hit the local press that is already hard pressed. Especially as the authority charged with defining “the strategic framework” of audiovisual broadcasting (which also includes Internet) will be a High Council for Information, led by the Prime Minister and a Secretary of State to be appointed by the latter and consisting not only of the Ministers of the Interior and of Communications but also of the General Secretary of the notorious National Security Council (MGK) and the Director of Electronic Communications of the Turkish Armed Forces’ General Staff.
The new Act also states that broadcasting can be “in Turkish but also in all the universal languages” (by implication the UNO official languages ?) — a formula that eliminates Kurdish, which does not exist in the eyes of the Turkish authorities (or else is regarded as just a number of local dialects), although it is spoken by over 30 million Kurds and is used in the media, the schools and the Universities of Iraqi Kurdistan as well as Iranian radio and television.
Jean-Christophe Flori, spokesman for Gunter Verheugen, the European Commissioner for enlargement, stated, on the same day, that this law “was not in conformity with the Copenhagen criteria” and that “the Turkish Parliament should immediately revise it”.
Created in 1994, the High Audiovisual Council (RTUK) has suspended hundreds of radio and TV networks, both national and local. Since the end of the State monopoly in 1990, radio and TV stations have multiplied in Turkey, where, today, there are 13 national and 200 local TV stations and about 2,500 radio stations. Reporters sans Frontières recalls, moreover, that RTUK maintains a strict control over the audiovisual media. Though the majority of the RTUK’s radio and TV network suspensions have not been for political reasons, the length of the suspensions are particularly long in the more political cases. They can be as long as a year’s suspension for broadcasting Kurdish music or for “calling into question the Constitutional order”. These latter cases, indeed, are often referred to the RTUK by the military authorities…
Although the Dicle court had dismissed a similar case the day before, an Izmir Public Prosecutor launched proceedings against nine other Kurdish families in Izmir, accused of having given Kurdish first names to their children. The incriminated names are Zozan (Summer pasture), Medroj (Medes Sun), Rojhat (Dawn), Siyar (Awake) and Baran (Rain) — though the last two are commonly used by Turks as well as by Kurds. At a time when the European Union is requiring that Turkey start serious reforms to respect Kurdish cultural rights, the Public prosecutor describes the giving of Kurdish first names to children as acts of “civil disobedience”.
As part of the series of Kurdish name hunts, the Turkish press announced that another family in Ardahan as well as the registryn office responsible for accepting the name, have been taken to court for registering the Kurdish name Beivan (Milkmaid). The case is all the more farcical in that Berivan is the name of one of the most popular Turkish television series…
“While talking about the Copenhagen criteria, we are regressing to the point of suing our centuries old first names. I’m sorry for the European Union. It seems that they are going to accept us amongst them. What use will these hard heads be tom Europe ? They’ll simply disturb the peace of those poor people” wrote Fatih Altayli on 30 May in his daily column.
• THE TURKISH CONSTITUTIONAL COURT INVALIDATES A NEW AMNESTY LAW PASSED BY PARLIAMENT DESPITE THE PRESIDENT’S VETO. On 21 May, ignoring a first Presidential veto, the Turkish Parliament had voted a amnesty law which would have benefitted Mehmet Ali Agça, the author of the failed attempt to assassinate Pope John-Paul II in 1981 but which, once again, excluded those sentenced for State crimes such as the Kurdish fighters, the extreme leftists, but also, more broadly political prisoners such as the the Kurdish ex-Members of Parliament, journalists or writers jailed for their opinions.
President Ahmet Necdet Sezer had referred the matter to the Constitutional Court on 23 May, arguing that under this law, reductions in sentences would not be decided on the basis a prisoner’s behaviour and that the law did not have the three fifths majority required, in his view, for what was a special amnesty.
More than 40,000 detainees in Turkey have been freed by amnesty since 2000. Some 11,500 murderers, 11,300 thieves and bandids, 1,100 persons jailed for sexual offenses have thus recoivered their freedom since 2000, when Turkey passed a lw reducing sentences by 10 years.
Incidentally, a communiqué published on 29 May announced the end of the hunger strike launched in the Turkish prisons on 20 October 2000 to protest against he conditions of detention and the transfers od prisoners to Type-F prisons.
• A TURKISH GENERAL SENT TO IRAQI KURDISTAN TO MEET THE KURDISH LEADERS. According to the Kurdish daily Hawlati (Citizen) of 20 May, General Nevzat Bakiroglu, commanding the Turkish Special Forces, was said to be visiting Kurdistan. He is said to have met Massoud Barzani at Salahaddin on an unspecified date and was lated received by Jalal Talabani in Suleimaniah on 17 May.
According to a local souce, Turkey is said to have sent its highest ranking official in the region, following the recent meeting between the two Kurdish leaders and Western and American leaders. According to Free Iraq Radio, Massoud Barzani has refused several invitations from the Turkish government recently. The Turks are also irritated by the fact that the two Kurdish leaders did not transit through Turkey for consultation with them before leaving for Europe.
• THE BANNING OF HADEP “WILL BE A SERIOUS SETBACK FOR RELATIONS BETWEEN THE E.U. AND TURKEY” WARNS THE E.U. DELEGATION TO TURKEY. A delegation of seven members of the E.U., led by Joost Lagendijk of Holland, visited Turkey on 9 May for three days to examine the situation of the People’s Democratic Party (HADEP). At a Press Conference on 10 May, Joost Lagendijk stated “If HADEP were closed down, it would be a serious setback to relations between the E.U. and Turkey”.
HADEP is threatened with a banning order for “organic links” with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) recently added to the European Union’s list of terrorist organisations. Mr. Lagendijk stressed that the Turkish authorities have not been able to supply the delegation with any “concrete evidence” of any link between that party and the PKK. “Our conclusion is that HADEP is an independent political party that defends the interests and rights of the Kurds by non-violent means” he declared.
The Dutch M.P. pressed the Turkish Authorities to abstain from all and any action against legal Kurdish groups following the E.U.’s acceptance of the PKK as a terrorist organisation. “We are insisting to the Turkish authorities that they avoid taking advantage of our inclusion of the PKK on the list of terrorist organisation to repress legal organisations and parties of Kurdish origin” he stressed.
• THE TURKISH PARLIAMENT HAS ENACTED A LAW THAT VIOLATES EUROPEAN STANDARDS , IGNORES THE KURDS AND REPRESSES “ATTACKS ON THE NATION’S MORALE”. On 15 May, the Turkish Parliament adopted a very controversial Bill introducing penalties for propagating false information over the Internet and increasing the penalties for breaches of the existing legislation covering radio and television. Widely opposed in Turkey, particularly by the Turkish President, by half of Parliament, the journalists’ professional organisations as well as the local media and ONGs, who denounce the law’s encouragement of monopoly and its serious violations of freedom of the press, the Bill was adopted after a ten hour long stormy debate in the course of which government and opposition M.P.s almost came to blows. If the 292 M.P.s present (out of 550), 202 voted in favour, 87 against and 4 abstained.
President Ahmet Necdet Sezer had vetoed this law in June 2001, on the grounds that it was contrary to the democratic standards that Turkey had undertaken to observe, as part of its application to join the European Union, and also that it opened the way to political interference and to the formation of monopolies and cartels.
The new Act stipulates that spreading false information over the Internet will henceforth be punishable by fines that could go up to 100 billion Turkish lire (about $72,000 US). The authorities will no longer be able to suspend radio and TV networks or chanels, hitherto a frequent practice, and the media supervisory body, RTUK, will only ask them to apologise. But RTUK will be able to cancel the licences of networks that crticise “the unity of Turkey” and spread “subversive and separatist propaganda”.
Moreover, the new law represses the spreading of any information that would provoke “despair or demoralisation” — a vague concept that would certainly hit the local press that is already hard pressed. Especially as the authority charged with defining “the strategic framework” of audiovisual broadcasting (which also includes Internet) will be a High Council for Information, led by the Prime Minister and a Secretary of State to be appointed by the latter and consisting not only of the Ministers of the Interior and of Communications but also of the General Secretary of the notorious National Security Council (MGK) and the Director of Electronic Communications of the Turkish Armed Forces’ General Staff.
The new Act also states that broadcasting can be “in Turkish but also in all the universal languages” (by implication the UNO official languages ?) — a formula that eliminates Kurdish, which does not exist in the eyes of the Turkish authorities (or else is regarded as just a number of local dialects), although it is spoken by over 30 million Kurds and is used in the media, the schools and the Universities of Iraqi Kurdistan as well as Iranian radio and television.
Jean-Christophe Flori, spokesman for Gunter Verheugen, the European Commissioner for enlargement, stated, on the same day, that this law “was not in conformity with the Copenhagen criteria” and that “the Turkish Parliament should immediately revise it”.
Created in 1994, the High Audiovisual Council (RTUK) has suspended hundreds of radio and TV networks, both national and local. Since the end of the State monopoly in 1990, radio and TV stations have multiplied in Turkey, where, today, there are 13 national and 200 local TV stations and about 2,500 radio stations. Reporters sans Frontières recalls, moreover, that RTUK maintains a strict control over the audiovisual media. Though the majority of the RTUK’s radio and TV network suspensions have not been for political reasons, the length of the suspensions are particularly long in the more political cases. They can be as long as a year’s suspension for broadcasting Kurdish music or for “calling into question the Constitutional order”. These latter cases, indeed, are often referred to the RTUK by the military authorities…
• THE TURKISH ARMY LAUNCHES A VAST LAND AND AIR OPERATION AT DERSIM. In a communique dated 14 May, the Turkish authorities announced that the Turkish Army had launched an opperation with air support in the Kurdish region of Dersim (Tunceli) to “destroy the caches of the Kurdish rebels of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK)”. The operation is taking place in the mountainous Alibogazi region, about 55 Km West of the city of Tunceli, the Procincial Governor’s Office stated.
“During the operations, mortars and helicopter gunships will be used, if neccessary, to strengthen the firepower of the land forces” the communiqué added, without giving any details of dates or of the number of troops engaged. Civilians have been forbidden access to the region for fear “of the presence of unexploded munitions and mines laid by the PKK terrorists” or that they might be taken as targets by the Army, in error, the communiqué continued.
The PKK, that recently changed its name to call itself Congress for Freedomand Democracy in Kurdistan (KADEK) stopped fighting in 1999, at the call of its chief Abdullah Ocalan, sentenced to death in Turkey for “treason and seperatism”. But the Turkish Army rejected their unilateral cease fire and promised to hunt them down to the last man.
• MAY DAY IN TURKEY: BANNED IN KURDISH TOWNS, BUT NO INCIDENTS REPORTED IN ANKARA AND ISTANBUL. The 1st May demonstrations in Turkey were banned in several Kurdish provinces, where thirty arrests are reported, but took place before a massive police turn-out in Ankara and Istanbul, where some 15,000 police were deployed. There were no incidents reported, and thousands of demonstrators assembled in the squares designated in advance by the authorities. The slogans centred on the serious economic crisis facing the country, but alos the Israelo-Palestine conflict, the Kurdish question and gay rights.
In Diyarbekir, the politico-cultural capital of Turkish Kurdistan, the police rapidly smothered attempts to assemble and ten people were arrested, according to police souces.
In Tunceli (Dersim) another ùkurdish city, there were clashes between police and 1,500 demonstrators. About twenty people were arrested, including the local leader of the pro-Kurdish HADEP party, Alican Unlu, after having attempted to make a public statement.
Diyarbekir and Tunceli are amongst the many provinces whose population is mainly Kurdish, where demonstrations are banned in the context of the state of emergency decreed in1987.
• TWO KURDISH REFUGEES FROM THE SANGATTE REFUGEE CENTRE VICTIMS OF A “PUNITIVE EXPEDITION” BY YOUTHS OF THE REGION. Three young men, aged between 24 and 25, from the Boulogne area, who had fired on and wounded two Kurdish refugees from the Sangatte Red Cross Refugee Centre, near Calais, were detained on 1st May for questioning on charges of attempted murder. Armed with .22 LR carbines, they had organised, on the evening of 29 April, a “punitive and xenophobic expedition against refugees with whom they said they had quarreled a fortnight earlier” explained Gérald Lesigne, the Public Prosecutor of Boulogne. The three young men then targetted refugees, wounding two Iraqi Kurds with their bullets. The first was hit in the foot while in the centre of Calais town, the second waqs seriously injuredmin the back while walking near Sangatte town hall. The agressors had already organised an first punitive expedition that had been interrupted by the police a week earlier.
This is the first time that such serious incidents have occured between refugees from the Sangatte Red Cross Centre and inhabitants of the Calais coastal area. Last summer a guard had fired on and wounded a refugee during an assault by a dozen illegal immigrants trying to enter the railways site at Frethun (Chanel Tunnel), near Calais. The guard, who was not authorised to carry weapons, explained that he had panicked.
The Sangatte Centre, opened in September 1999, at present houses 1,400 people, mainly Iraqi Kurds and Afghans, who are trying to enter Great Britain illegally, via the Chanel Tunnel. On 15 April, a regugee (a young Iraqi Kurd) died in a riot inside the centre.
• HOW THE TURKS TAKE REVENGE ON THEIR EUROPEAN ENEMIES. Bekir Coskun, a journalist on the staff of the daily Hurriyet, denounces with a caustic pen the preservation and encouragement of the warlike spitit cultivated by the Turkish authorities who re-enact the war of independence in nearly all the large towns, in which the very poorly paid municipal employees are dressed up as the enemy and beaten up. Here are extensive extracts from his article, published on 16 May :
“I am familiar with Independence Day celebrations. The municipal street sweepers are dressed up as “enemy French soldiers” in a sort of very cheap sky blue uniform looking like a cross between a boiler suit and a pair of baggy trousers.
According to hearsay, it is the tailor who sewed them who deals the first blows, then the hattter … the boot-maker etc.
Then the daily of celebration arrives.
The towns big wigs, dressed up as Turkish soldiers, line up with their swords, riding boots, and binoculars and the municipal employees, dressed up as enemies … begin to tremble. And war begins.
The enomy soldiers, in their cheap blue uniforms, appear, the commentator cries out into the microphone “dirty enemy bastards” which is taken up in chorus by the spectators on the grand stands … Then the Turkish soldiers advance, firing in the air, and all those of the spectators who can, approach the municipal streesweepers and beat them with sticks and kicks.
At last the ANAP group has proposed a Bill to ban the beating up of the “enemy soldiers” during the Independence Day celebrations…
When the former occupation forces, French, Italian or British, come to Turkey today, they try belly dancing. So why must we continue to beat up our municipal workers dressed up as enemies ? Why do you beat them up ? …”
• REPORT FROM DIYARBEKIR: IN THE FOOTBALL STADIUM “ONE OF THE STANDS SHOUTS “KINE EM ?” (WHO ARE WE) AND THE OTHER REPLIES “KURDIN EM !” (WE ARE KURDS)”. As an early Turkish General Election appears increasingly probable, the Turkish journalist Hasan Cemal is trying to feel the pulse of society through a series of reports being published in the Turkish daily Milliyet. After visiting some towns in the West, here he is on 28 May in Diyarbekir where his first assessment is clearly made in the headline “Diyarbekir is determined. There is no indecision in Diyarbekir ! There is only one political reality here — it’s HADEP!” Here are extensive extracts from the report he devoted to Diyarbekir, published over 28 and 29 May :
“Heads were confused in the nine towns I’ve just visited across Anatolia. That is not the case in Diyarbekir. There is no indecision in thisa town : the People’s Democratic Party (HADEP). They’ll all vote for this party like soldiers because they consider HADEP as their party, as the party that faces up to the State.
HADEP secures the majoritym of votes, but as it does not pass the national threshold of 10% it is not represented in Parliament. Diyarbekir is the very incarnation of this fact. HADEP won 46% of the votes in the 1999 General Elections in this town — 187,000 votes. But not a single Member of Parliament.
As against that the Virtue Party (Fazilet — Islamist) has 4 M.P.s withonly 59,000 votes, the Motherland Party (ANAP) and the True Path Party (DYP), with 45,000 votes each have 3 M.P.s each and the Democratic Left Party (Editor’s note: the Prime Minister’s Party — ultra nationalist) with 20,000 votes has 1 MP for Diyarbekir. Note that all four of those parties together only got 170,000 votes while HADEP, which has more than all four of them doesn’t have a single member in parliament. Is this acceptable ? Here is a proverb about election systems “Justice in representatrion, stability in administration !” Àthere is no justice in this…
HADEP criticises the injustice of which it is victim. “This policy must be abandonned. It is to no one’s advantage. At first on the pretext of terrorism there was a rejection. But today there is nothing of the sort. I am against violence, so let us engage in politics”.
What then will HADEP do in this situation ?
A retired teacher said : “I’ll vote HADEP! Its a reaction, not because I have any hope”. Another adds “I expect neither services not democracy. I’ll vote HADEP to prove that I exist…”. Yet another reactionPWe want the State to sent people here who have a cleaner police record, we want HADEP to cease to be excluded, because exclusion from the politica l sceneleads to radicalisation”. Someone pursues “Herethere is HADEP and then Tayip [Editor’s Note : Recep Tayip, leader of the Islamist Justice and Development Party (AK)].
Yilmaz’s statement “the road into Europe passes through Diyarbekir” attracted many people, but they also questioned his credibility and real determination : “The European Union is our common desire… We should join it so that, all together, we can be treated as first class people” retorted one of these men. In the blacksmith’s street, I was told “We need peace and quiet. I want democracy and freedom. When I go to the West I feel like another man. I feel well. You can’t do things by just plasterinmg over the cracks” then adding “They talk about the European Union, but they ban Kurdish. When Turkish was banned in Bulgaria we moved heaven and earth. But here, my brother, Kurdish is still banned”.
The HADEP mayor of Diyarbekir, Feridun Çelik, won 104,000 votes in 1999. He was elected mayor with 62.5% of the votes. Cabbar Leygara, HADEP mayor of Baglar district, for his part, was elected with 71% of the votes… Both pointed out that HADEP, in fact, represents even more and particularly criticised the pressures exerted in the rural areas.
Feridun Çelik describes the fact that HADEP has no representatives in the Turkish Parliament despite winning 46% of the votesin the 1999 elections as a “great injustice”. “The choice of the electors should be respected. That is a clear definate reality that must be accepted. How can you ignore HADEP? The whole population of a region gives its votes to a party but, inthe end, has no representation in Parliament. Won’t this exclusion still further reinforce inequality ?” he asked. Cabbar Leygara continued : “No one asks anything of our Members of Parliament. All come to see us and say that they have chosen us. They ask whenj will their children be able to come down from the mountains ? When will they come out of prison ? When will there be an amnesty ? When will they be able to return to their villages? They tell us that is what they elected us for”. The mayor of Diyarbekir asks himself “Where can they go with their rejection ?”. He adds that their relations with the civillian bureaucracy are easier than three years ago … but the distance with the military bureqaucracy continues…
F. Çelik also stresses that “Leyla (Zana) and her colleagues do not deserve to be jailed for 11 years. All the murderers are free … thanks to the amnesties, but they are still in jail. If they were to be freed they would have a great influence on the population that elected them…”
Feridun Çelik pointed out that for the last few years there had been no clashes in the region but “there are still no good policies applied”. He would like the authorities to stop accusing any democratic demands of “separatism”: “The abolition of the death sentence, education in Kurdish, audiovisual broadcasting in Kurdish are all proposals made by President Sezer. Ecevit says the same. So does Yilmaz. Tayyip too. But they say it in Ankara. If we were to say it here in Diyarbekir we would be charged under the State of Emergency regulations”. He continued with an example : “Last week the Prefect’s Office sent us a note the evening before the inauguration of a cultural and artistic festival. It stated that, if there were any slogans shouted against the death penalty, for the return to the villages or for education in Kurdish, the festival would be cancelled. If leaders in Ankara make such proposals there is no reaction — but if it’s us, it becomes a legal offence”.
The HADEP party leader in Diyarbekir, Ali Urkut, declared : “Diyarbekir is, today, a civil society graveyard. So many organisation s are banned”.
Diyarbekirsport — football is an important subject in the town. “At first they tried to use football as a means of depoliticisation … against HADEP, but it didn’t work. Society even politicised football. Quite naturally … One of the stands shouts “Kine em ? (Who are we ?)” and the other replies “Kurdin em ! (We are Kurds !)” Feridun told us.
