Violations of the Lausanne Treaty by turkey.

[Heat]

IMVROS and TENEDOS

Imvros and Tenedos are two small islands in Northern Aegean Sea between Greece and Turkey, strategically located outside the Straits of the Dardanelles, the only communication between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. In 1923, after the end of a war between Greece and Turkey, the two countries signed the Treaty of Lausanne, which, among other things, provided for the handing over of these two islands to Turkey, even though at that time they were under the control of Greece and their population had always been exclusively Greek. The reason for such provision was purely geopolitical, i.e. to secure control of the Straits by Turkey. In exchange the Treaty (article 14 and articles 37-44 of the 3rd section) provided for a special administrative status of the islands that guaranteed protection of life and property, free use of the native language (Greek), religious freedom, and generally all human rights. These articles of the Treaty were considered "Basic Laws", which, it was agreed, Turkey would have no right to abrogate through any other law, regulation or administrative act.

See how Turkey "honored" its signature regarding these two islands.

The same concern pertains as to how the provisions of the Treaty about the Greek community of Constantinople (Istanbul) were violated by Turkey, but this should become the subject of another discussion. In any case, we believe that the following should be known by all people concerned with human rights and rights of minorities, about the condition of the native population in these two islands.

(1) In September of 1923, immediately after the islands were handed over to Turkey, article 14 was violated by the appointment of a Turkish governor instead of a governor from the local Greek population, as the Treaty clearly provided for. In violation of the same article, control of the police, courts, customs, and port authorities, came under the Turks.

(2) Sixty four lawyers, doctors, teachers, and merchants were characterized as "collaborators of the (previous) Greek regime" and proclaimed "undesirables". An additional 1500 persons were denied return to their homes because they had abandoned the islands before September 1923 (a violation of the 15th protocol regarding amnesty, attached to the Treaty).

(3) In 1927 a new law was voted in the Turkish Parliament (Law 1151), that made official the previous administrative measures, despite the statements in the Treaty that no law could override its provisions.

(4) During World War II, a property tax (the notorious Varlik kanunu ) was imposed, which called for taxes arbitrarily fixed at many times above the total worth of the property of the islanders, in an obvious attempt to financially ruin the population (violation of articles 39 and 40).

(5) At the same time, real estate properties of Christian monasteries, which offered sustenance to many families, were confiscated and given to ethnic Turks brought over from the eastern parts of Turkey; very quickly these newcomers leveled down the churches and other buildings of the monasteries in violation of articles 38, 39, 40, and 42 of the Treaty.

(6) Men of the islands between the ages of 20-40 were at that time conscripted in the Turkish Army and sent to the infamous "labor battalions" (amele taburu), where they were subjected to forced labor in the harsh winter conditions of the mountains of Eastern Turkey and Kurdistan (violation of articles 39 and 40).

(7) The bishop of the islands and the leaders of the local communities were arrested and exiled to Anatolia (eastern Turkey), thus leaving the local population leaderless (violation of articles 38, 39 and 40).

(8) In 1964 the Turkish authorities confiscated the school buildings of the local community (kindergarten, grammar school and high school) together with their furniture, libraries and teaching equipment. The teachers were fired and were not even allowed to get a job in the minority schools in Constantinople. Teaching the Greek language was not allowed even at home and the Greek children were forced to learn only Turkish (violation of articles 38, 39, 40, 41 and 42).

(9) In 1964 the Turkish Parliament voted Law 6830 "on land expropriation" , that according to its Article 5 gave the right to the "designated civil authorities to expropriate land, without being limited by any previous legal arrangements, and to adjust the amount of compensation according to their own subjective judgment". Eventually about 98% of all fertile and arable land was expropriated at prices equivalent to the worth of a basket of eggs in the local market, thus having been confiscated for all intents and purposes. In 1964 about 6,150 acres of arable land was owned by the Greek inhabitants of the islands. In 1990, after all these virtual confiscations only 16 acres were left in their hands. On top of that, pastures, that traditionally had been used for sheep grazing, were characterized as "forested" or "about to be reforested" state lands, on which the local people no longer had the right to bring their flocks. Thus the people, mostly farmers and shepherds, were deprived of their farms, olive groves, vineyards, orchards and pastures. Next to these measures, the few remaining water sources next to the villages were diverted toward army barracks or state-owned farms taking away from the locals even the ability to cultivate the little gardens in their yards. And, finally, together with the land, the authorities confiscated any farmhouses and any other installations in the farming areas, and prohibited even the passage of the former owners through those areas (violation of articles 38, 39, 40 and 42).

(10) "Open farm prisons" (agir ceza) were created on Imvros, where some of the worst inmates from other prisons of the country were transferred. These criminals were allowed to freely roam the island, terrorize, loot, rape and murder the people of the islands (violation of articles 38, 39, 40 and 42).

(11) An army regiment was moved to the islands and the soldiers were allowed to destroy farmhouses and country chapels, to rob, beat, rape and murder local people. Military outposts were installed within inhabited areas and did the same things there (violation of articles 38, 39, 40, 42).

(12) A teachers' college/boarding house was founded for 800 students transferred there from mainland Turkey; the main "teaching courses" had to do with terrorizing the local population and raping local women (violation of articles 38, 39 and 42).

(13) Out of 262 country chapels of Imvros, 248 were desecrated and looted and are now used as stables, army outposts, warehouses and latrines, or were demolished and the building materials used to make army barracks and prisons.

The historical cathedral in the village of Kastro (dated from the 16th century) was put on fire and its ruins are now used as a stable. The people of the island were not allowed to repair the cathedral even at their own expense (violations of articles 38, 40, 42 of the Treaty).

(14) On the night of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus (July 1974) all the inhabitants of the village of Kastro were forced to abandon their houses. Then the cemetery of the village was desecrated and the bones of the dead were scattered into the ravine next to the village (violation of articles 38, 39, 40 42).

(15) The Imvrians and Tenedians that lived abroad were stripped of their Turkish citizenship, thus losing their "civil rights" and the ability to return to their ancestral homes (violation of articles 38, 39, 40).

(16) Soon this officially tolerated terror reached the point of murders of local people. In September 1973 freely wandering prison inmates assassinated Stelios Kavalleros, a merchant from the village of Panaghia. His mutilated body was found by his neighbors in the bottom of a well.

In the summer of 1977, Styliani Zouni, a mother of two young children, was raped and then murdered by a Turkish soldier in the village of Aghioi Theodoroi.

In July of 1980, George Viglis from the village of Schinoudi was tortured and murdered by prison inmates in his farmhouse.

In 1983 two more Imvrians, Eustratios Stylianides and Nicholas Ladas were assassinated by settlers from mainland Turkey, the former in the village of Schinoudi and the latter in the village of Panaghia.

In November of 1990 Zaphiris Deliconstantis, the mayor of the village of Glyky, was assassinated by a Turkish immigrant.

Of all these assassins none has been arrested or convicted so far (violation of articles 38, 39, 40).

(17) The ethnic composition of the islands' population was forcibly altered through the mandatory settling of ethnic Turks from the mainland. Such people were brought to the islands, were given state subsidies, and were housed in complexes built specifically for them, or in the houses of Greeks forcibly taken away from their previous owners. The lands and property confiscated from the Greek native population were also handed out to these settlers (violations of articles 14, 39, 40).

As a consequence of all these and other acts of commission or omission by the Government of the Turkish Republic, the Greek Imvrians and Tenedians were forced to desert their hearths, where their ancestors had lived for more than 3,000 years, and to scatter as refugees all over the world. In 1960, according to the official census there were 5,487 Greeks and 289 Turks in Imvros. Today there are 300 Greeks and 7,900 Turks on that island. Less than 50 Greeks remain in Tenedos.

[Heat]

The State Department’s Disrespect for and Violations of the Rule of Law

Op-Ed
9-27-05
The State Department’s Disrespect for and Violations of the Rule of Law
By Gene Rossides

I take no pleasure in writing this article which indicts the State Department as a lawless institution regarding U.S. relations with Turkey, Greece and Cyprus.

The facts are clear and not in dispute. The list of actions and inactions by the State Department in violation of the rule of law in U.S. relations with Turkey, Greece and Cyprus is as follows:

Aegean Sea Boundary

Turkey has made claim to one-half of the Aegean Sea and refuses to take its claim to the International Court of Justice at the Hague for a binding ruling. The U.S. has refused repeated requests by the American Hellenic Institute to publicly state that it accepts as final the treaty-defined demarcation of the maritime border between Greece and Turkey in the Aegean Sea.

The relevant agreements are the Lausanne Treaty of 1923, the Italy-Turkey Convention of January 4, 1932, the Italy-Turkey Protocol of December 28, 1932 and the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty, under which the Dodecanese Islands and adjacent islets were ceded by Italy to Greece.

The U.S. is a signatory to the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty and is obligated by U.S. law to carry out its provisions. The State Department has refused to publicly declare what the law is. It should do so now. The U.S. should also vigorously repudiate any challenge to the treaty-defined boundary and should urge Turkey to submit its claim to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

In the January 1996 Imia islet crisis the Clinton administration succeeded in preventing an armed clash between Greece and Turkey. President Clinton and Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke were the key actors. However, after the crisis they refused to state publicly what the Aegean Sea boundary was under the relevant treaties and that the Imia islet was sovereign Greek territory.

Aegean Sea airspace

Turkey for decades has violated Greek airspace in the Aegean Sea and the U.S. State Department has stood silent and has refused to state what international law and agreements provide. This dangerous situation persists today because of Turkey’s illegal conduct and the State Department’s refusal to act to uphold the law.

Cyprus

On July 20, 1974, Turkey invaded the Republic of Cyprus with the illegal use of U.S.-supplied arms and equipment in violation of the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, the UN Charter article 2 (4), the preamble and article 1 of the NATO Treaty and customary international law. Turkey occupied about four percent of Cyprus during the initial phase of its invasion. Turkish pilots flying American planes dropped American-made bombs (including napalm bombs), terrorizing and killing innocent Greek Cypriot civilians in Nicosia, Famagusta, Kyrenia, and elsewhere.

Turkey’s invasion had the support and encouragement of then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger who knew in advance Turkey planned to invade Cyprus and refused to use the U.S. Sixth Fleet or otherwise act to prevent the invasion, as requested by U.S. Ambassador to Greece, Henry Tasca. Kissinger refused to denounce Turkey's aggression, as Britain and most other nations did. He refused to enforce U.S. laws requiring an immediate halt in U.S. arms to Turkey, though he had the statutory obligation to do so. He also violated his oath of office by failing to do so.

On August 14, 1974, three weeks after the legitimate government of Cyprus was restored, Turkey launched the second phase of its invasion of Cyprus. This was also encouraged by the State Department. The day before Kissinger had authorized a statement by the State Department's spokesman, Ambassador Robert Anderson, that the Turkish Cypriots needed more protection. The State Department failed to denounce the second phase of Turkey’s aggression and failed to uphold U.S. laws requiring an immediate halt in U.S.- supplied arms.

In the second phase of the aggression, Turkey grabbed another 33 percent of the island, expanding its land grab to a total of 37.3 percent of Cyprus’s sovereign territory, killed innocent civilians, raped women from the ages of 12-71, forced 180,000 Greek Cypriots from their homes and property and committed massive destruction of property including churches. The European Commission on Human Rights issued a report on July 10, 1976 on the charges made in two applications by the Cyprus government. In the report the Commission found Turkey guilty of violating the following articles of the European Convention on Human Rights:

(1) Article 2 – by the killing of innocent civilians committed on a substantial scale;
(2) Article 3 – by the rape of women of all ages from 12 to 71;
(3) Article 3 – by the inhuman treatment of prisoners and persons detained;
(4) Article 5 – by deprivation of liberty with regard to detainees and missing persons – a continuing violation;
(5) Article 8 – by the displacement of persons creating more than 170,000 Greek Cypriot refugees, and by refusing to allow the refugees to return to their homes – a continuing violation;
(6) Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention – by deprivation of possessions, looting and robbery on an extensive scale.

On January 23, 1977, the London Sunday Times published excerpts of the report on its front page and stated: “It amounts to a massive indictment of the Ankara government for the murder, rape and looting by its army in Cyprus during and after the Turkish invasion of summer 1974.”

The State Department refused to comment on the report. The Turkish army has continued to occupy this territory since 1974. It is an affront to the international legal order and a continuing threat to regional stability.

The invasion and Turkey’s continuing occupation have drawn universal international condemnation, as reflected in UN resolutions, statements by members of Congress and from many nations, and various court decisions in Europe, but not from the State Department. The State Department should not only have condemned the invasion but should have called for a war crimes tribunal for the Turkish military involved in these heinous war crimes.

Turkey’s illegal settlers/colonists

To secure its land grab of Cypriot territory, Turkey has illegally settled northern occupied Cyprus with one hundred and twenty thousand Turks from Anatolia in violation of the Geneva Convention of 1949, section III, art. 4, which prohibits colonization by an occupying power. The State Department refused to denounce the illegal colonization when it started and continues to refuse to apply the law and call for the immediate removal of the settlers/colonists.

Invasion V. intervention

The State Department, incredible as it may seem, refuses to call Turkey’s invasion an invasion. The State Department calls it intervention. The U.S. Ambassador to Cyprus Michael Klosson refused to call it invasion when he met with an American Hellenic Institute delegation these past two years and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza refused to call it invasion at an AHEPA sponsored panel on September 9, 2005.

Turkey’s illegal transfer of U.S. tanks

Turkey illegally transferred earlier this year U.S.-supplied tanks to the Turkish army in occupied Cyprus in violation of a specific U.S. law that prohibits such transfers to Cyprus, namely 22 U.S.C. section 2373 which absolutely prohibits the transfer of U.S. arms to Cyprus by Turkey. Yet the State Department spokesman, former U.S. Ambassador to Cyprus, Richard Boucher, not only refused to denounce the illegal transfer as in violation of U.S. law, he actually said it was legal because the tanks were in the custody of the Turkish military in occupied Cyprus, a blatantly false statement.

Illegal entry to occupied Cyprus

The next example of the State Department’s lawlessness involves the illegal entry into occupied Cyprus by U.S. officials and members of Congress this year directly through the illegal Tymbou airport in occupied Cyprus in violation of the sovereignty of Cyprus and its laws and in violation of the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation to which the U.S. and Cyprus are signatories. The State Department actually told the members of Congress it was not illegal to enter Cyprus directly through the illegal Tymbou airport, another blatantly false statement.

The Annan Plan

The State Department’s unqualified support of the Annan Plan is another prime example of lawlessness. The Annan Plan was replete with violations of the rule of law -- from the removal of the Greek Cypriots right to sue in the courts for damages -- to the removal of their legal rights to the sea bed bordering the British bases in Cyprus. The illegality extended to outright corruption in absolving the aggressor Turkey of its war crimes and requiring the victims, the Greek Cypriots to pay for the damages they suffered from Turkey’s invasion.

Further, in my judgement the State Department’s support of the veto power by the 18% Turkish minority over all legislative and executive actions was and is illegal. The U.S. Constitution grants enumerated powers to the Executive Branch. Nowhere does the Constitution grant to the Executive Branch the authority to support minority rule over the majority in foreign affairs.

FYROM

The State Department has misled the American people on the law regarding what a country can call itself. When the State Department on November 4, 2004 reversed its policy and recognized the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) as the “Republic of Macedonia,” State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher said that since the name Macedonia is the name “that the government and the people of Macedonia have chosen for their country, that’s the name we will recognize them under.”

That premise is false. There is no unqualified universally accepted rule of international law that authorizes a state to name itself anything it wants. The Macedonia issue stems from the 1991 secessionist Skopje regime’s naming itself in the most provocative way possible as the so called “Republic of Macedonia” and requesting worldwide recognition.

It is not proper for a country, which is part of a region to define itself in an official manner as representing the whole region. Macedonia, like the Americas, Europe, Scandinavia, and the Balkans, is a region. Just as no country in North and South America would call itself the “American Republic,” and no European country would call itself the “Republic of Europe,” FYROM in naming itself cannot assume the mantle of Macedonia.

Turkey and its Kurds

Since 1984 Turkey has waged a relentless campaign of ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity and genocide against its 15 million Kurdish citizens. The Turkish military killed over 30,000 innocent Kurds and destroyed 3,000 Kurdish villages creating three million Kurdish displaced persons. The State Department not only failed to denounce Turkey’s actions, it encouraged them with economic and military aid during much of this period which has made the U.S. an accessory to Turkey’s crimes. The key State Department official supporting Turkey was Marc Grossman, a former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey and recently retired Under Secretary of State.

The State Department also refused to denounce Turkey’s several invasions of northern Iraq and indeed Mr. Grossman encouraged them.

The State Department’s lawless conduct regarding U.S. relations with Cyprus, Greece and Turkey makes a mockery of Bush’s democracy initiative for the Middle East and elsewhere. The rule of law is fundamental to Bush’s democracy initiative.

Bush’s legacy will be damaged by (1) the failure to adhere to the rule of law in U.S. relations with Turkey, Greece and Cyprus and (2) the failure to support the rule of law and democratic norms for a Cyprus settlement.

The Greek Cypriots worked hard to recover from the devastation of the Turkish invasion and adhered in all their efforts to the rule of law. The State Department should do the same.

Gene Rossides is President
of the American Hellenic Institute and
former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury

http://www.hellenicnews.com/readnews.html?newsid=4083&lang=US

[Heat]

The Lausanne Treaty

SECTION III.

PROTECTION OF MINORITIES

Article 37.

Turkey undertakes that the stipulations contained in Articles 38 to 44 shall be recognized as fundamental laws, and that no law, no regulation, nor official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation, nor official action prevail over them.

Article 38.

The Turkish Government undertakes to assure full and complete protection of life and liberty to all inhabitants of Turkey without distinction of birth, nationality, language, race or religion.

All inhabitants of Turkey shall be entitled to free exercise, whether in public or private, of any creed, religion or belief, the observance of which shall not be incompatible with public order and good morals.

Non-Moslem minorities will enjoy full freedom of movement and of emigration. Subject to the measures applied, on the whole or on part of the territory, to all Turkish nationals, and which may be taken by the Turkish Government for national defense, or for the maintenance of public order.

Article 39.

Turkish nationals belonging to non-Moslem minorities will enjoy the same civil political rights as Moslems.

All the inhabitants of Turkey, without distinction of religion, shall be equal before the law.

Differences of religion, creed or confession shall not prejudice any Turkish national in matters relating to the enjoyment of civil or political rights, as, for instance, admission to public employments, functions and honors, or the exercise of professions and industries.

No restrictions shall be imposed on the free use by any Turkish national of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, religion, in the press, or in publications of any kind or at public meetings.

Notwithstanding the existence of the official language, adequate facilities shall be given to Turkish nationals of non-Turkish speech for the oral of their own language before the Courts.

Article 40.

Turkish nationals belonging to non-Moslem minorities shall enjoy the same treatment and security in law and in fact as other Turkish nationals. In particular, they shall have an equal right to establish, manage and control at their own expense, any charitable, religious and social institutions, any schools and other establishments for instruction and education, with the right to use their own language and to exercise their own religion freely therein.

Article 41.

As regards public instruction, the Turkish Government will grant in those towns and districts, where a considerable proportion of non-Moslem nationals are resident, adequate facilities for ensuring that in the primary schools the instruction shall be given to the children of such Turkish nationals through the medium of their own language. This provision will not prevent the Turkish Government from making the teaching of the Turkish language obligatory in the said schools.

In towns and districts where there is a considerable proportion of Turkish nationals belonging to non-Moslem minorities, these minorities shall be assured an equitable share in the enjoyment and application of the sums which may be provided out of public junks under the State, municipal or other budgets for educational, religious, or charitable purposes.

The sums in question shall be paid to the qualifies representatives of the establishments and institutions concerned.

Article 42.

The Turkish Government undertakes to take, as regards non-Moslem minorities, in so far as concerns their family law or personal status, measures permitting the settlement of these questions in accordance with the customs of those minorities.

These measures will be elaborated by special Commissions composed of representatives of the Turkish Government and of representatives of each of the minorities concerned in equal number. In case of divergence, the Turkish Government and the Council of the League of Nations will appoint in agreement an umpire chosen from amongst European lawyers.

The Turkish Government undertakes to grant full protection to the churches, synagogues, cemeteries, and other religious establishments of the above-mentioned minorities. All facilities and authorization will be granted to the pious foundations, and to the religious and charitable institutions of the said minorities at present existing in Turkey, and the Turkish Government will not refuse, for the formation of new religious and charitable institutions, any of the necessary facilities which are granted to other private institutions of that nature.

Article 48.

Turkish nationals belonging to non-Moslem minorities shall not be compelled to perform any act which constitutes a violation of their faith or religions observances, and shall not be placed under any disability by reason of their regal to attend Courts of Law or to perform any legal business on their weekly day of rest.

This provision, however, shall not exempt such Turkish nationals from such obligations as hall be imposed upon all other Turkish nationals for the preservation of public order.

[Heat]

Lausanne Treaty: Part I
POLITICAL CLAUSES

SECTION I.
I. TERRITORIAL CLAUSES.

ARTICLE 3.

(2) With Iraq:

The frontier between Turkey and Iraq shall be laid down in friendly arrangement to be concluded between Turkey and Great Britain within nine months.

In the event of no agreement being reached between the two Governments within the time mentioned, the dispute shall be referred to the Council of the League of Nations.

The Turkish and British Governments reciprocally undertake that, pending the decision to be reached on the subject of the frontier, no military or other movement shall take place which might modify in any way the present state of the territories of which the final fate will depend upon that decision.

[Heat]

Chicago Tribune (September 19, 1996)
Voice of the people

U.S. is too lenient with Turkey
by Andrew T. Kopan
Professor Emeritus, Depaul University

The Tribune's Aug. 18 editorial "On keeping Turkey in
the fold" unfortunately misses the mark. Certainly it
would be desirasble to keep Turkey in alliance with the
Western democracies as she wings dangerously toward Islamic
Fundamentalism. But this can only be done if Turkey abandons
her policy of anti-humanitarianism and military aggressiveness.

Turkey's intolerance of her own religious and ethnic minorities,
foreigners and toward social and cultural diversity has been
well-documented by numerous international agencies. Among
them are the Helsinki Watch Committee, Amnesty International,
the United World Council of Churches, European Union, the
Committee on Security and Cooperation in Europe, not to mention
the president's annual report on human-rights violations,
country per country, as prescribed by Congress.

In every instance, Turkey has been found in gross violations
of human rigths. Indeed, as your editorial also pointed out
Turkey has a notorious record of such abuses. From the days of
the Old Ottoman Empire, Turkey, because of her conquests, has
always been a multinational state but had to be coerced by the
great powers to observe the rights of her minority groups.
This was achieved by forcing her to sign treaties in order to
safeguard these groups. Yet Turkey has violated practically
every treaty she has signed with the West, especially the Lausanne
Treaty of 1923, which the Allies concluded with her ending World
War I hostilities, and the Helsinki Accord of 1976.

Turkey is the third largest recepient of American foreign aid, after
Israel and Egypt. Yet these funds, which are meant as economic aid
and to bolster her armed forces as a NATO ally, are used to maintain
her occupation of more than one-third of the Republic of Cyprus and
to support the so-called "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" which
is not recognized by any country in the world except Turkey itself-
all this in continues violation of American law and UN resolutions.

Besides human reghts violations, Turkey is guilty of military aggression
against her neighbors, such as her invasion and military occupation of
Cyprus. Witness her current attempts to seize Greek islands in the Aegean
in spite of their Greek ethnic composition and sovereignty. Witness her
questionable annexation in 1939 of Syria's Alexandretta province, whose
chief city, Antioch, has historically always been part of Syria.
Witness her current blockade of Armenia, due to Armenia's quarrel with
Azerbaijan, a Moslem nation. Witness her illegal incursions into adjoining
Iraq in pursue of fleeing kurds. All are violations of international
law and standing treaties.

During the cold war, our State Department and Pentagon considered Turkey
essential to the defense of the West, and so we overlooked Turkey's
violations of human rights and international law. But the cold war is over
now. Turkey is no longer crucial to the West.

Providing aid to Turkey without insisting that she mends her ways gives credence to the belief that the United States does not care about human rights and morality. It could lead to a foreign policy debacle as was the case when we backed Shah of Iran despite his bad humanitarian record.

[Heat]

THE GREEKS OF TURKEY 1993-1994-1995
FACT SHEET
During 1994, the Greek Community in Turkey witnessed defamation of its religious sanctuaries, threats against its religious leaders, discrimination against its youth, and intimidation of its advocates. Defamation of Religious Sanctuaries In July and August 1993, the Christian Orthodox cemetery in Yenikoy, Istanbul, was attacked by vandals and desecrated. In October 1994, the ancient Greek-Orthodox Church of Haghia Eirene in Istanbul was used as a stage of a beauty contest. The Church was built by the Emperor Justinianus I in the sixth century AD. Since then, it was used as the Imperial Chapel of Constantinople. In 1453, after the fall of Constantinople to the Turks, it was converted to a mosque. Turkish Republic transformed it to a museum in 1923. Haghia Eirene is one of the most important existing Orthodox monuments, classified by UNESCO as part of the world's cultural patrimony. Religious and Educational Discrimination The Ecumenical Patriarchate The Ecumenical Patriarchate is oldest active institution in Eastern Europe and the Balkans today. It is the spiritual center for more than 250,000,000 Orthodox Christians worldwide, including approximately 5,000,000 in the United States.

The Turkish Government arbitrarily closed the Halke Patriarchal School of Theology in 1971. The current government refuses to re-open the School, in spite of the continuous requests by Patriarch Vartholomeos I. The closing of the Halke School of Theology is in violation of International Treaties to which Turkey has been a signatory, including the Treaty of Lausanne, the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, and the Charter of Paris; Discrimination in Higher Education

In September 1994, more than one hundred Greek high-school graduates in Istanbul were not allowed to enroll to Turkish Universities. The pupils had succeeded in the nation-wide entrance exams. The pretext for not allowing their enrollment was that they did not attend the course of physical education during the last school-year. It was because of the Turkish authorities, however, that this course was not taught: Turkey violated the Lausanne Treaty of 1923 by not allowing the entrance of teachers from Greece to teach in Greek minority schools.

Civil Rights The Turkish state, with a number of secret decrees (1964, 1985, 1986), revoked the right of ethnic Greeks to trade, buy and inherit properties. Greeks who are trying to retain their properties have to sustain years of judicial struggle; most of them are obliged to sell out their property to Turks for nominal prices. Elpida Frangopoulou, an ethnic Greek lawyer in Istanbul was charged with "insulting the Turkish nation" when she protested after being discriminated against when trying to get a copy of her high-school diploma. After two years of judicial struggle she was convicted to two months imprisonment and was put on probation. Ms. Frangopoulou is well-known for her continuous struggle to save the vast wealth of thousands of ethnic Greeks of Istanbul following a 1964 secret Turkish decree which confiscated their properties.

The Aegean islands of Imvros and Tenedos, which under the Lausanne Treaty were supposed to be granted special autonomy status, are still being used as open prisons. Inmates have been terrorizing the Greek inhabitants who are gradually leaving their ancestral lands. Besides the Greek communities of Istanbul, Imvros and Tenedos, there are other ethnic Greek communities throughout Turkey. Some have lost their Christian Orthodox faith, others still practice it underground (underground-Christians).

All of them have no right whatsoever to express freely, maintain and cherish their culture, identity, and language. Those who reside outside Istanbul and remain Christian Orthodox, are obliged by Turkish law to perform their religious services in Turkish.

[Heat]

Turkey

International Religious Freedom Report 2005
Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

Restrictions on Religious Freedom

Government policy and practice contributed to the generally free practice of religion; however, state policy imposes some restrictions on religious groups and on religious expression in government offices and state-run institutions, including universities.

"Secularists" in the military, judiciary, and other branches of the bureaucracy continued to wage campaigns against what they label as proponents of "Islamic fundamentalism." These groups view "religious fundamentalism," which they do not define clearly, but which they assert is an attempt to impose the rule of Shari'a law in all civil and criminal matters, as a threat to the "secular State." The National Security Council (NSC) categorizes religious fundamentalism as a threat to public safety.

According to Mazlum-Der and other groups, some government ministries have dismissed or barred from promotion civil servants suspected of anti-state or Islamist activities. Reports by Mazlum-Der, the media, and others indicated that the military sometimes dismisses religiously observant Muslims from military service. Such dismissals were based on behavior that military officials believed identified these individuals as Islamic fundamentalists, which they were concerned could indicate disloyalty to the secular State.

According to Mazlum-Der, the military charged individuals with lack of discipline for activities that included performing Muslim prayers or being married to women who wore headscarves. According to the military, officers and NCOs were sometimes dismissed for maintaining ties to Islamic fundamentalist organizations, despite repeated warnings from superior officers.

In February, a military court reportedly dismissed the deputy commander of the Jandarma Command in Ardahan for worshipping at a mosque while wearing his uniform.
Mystical Sufi and other religious-social orders (tarikats) and lodges (cemaats) have been banned officially since the mid‑1920s; however, tarikats and cemaats remain active and widespread. Some prominent political and social leaders continue to associate with tarikats, cemaats, and other Islamic communities.

Under the law, religious services may take place only in designated places of worship. Municipal codes mandate that only the Government can designate a place of worship, and if a religion has no legal standing in the country, it may not be eligible for a designated site. "Non-Muslim" religious services, especially for religious groups that do not own property recognized by the Vakiflar, often take place on diplomatic property or in private apartments. Police occasionally bar Christians from holding services in private apartments, and prosecutors have opened cases against Christians for holding unauthorized gatherings.

Members of the St. Paul Union Church Association continued to try to purchase an abandoned church building in Antalya. The Foreign Ministry has been reviewing the purchase agreement since 2001.

In September 2004, Bodrum police closed a Protestant church and confiscated its signs under orders from the Governor. Authorities reopened the church several days later.

Protestants in Tarsus claimed they were subject to repeated threats and harassment, including from individual law enforcement officials and municipal officials, during the reporting period.

In May, the High Board of Radio and Television ordered a program of the Christian station Radyo Shema off the air for one episode as punishment for a broadcast it deemed "discriminatory." Christians affiliated with the station said the broadcast featured only passages read directly from the Bible. In June, the High Court of Appeals reportedly annulled the decision to sanction the station.

In September 2004, Parliament adopted a law prohibiting imams, priests, rabbis, or other religious leaders from "reproaching or vilifying" the Government or the laws of the State while performing their duties. Violations are punishable by prison terms of 1 month to 1 year, or 3 months to 2 years if the crime involves inciting others to disobey the law.

The authorities continue to monitor the activities of Eastern Orthodox churches but generally do not interfere with their activities. The Government does not recognize the ecumenical status of the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, acknowledging him only as the head of the country's dwindling Greek Orthodox community. High-level government leaders often assert publicly that use of the term "ecumenical" in reference to the Patriarch violates the 1923 Lausanne Treaty. However, government officials privately acknowledge that Lausanne does not address the issue.

As a result, the Government has long maintained that only citizens of the country can be members of the Church's Holy Synod and participate in Patriarchal elections. Members of the Greek Orthodox community said these restrictions threaten the survival of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul, because, with fewer than 2,500 Greek Orthodox left in the country, the community is becoming too small to maintain the institution.

In March 2004, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I appointed six non‑Turkish-citizen metropolitans to the Holy Synod, representing the first time in the 80-year history of the country that noncitizens had been appointed to the body. Government officials said they were conducting a legal analysis of the appointments.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul continues to seek to reopen the Halki seminary on the island of Heybeli in the Sea of Marmara. The Government closed the seminary in 1971, when the State nationalized all private institutions of higher learning. Under existing restrictions, religious communities other than Sunni Muslims cannot legally train new clergy in the country for eventual leadership. Coreligionists from outside the country have been permitted to assume leadership positions in some cases, but in general all religious community leaders, including Patriarchs and Chief Rabbis, must be citizens.

In November 2004, the High Court of Appeals upheld the Vakiflar's February 2004 expropriation of an orphanage on the Prince's Islands that had belonged to the Ecumenical Patriarchate. In April, the Patriarchate filed an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights.

The Armenian Orthodox community continued a legal battle against the Government's expropriation of properties belonging to the Yedikule Surp Pirgic Armenian Hospital Foundation in Istanbul. In March, the Treasury attempted to sell a building expropriated from the foundation to a private company, but the Finance Ministry blocked the sale. The European Court of Human Rights continued proceedings related to the appeal by the Armenian Orthodox community of the 1999 expropriation of two other foundation properties.

No law explicitly prohibits proselytizing or religious conversions; however, many prosecutors and police regard proselytizing and religious activism with suspicion. Police occasionally bar Christians from handing out religious literature. Proselytizing is often considered socially unacceptable; Christians performing missionary work are sometimes beaten and insulted. If the proselytizers are foreigners, they may be deported, but generally they are able to reenter the country. Police officers may report students who meet with Christian missionaries to their families or to university authorities.

The Government waged a public campaign against Christian missionary activity. The Diyanet drafted an anti-missionary sermon and distributed it to imams. The sermon, delivered in mosques across the country in March, depicted missionaries as part of a plot by foreign powers to "steal the beliefs of our young people and children." The sermon also implied that Christians are polytheists.

State Minister Mehmet Aydin, who oversees the Diyanet, issued a written statement in response to a question in January from a parliamentarian about missionaries. In the statement, Aydin calls missionary activity "separatist and destructive" and claims that, "history, as well as contemporary developments, have demonstrated that missionary activities are not an innocent act of communicating one's religion or exercising religious freedom, but a highly planned movement with political motives." Aydin also advised citizens to report missionary activity to authorities.

Interior Minister Abdulkadir Aksu issued a similarly argued statement, in which he reported that 344 persons had informed authorities that they had changed their religion between 1997 and 2004; 338 converted from Islam to Christianity and 6 from Islam to Judaism.

In June, three Selcuk University faculty members spoke at a conference in Adana on "Armenian Issues and Missionary Activities." The speakers reportedly depicted both Armenians and missionaries as threats, with one faculty member warning the audience that missionaries seek to "divide Turkey."

Also in June, the Diyanet published a book on missionaries in which the author states that "missionaries and the Crusades are related." The author further claims that Muslims throughout history have never tried to convert "non-Muslims" and have only explained their beliefs "in an honest fashion," whereas Christian missionaries have used "all means, including the use of sheer force." The Diyanet distributed the book free of charge to parliamentarians and students.

By the end of the reporting period, there was no verdict in the trial proceedings in the case of three members of the Nationalist Movement Party who severely beat Yakup Cindilli, a convert to Christianity, for distributing New Testaments in Bursa Province in 2003.

Authorities continued to enforce a long-term ban on the wearing of headscarves at universities and by civil servants in public buildings. Women who wear headscarves and persons who actively show support for those who defy the ban have been disciplined or have lost their jobs in the public sector as nurses and teachers. Students who wear head coverings are officially not permitted to register for classes, although some faculty members permit students to wear head coverings in class.

Many secularists accuse Islamists of using advocacy for wearing the headscarf as a political tool and say they fear that efforts to repeal the headscarf ban will lead to pressure against women who choose not to wear a head covering.

Opponents of the headscarf ban staged a number of nonviolent protests against the policy during the reporting period. In May, an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 persons attended an Ankara demonstration against the headscarf ban.

In March, the High Court of Appeals upheld the conviction and 20-month prison sentence of Mehmet Sevket Eygi for writing against the headscarf ban. The court in its ruling argued that freedom of speech is subordinate to the protection of public order in democracies, and it maintained that Eygi's criticism of the headscarf ban and its supporters constituted "hatred and animosity."

In May, Constitutional Court President Mustafa Bumin and Speaker of Parliament Bulent Arinc engaged in a sharp, public dispute over the headscarf ban. Bumin asserted in a speech that the Constitutional Court would annul any parliamentary legislation aimed at lifting the ban; Arinc replied that Parliament has the authority to close the Court.

A 1997 law made 8 years of secular education compulsory. After completing the 8 years, students may pursue study at imam hatip (Islamic preacher) high schools, which cover both the standard high school curriculum and Islamic theology and practice. Imam hatip schools are classified as vocational, and graduates of vocational schools face an automatic reduction in their university entrance exam grades if they apply for university programs outside their field of high school specialization. This reduction effectively bars imam hatip graduates from enrolling in university programs other than theology. Many pious Turks criticize the religious instruction provided in the regular schools as inadequate. Most families who enroll their children in imam hatip schools do so to expose them to more extensive religious education, not to train them as imams.

Only the Diyanet is authorized to provide religion courses outside of school, although clandestine private courses do exist. Students who complete 5 years of primary school may enroll in Diyanet Qur'an classes on weekends and during summer vacation. Many Qur'an courses function unofficially. Only children 12 and older legally may register for official Qur'an courses, and Mazlum-Der reports that police often raid illegal courses for younger children. According to Mazlum-Der, in 2 separate incidents in March, law enforcement authorities raided a Qur'an course in Kabala, Mardin Province, detaining 30 persons, and a course in Tarakli, Sakarya Province, detaining 3 persons.

In June, Parliment adopted a law reducing the prison term for those convicted of operating illegal educational courses and allowing courts to issue fines instead of prison sentences. The law would apply to illegal Qur'an courses.

In September 2004, members of the Jehovah's Witnesses requested legal recognition as a religious association. They were informed that association status could be given, but it would remain illegal for anyone who was not part of the association to attend religious meetings. The Jehovah's Witnesses, unable to accept these terms, did not submit their request.

Jehovah's Witnesses reported continuing official harassment of their worship services because they are not members of an officially recognized religion. In June, authorities sealed a Kingdom Hall (place of worship) used by members of the Jehovah's Witnesses in Akcay, Balikesir Province.

Restoration or construction may be carried out in buildings and monuments considered "ancient" only with authorization of the regional board on the protection of cultural and national wealth. Bureaucratic procedures and considerations relating to historic preservation in the past have impeded repairs to religious facilities, especially in the case of Syrian Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox properties. Groups are prohibited from using funds from their properties in one part of the country to support their existing population in another part of the country.

Religious affiliation is listed on national identity cards. Some religious groups, such as the Baha'i, are unable to state their religion on their cards because their religion is not included among the options; they have made their concerns known to the Government. There were reports that authorities have become more flexible regarding the religious affiliation that may be listed. In September 2004, an Ankara court approved the application of a family requesting permission to leave the religion portion of their children's identity cards blank until they reach 18 years of age.

There were reports that local officials harassed some persons who converted from Islam to another religion when they sought to amend their cards. Some "non‑Muslims" maintained that listing religious affiliation on the cards exposes them to discrimination and harassment.

In October 2004, the Government's Human Rights Consultation Board issued a report on minorities, which stated that "non-Muslims" are effectively barred from careers in state institutions such as the armed forces, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the National Police, and the National Intelligence Agency. Without refuting its findings, a number of government officials harshly criticized the report, and Ankara prosecutors opened an investigation against the report's principal authors. There were no developments in the investigation at the end of the reporting period. Members of minority religious communities confirmed the report's conclusions. They said "non-Muslim" citizens are viewed as foreigners, and are therefore considered unqualified to represent the state.

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2005/51586.htm

[ScythianVizier]

So the Americans complain about Turkey failing to comply with international agreements and laws?

Is there some kind of irony in that?

[Varouj]

So the Americans complain about Turkey failing to comply with international agreements and laws?

Is there some kind of irony in that?

There are a lot of ironies where the perpetrators of the AG are concerned.

[TurQ]

Vezir

The real irony is these guys, like Varouj and that kind(actually the leading Tashnaks and the diaspora leaders) who do not even recognize Lausanne Treaty
and to be frankly they dont even recognize our borders(against Kars Treaty), and come here and agonize that Turkey is not abiding by the treaty. Are they abiding? Do they recognize our territorial integrity?

How can they accuse Turkey for the treaty that they dont even recognize.
According to them Sevres is the only treaty which is recognized only by them!

So the Americans complain about Turkey failing to comply with international agreements and laws?

Is there some kind of irony in that?