Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!)

1] What you CAN NOT post.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is:
- abusive
- vulgar
- hateful
- harassing
- personal attacks
- obscene

You also may not:
- post images that are too large (max is 500*500px)
- post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or cited properly.
- post in UPPER CASE, which is considered yelling
- post messages which insult the Armenians, Armenian culture, traditions, etc
- post racist or other intentionally insensitive material that insults or attacks another culture (including Turks)

The Ankap thread is excluded from the strict rules because that place is more relaxed and you can vent and engage in light insults and humor. Notice it's not a blank ticket, but just a place to vent. If you go into the Ankap thread, you enter at your own risk of being clowned on.
What you PROBABLY SHOULD NOT post...
Do not post information that you will regret putting out in public. This site comes up on Google, is cached, and all of that, so be aware of that as you post. Do not ask the staff to go through and delete things that you regret making available on the web for all to see because we will not do it. Think before you post!


2] Use descriptive subject lines & research your post. This means use the SEARCH.

This reduces the chances of double-posting and it also makes it easier for people to see what they do/don't want to read. Using the search function will identify existing threads on the topic so we do not have multiple threads on the same topic.

3] Keep the focus.

Each forum has a focus on a certain topic. Questions outside the scope of a certain forum will either be moved to the appropriate forum, closed, or simply be deleted. Please post your topic in the most appropriate forum. Users that keep doing this will be warned, then banned.

4] Behave as you would in a public location.

This forum is no different than a public place. Behave yourself and act like a decent human being (i.e. be respectful). If you're unable to do so, you're not welcome here and will be made to leave.

5] Respect the authority of moderators/admins.

Public discussions of moderator/admin actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private.

6] Promotion of sites or products is not permitted.

Advertisements are not allowed in this venue. No blatant advertising or solicitations of or for business is prohibited.
This includes, but not limited to, personal resumes and links to products or
services with which the poster is affiliated, whether or not a fee is charged
for the product or service. Spamming, in which a user posts the same message repeatedly, is also prohibited.

7] We retain the right to remove any posts and/or Members for any reason, without prior notice.


- PLEASE READ -

Members are welcome to read posts and though we encourage your active participation in the forum, it is not required. If you do participate by posting, however, we expect that on the whole you contribute something to the forum. This means that the bulk of your posts should not be in "fun" threads (e.g. Ankap, Keep & Kill, This or That, etc.). Further, while occasionally it is appropriate to simply voice your agreement or approval, not all of your posts should be of this variety: "LOL Member213!" "I agree."
If it is evident that a member is simply posting for the sake of posting, they will be removed.


8] These Rules & Guidelines may be amended at any time. (last update September 17, 2009)

If you believe an individual is repeatedly breaking the rules, please report to admin/moderator.
See more
See less

"insulting Turkish identity"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Whats worse then a donkey ?

    A donkey that doesnt know hes a donkey!
    "All truth passes through three stages:
    First, it is ridiculed;
    Second, it is violently opposed; and
    Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

    Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

    Comment


    • #22
      Times are tough for outspoken scholars

      Aug 4th 2005 | ANKARA
      From The Economist print edition



      Times are tough for outspoken scholars

      IF TURKEY is ever to join the European Union, it will need to
      acknowledge-and allow free discussion of-the mass slaughter of the
      Ottoman empire's Armenian subjects both during and after the first
      world war. That, at least, is the opinion of some EU members-especially
      France, where many Armenians live, and where objections to Turkish
      entry run high.

      In theory, Turkey's rendezvous with the Union-entry talks are due
      to start in October-should be good news for the Turkish scholars
      who have risked prosecution by challenging the official line, which
      holds that the mass deportation of Armenians in 1915 did not amount
      to a conspiracy to kill them. And earlier this year, there were some
      good signs.

      After decades of denying that the killings-which Armenians round
      the world regard as genocide-ever took place, Turkey in April called
      on international scholars to determine once and for all what really
      happened, saying they were free to examine the Ottoman archives. This
      invitation from Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister, won strong
      praise from EU governments. But the few intrepid souls who took him
      at his word have had nothing but trouble ever since.

      In May, a group of Turkish historians (many of whom challenge the
      official view that the main cause of death among deported Armenians
      was exposure and disease) suffered a sharp setback. They had to cancel
      a conference which was due to debate the Armenian tragedy after the
      justice minister, Cemil Cicek, accused them of "stabbing Turkey in
      the back".

      Another bad sign: Hrant Dink, the publisher of Agos, an Armenian
      weekly in Istanbul, is facing up to three years in jail for telling
      an audience in 2002 that he was "not Turkish" but "an Armenian of
      Turkey". In a separate case, also filed this year, Mr Dink is facing
      up to six years for urging Armenians and Turks to stop hating one
      another. In both instances, Mr Dink was said to have "insulted the
      Turkish state".

      How do these prosecutions square with Mr Erdogan's stated wish to take
      the sting out of Turkish-Armenian relations by allowing some honest
      research? "Easily," insists Mr Dink. "There are forces in this country
      who are working night and day to stop Turkey from joining the EU and
      part of that is silencing people like me."

      But these days, the problems of liberal Turkish scholars-and advocates
      of Turkish-Armenian reconciliation-are not all caused by their own
      country. Take the case of Yektan Turkyilmaz, an internationally
      acclaimed Turkish scholar who was arrested in Armenia on June
      17th on charges of seeking to smuggle antique books out of the
      country. Fluent in Armenian, Mr Turkyilmaz is among the few Turks
      who say the Ottoman policy in 1915 did amount to deliberate killing.
      The first Turkish academic to be granted access to Armenia's national
      archives, Mr Turkyilmaz is being held in a maximum security prison in
      Yerevan. He will face trial next month for violating Article 215 of
      the Armenian Criminal Code, which equates the smuggling of antiquities
      with trafficking in weapons of mass destruction. He could incur a
      jail sentence of up to eight years.

      Mr Turkyilmaz insists he had no idea about the law, and that the
      dealers who sold him some 100 volumes never said he would need
      permission to take them out. In an open letter to Armenia's president,
      Robert Kocharian, some 200 academics, campaigning for the historian's
      freedom, said the arrest would "raise serious doubts as to whether
      Armenia encourages independent scholarly research on its history."

      Whatever view you take of the Armenian tragedy, it can get you into
      trouble-in unexpected places. Dogu Perincek, an eccentric Turkish
      leftist, was briefly detained in Switzerland on July 23rd. The Swiss
      authorities say he breached article 261 of their penal code, which
      makes the denial or justification of genocide a punishable offence.
      Mr Perincek had told a conference that to speak of Armenian genocide
      was an "imperialist lie". Oddly enough, the Turkish authorities
      seem far more indignant about his minor travails than they are about
      Mr Turkyilmaz.
      "All truth passes through three stages:
      First, it is ridiculed;
      Second, it is violently opposed; and
      Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

      Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

      Comment


      • #23
        JTW Condemns The California Courier Publisher Harut Sassounian

        JTW Condemns The California Courier Publisher Harut Sassounian

        Source: JTW Press Release
        Press Release, 9 August 2005

        As Journal of Turkish Weekly (JTW) we have been making constructive
        publishing on Armenian issue. We have argued that Turkey and Armenia
        could be very close partners even allies in the Caucasus. We defended
        that the diaspora should be more positive in solving historical
        disputes. The JTW has always supported dialogue between Turks and
        Armenians. Naturally we have Turkish perspective in comments though we
        also publish the other approaches in JTW. The problem is that some of
        the ultra extremist Armenians in diaspora cannot bear different ideas
        and they blame differences of being lies. We named this Armenian
        approach as "shut-up and accept it" approach. Armenian extremist
        groups do not want to listen, do not want to discuss, but they just
        impose their ideas as truth.

        Two days ago JTW published a news titled "Swiss Senate: 'Genocide'
        Allegations is Not Parliament's Job". As expected many Armenians did
        not share the ideas in the news. Actually it was compiled news and was
        reporting Peter Briner's latest declaration about the Armenian
        issue. According to the news reported by Swiss news sources and JTW
        Briner said other countries had no business pointing the finger at
        Turkey 90 years after the disputed events. Having published the news
        we received a letter from Maral Der Ohanesian. We thanked her and
        replied our point of view. We exchanged two letters on the report. But
        then we received a really rude letter from Harut Sassounian, publisher
        of The California Courier, instead of Mrs Maral. It is unfortunate
        that Mr. Sassounian's letter was full of insults. We as the JTW
        condemn Harut Sassounian, and we remind him that JTW and our editor
        will use all the legal rights regarding the insults. The JTW will
        start a legal action in California against this rude letter. However
        we consider his letter as a good example to show the extremist
        Armenian approach to our readers. Therefore we added his letter below
        so all Turks and Armenians could assess how he is constructive and
        polite.

        Sassounian's 'letter' made us sad. Nevertheless we know that all
        Armenians are not the same and we, Turks and Armenians, can find a
        base to construct a dialogue environment.

        -----------------
        SASSOUNIAN'S 'LETTER'
        -------------------
        Sir:

        I don't know what your background or training is, but I am sure you
        know nothing about journalism. Your replies to Maral Der Ohanesian
        confirm my suspicions about your ignorance. How dare you give a
        lecture to her on a subject you know nothing about? Not only your
        distorted and perverted version of this news item was full of lies,
        every piece of news you have released has been nothing but a pack of
        lies. I will be happy to give you one free lesson in journalism: there
        is no such thing as Armenian or Turkish journalism. There is only one
        kind of universal journalism, which is reporting the truth. What you
        added to the ... news is not the Turkish point of view, but sheer
        lies. Maybe lies ARE the Turkish point of view, in which case you have
        a point. I would normally list the lies in your news, but I am sure
        you do not need my help, since you know the lies that you have made
        up. To report such lies and try to convince others that you are
        reporting the truth, you must be truly "sharafsiz"! (*) And you
        shamelessly call yourself "Editor" and "Dr."

        Harut Sassounian
        Publisher
        The California Courier

        (*) 'sharafsiz' is a Turkish word and it means one who has no honor)
        "All truth passes through three stages:
        First, it is ridiculed;
        Second, it is violently opposed; and
        Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

        Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

        Comment


        • #24
          What they left out is all the 'sherefli' things the Turkixh goverment did towards the Armenian people.
          "All truth passes through three stages:
          First, it is ridiculed;
          Second, it is violently opposed; and
          Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

          Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

          Comment


          • #25
            Turks Try to Intimidate

            Commentary
            Turks Try to Intimidate This Writer
            By Threatening Him with Lawsuit

            By Harut Sassounian
            Publisher, The California Courier

            While Turkish leaders are desperately trying to convince the world that
            their country is civilized enough to join the European Union, they are
            actually proving the exact opposite with every passing day.
            Despite the fact that the Turkish leaders are supposed be on their best
            behavior in order to impress the Europeans, they have yet to grant equal
            rights to Turkey's many religious and ethnic minorities. They also refuse
            to return to Greek and Armenian charitable foundations in Turkey their
            properties confiscated by the Turkish government decades earlier.
            In an attempt to fool the international community, on the one hand Turkish
            officials have advocated the setting up of a joint commission with
            Armenians ostensibly to study the facts of the Armenian Genocide, while on
            the other hand, they have forced the cancellation of a symposium organized
            by three leading universities in Turkey, thereby preventing the discussion
            of this issue even among Turkish scholars.
            Meanwhile, Prime Minister Recep Erdogan has boldly announced that his
            government is ready to admit the Armenian Genocide if sufficient proof is
            presented, while Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul is bragging that Turkey has
            inundated journalists, scholars, universities, libraries and
            parliamentarians worldwide with revisionist books on the Armenian Genocide.
            As the human rights of millions of Turkish citizens are violated on a
            regular basis, it comes as no surprise that the Turkish government is
            prosecuting Hrant Dink, an Armenian journalist in Turkey, for allegedly
            insulting Turks in an article he wrote in his newspaper, AGOS. If found
            guilty, he could be sentenced to a 1-6 year jail term.
            Turkish officials and their agents are so used to silencing, intimidating
            and jailing anyone who disagrees with them that they dare to bully also
            their opponents overseas who are beyond their reach. No dissent is
            tolerated!
            This writer is quite familiar with the Turkish practice of suppressing free
            speech. As the author of a weekly column that is very critical of Turkish
            denialist and oppressive policies, I receive a lot of abusive e-mails from
            Turks from around the world. Most of these Turks forget that the despotic
            methods they practice at home to bully people or force them into silence do
            not work in Western countries where freedom of expression is basic right.
            Last week, when a young Armenian lady, Maral Der Ohanesian, sent a couple
            of e-mails to Dr. Sedat Laciner, editor of the Journal of Turkish Weekly in
            Ankara, an on-line Turkish propaganda site, complaining about the
            distortions in one of its articles, he shamelessly accused her of
            "fabricating" arguments.
            The JTW had cleverly edited an Swiss info wire story by including
            revisionist statements on the Armenian Genocide and deleting criticism of
            the Turkish position, thereby giving the false impression that Peter
            Briner, the President of the Senate foreign affairs committee of
            Switzerland, had made statements which he had not.
            When Maral forwarded to me her exchange of e-mails, I sent a strongly
            worded private e-mail to JTW, castigating the staff for accusing Maral of
            fabrication when they themselves had distorted the original news item
            beyond recognition. Within hours of my letter, the JTW published on its
            front page a "press release" with the following sensational title: "JTW
            Condemns The California Courier Publisher Harut Sassounian." Not happy with
            my criticism, the JTW resorted to calling me an extremist Armenian and
            threatened that
            "the JTW will start a legal action in California" against me. The JTW also
            posted my e-mail on its web site.
            I received dozens of e-mails and phone calls from around the world, from
            both Armenians and non-Armenians alike, among them several attorneys and
            judges, who assured me that there was nothing illegal in what I had written
            to the JTW. Criticizing a publication is not against the law in civilized
            countries. That, apparently, is not the case in Turkey.
            A reader from Canada wrote: "The prospect of a lawsuit against you by the
            JTW in California must be extremely encouraging. They silenced their own in
            Turkey. They try to silence foreign parliaments and now they're trying to
            silence an American journalist. It's wonderful the way they are keeping the
            issue alive. A lawsuit would provide a superb opportunity for a US court to
            pronounce itself definitely on the Armenian Genocide." Another reader from
            Armenia wrote: "Congratulations on being vilified by the Turkish press!
            It's an achievement, and I consider it a badge of courage. Keep on pissing
            them off." A fellow publisher wrote in his newspaper: "Turks have
            unwittingly made [this writer] an even bigger hero."
            The real issue is not these empty Turkish threats. As we do not live in
            Turkey, no one in this country is scared or intimidated by such tactics.
            What's more important is that these Turkish propagandists had apparently
            started celebrating a little prematurely. The JTW, quoting Peter Briner,
            had gleefully reported that the Armenian Genocide issue would "never" be
            taken up by the Swiss Senate. Dogu Perincek, the leader of the Turkish
            Labor Party, who had been interrogated by Swiss prosecutors last month for
            denying the Armenian Genocide, also claimed credit for this false report.
            He gave a press conference to announce that his outspoken statements on
            this issue as well his testimony in Switzerland had influenced the Swiss
            Senate to withdraw a pending resolution on the Armenian Genocide. Perincek
            called his antics "a great success."
            Here is a more accurate report of what really transpired: To begin with,
            Perincek's bombastic statements not only got him in legal trouble in
            Switzerland, but helped generate great publicity for the issue of the
            Armenian Genocide in Switzerland and throughout Europe on the eve of a
            decision by the Europeans to consider starting negotiations for Turkey's
            membership in the EU. Turkey then decided to deliver a note of protest to
            Switzerland and cancelled the scheduled visit of the Swiss Economics
            Minister Joseph Deiss to Turkey. These foolhardy Turkish actions made the
            genocide issue even more newsworthy throughout the world.
            Erwin Jutzet, the President of the Foreign Affairs Commission of Swiss
            Parliament reacted sharply to the Turkish bullying tactics by stating:
            "Turkey has to stop reacting so sensitively to such events. It would be
            better to recognize once and for all the genocide of the Armenians." Jutzet
            said it was up to Turkey to make a positive move rather than "always taking
            offense and resorting to blackmail. If Switzerland were to turn its back on
            Turkey, it would be a bad sign for EU entry."
            More bad news surfaced for the xxxxy Turkish propagandists, when Sen. Peter
            Briner denied having said that the Armenian Genocide would "never" be
            debated in the Swiss Senate. He countered that these false reports were
            "based on either a misquote or a misunderstanding." He added: "I can never
            be sure what will be on the Senate's agenda, of course, but right now the
            postponement of Economics Minister Joseph Deiss' invitation to Turkey will
            certainly be discussed" during the Foreign Affairs Committee's next meeting
            on August 23. At that time, any member of the Committee could raise the
            issue of the Armenian Genocide. Should that happen, the self-declared
            premature Turkish victory could end up being a defeat, thanks to the
            boastful behavior of Mr. Perincek and his band of incompetent
            propagandists.
            Even worse for Turkey, the Swiss government declared that its law against
            denial of genocide also applies to the Armenian Genocide. The Swiss Foreign
            Ministry (DFA) issued a formal statement following a meeting between
            Ambassador Jean-Jacques de Dardel, the head of the Political Affairs
            Division of the Foreign Ministry, and the Ambassador of Turkey in
            Switzerland, in connection with the proceedings against Perincek. The
            Foreign Ministry stated:
            "During the meeting, the DFA underlined the applicability of Swiss law in
            this matter and recalled that article 261 bis of the Swiss Penal Code
            stipulates that any person who denies, minimizes or justifies a genocide or
            other crimes against humanity is liable to prosecution. It is the task of
            the Swiss judicial instances to decide on the modalities of the application
            of the legal provisions of our country."
            Despite the boastful and threatening statements emanating from various
            Turkish propagandists, the fact remains that ever fewer countries are going
            along with Ankara's denials of the Armenian Genocide. The Turkish officials
            have less than six weeks to come to their senses and realize that they have
            to make a bold move on the Armenian Genocide issue if they have any hope of
            salvaging their sinking prospects for the start of EU negotiations on
            October 3.
            "All truth passes through three stages:
            First, it is ridiculed;
            Second, it is violently opposed; and
            Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

            Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

            Comment


            • #26
              Memorandum on AI's recommendations to the government to address human rights violatio

              Amnesty International
              Aug 1 2005



              Turkey
              Problems with the new TPC
              As stated above, Amnesty International considers that the new TPC
              contains measures which may be significant obstacles to the full
              enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression in Turkey and appear
              to be a step back in the reform process. Some provisions - in the use
              of which the European Court of Human Rights has found Turkey to have
              been in breach of the ECHR - have apparently been carried over
              directly from its predecessor. International human rights law on
              freedom of expression, as set out in the International Covenant on
              Civil and Political Rights and the ECHR as elaborated in the
              jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, provides that
              any limitations on the right to freedom of expression must be
              narrowly drawn and only such as are necessary in a democratic society
              for respect of the rights or reputations of others, for the
              protection of national security or of public order, or of public
              health or morals, or for the prohibition of war propaganda and
              advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination,
              hostility or violence. The restrictions provided for in the new TPC
              appear to be considerably broader than this and are not limited to
              those instances which are demonstrably necessary on one of the
              permissible grounds. As such, the law could be used to penalize
              individuals exercising their human right to freedom of expression on
              matters of political opinion.

              For example, Section 3 of Part 4 of the new TPC entitled "Crimes
              against signs of the state's sovereignty and the honour of its
              organs" (Articles 299 - 301) could be used to penalize individuals
              who exercise their right to freedom of expression by expressing
              political views. In particular, Amnesty International is disturbed
              that this section of the new TPC criminalizes offences such as
              "insulting" the President (Article 299), or "denigrating" the Turkish
              flag or anything carrying its replica and the national anthem
              (Article 300), Turkishness, the Republic, the Parliament, the
              government, the judiciary, the military and security forces (Article
              301). There is no clear reason provided why, as the law states, such
              acts should be aggravated and provided with heavier sentences when
              perpetrated abroad by a citizen of Turkey. Moreover, Section 3
              carries over aspects of Article 159 of the previous TPC, which
              criminalized insults against or denigration of various state
              institutions. In the light of the way that this provision has been
              used to unnecessarily restrict the right to freedom of expression,
              Amnesty International has called for it to be repealed.

              We recognize that Paragraph (4) of Article 301 states that "any
              expression of thought which is made with the intention of criticism
              does not constitute a crime". However, Amnesty International recalls
              that a similar amendment was made in August 2002 to this provision in
              the previous TPC, under Article 159, yet this did not prevent
              prosecutions of statements by individuals who had exercised their
              right to freedom of expression. Amnesty International therefore urges
              the government to repeal this section in order to bring the
              legislation into line with international standards on freedom of
              expression.

              Some of the articles found within Section 4 of Part 4 of the new TPC
              (Articles 302 - 308) entitled "Crimes against State Security" also
              appear to be in contravention of Turkey's obligations to comply with
              human rights standards. Amnesty International views with particular
              concern Article 305 which criminalizes "acts against the fundamental
              national interest", especially in the light of the written
              explanation attached to the draft when the law passed through
              Parliament. The explanation provided as examples of crimes such acts
              as "making propaganda for the withdrawal of Turkish soldiers from
              Cyprus or for the acceptance of a settlement in this issue
              detrimental to Turkey... or, contrary to historical truths, that the
              Armenians suffered a genocide after the First World War". Amnesty
              International considers that the imposition of a criminal penalty for
              any such statements - unless they demonstrably amount to advocacy of
              national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
              discrimination, hostility or violence - would be a clear breach of
              international standards related to freedom of expression.

              Amnesty International is additionally concerned by Section 5 of Part
              3 of the new TPC entitled "Laws against the Public Order" (Articles
              213 - 222). Amnesty International notes that Article 312 of the
              previous TPC - which criminalized incitement of people to enmity on
              the basis of social, regional, ethnic or religious difference - has
              been carried over into the new TPC as Article 216. In the past, the
              Turkish state has been found to have been in breach of the right to
              freedom of expression by the European Court of Human Rights in its
              use of this provision. While such legislation is necessary to
              criminalize advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that
              constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, it
              has rarely been used as such. In the past, peaceful statements
              related to religious or minority rights have been prosecuted under
              this Article - Amnesty International has repeatedly raised its
              concerns about the use of this provision. Amnesty International urges
              that particular care be paid in the use of this Article and supports
              the recent recommendation of the European Commission on Racism and
              Intolerance which urged the Turkish authorities "to continue their
              efforts to ensure that Article 312 of the Criminal Code prohibiting
              incitement to hatred is applied for the purpose of punishing racist
              statements in compliance with the letter and spirit of this provision
              [Article 312]".

              Furthermore, Amnesty International notes the concern articulated by
              human rights organizations and press groups related to Article 220
              (8) - which criminalizes the making of propaganda for criminal
              organizations, as well as Article 226 - which criminalizes obscenity,
              that these may be used to restrict the right to freedom of
              expression. Article 318 which criminalizes "alienating the people
              from the army" also appears to offer possibilities to restrict the
              right to freedom of expression in a way not permitted by
              international standards.

              Paragraph 1 of Article 298 of the new TPC introduces sanctions
              against individuals who may try to prevent prisoners from exercising
              their full rights. While legislation protecting the rights of
              prisoners is welcome, this provision is framed in such a way as to
              suggest that the focus of the law is prisoners who, for example, may
              engage in a boycott of a prison facility. Paragraphs 2 and 3 lay down
              penalties for those who encourage or persuade prisoners to take part
              in hunger strikes. Amnesty International is concerned that Article
              298 may be used to curtail non-violent protests such as boycotts or
              hunger strikes and thus may violate the right to freedom of
              expression.

              While some changes were made to the draft of the law after its entry
              into force was delayed, these must be considered insufficient. Most
              obviously, the possibility of aggravated sentences when the offences
              are perpetrated through the press was removed in some crimes.
              However, the problems in the law remained unaddressed. In at least
              one instance, a change made the TPC even more restrictive. For
              example, Article 305 of the draft, which criminalized "acts against
              the fundamental national interest", was altered to explicitly allow
              for the prosecution of "foreigners" as well as Turkish citizens who
              engage in such acts.

              Amnesty International considers that legal and constitutional
              guarantees for the right to freedom of expression must be further
              strengthened so that they are compatible with international legal
              provisions, such as those of Article 10 of the European Convention of
              Human Rights. The European Court has interpreted restrictions to
              Article 10 very narrowly. Amnesty International will closely monitor
              the implementation of the new TPC but asks for further steps to be
              taken to amend the law and constitution in order to fully ensure
              freedom of expression in Turkey.

              8. MINORITY RIGHTS AND DISCRIMINATION

              Amnesty International continues to be concerned about restrictions on
              the use of minority languages and calls for such obstacles to be
              lifted immediately. In particular, Article 42 of the Constitution, in
              which "No other language than Turkish may be taught in educational
              and teaching facilities to Turkish citizens as their mother tongue",
              appears to be contrary to international standards related to minority
              rights. Such standards include the United Nations Declaration on the
              Rights of Persons Belonging to National, Ethnic, Religious and
              Linguistic Minorities which states that all UN member states should
              take "appropriate measures so that, wherever possible, persons
              belonging to minorities may have adequate opportunities to learn
              their mother tongue or to have instruction in their mother tongue".
              While Amnesty International welcomed the amendment of the Law on the
              Education and Teaching of Foreign Languages in 9 August 2002 to allow
              for the "learning of different languages and dialects used
              traditionally by Turkish citizens in their daily lives", the
              organization notes serious restrictions to this right, for example,
              the languages may only be taught to adults at private language
              courses. In addition, Article 42 of the Constitution was used to
              close the trade union, Eًitim Sen, because it stated in its statute
              that it would work for the right to mother-tongue education. This
              case was a clear violation of the right to freedom of expression and
              association. There is the risk that other entities' rights to freedom
              of expression may be similarly unnecessarily and arbitrarily
              restricted while Article 42 exists in the Constitution in its present
              state.

              Similarly, Amnesty International is greatly concerned at cases
              launched against politicians for speaking in minority languages to
              audiences and distributing materials in these languages under Article
              58 of Law 298 on Elections as well as Law No 2820 on Political
              Parties. Article 81 of the latter law appears to be particularly
              problematic stating:
              a) ...Political parties may not put forward the view that there are
              minorities in the country of the Republic of Turkey based upon
              difference of national or religious culture or creed or race or
              language ...
              c) Political parties may not use languages other than Turkish in the
              statute or program or publication, or in congresses or in meetings
              closed or open to the public or in mass meetings. They cannot
              distribute placards, signs, cassette or video tapes, brochures or
              announcements written in languages other than Turkish...

              Article 122 of the draft of the new TPC which forbids discrimination
              on the basis of "language, race, colour, gender, political thought,
              philosophical belief, religion, denomination and other reasons" was
              amended at the last moment so that "sexual orientation" was removed
              from the draft. Amnesty International is therefore concerned that
              discrimination on the basis of sexuality was not criminalized in the
              new TPC. This is coherent with Article 10 of the Constitution which
              states that "Everybody is equal before the law without making any
              distinction on the basis of language, race, colour, gender, political
              thought, philosophical belief, religion, denomination and other
              reasons." Amnesty International considers that both these articles
              should be amended to ensure full equality in law and practice of
              individuals of different sexual orientation.

              Amnesty International is still seriously concerned about the ban on
              the wearing of headscarves in higher education in Turkey - it
              believes that this ban is discriminatory and disproportionate.
              Despite the amnesty proposed for students excluded from university,
              the ban has and will continue to result in many people being excluded
              from university education and in the suspension or dismissal of
              hundreds of women from university teaching posts as a result of their
              religious beliefs. Amnesty International urges the Turkish
              authorities to take steps to address this issue.

              Amnesty International therefore considers that further steps need to
              be taken to improve minority rights in Turkey and to prevent
              discrimination. We urge that the country should sign and ratify
              international instruments in this area, including the Framework
              Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. Further it
              should ratify Protocol No.12 to the ECHR, which provides for a
              general prohibition of discrimination; and make the declaration under
              Article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All
              Forms of Racial Discrimination, empowering the Committee for the
              Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive individual
              communications. The government should also withdraw its reservations
              in respect of Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and
              Political Rights and Article 13 of the International Covenant on
              Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

              Amnesty International is aware that the Ministry of the Interior
              distributed in October 2004 to its officials as a circular the EU
              Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. However, since this is a
              document aimed at foreign delegations in second countries, Amnesty
              International considers that it would have been more appropriate to
              circulate a copy of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. We
              therefore urge the government to take further action to ensure that
              state officials at every level of the state apparatus, including law
              enforcement officials, respect the legitimacy of the work of human
              rights defenders and allow them to carry out this work without
              hindrance or harassment. The UN Special Representative on Human
              Rights Defenders has made numerous detailed recommendations in her
              report. Amnesty International expects the government to incorporate
              into its programme steps towards implementing these recommendations.

              10. FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY

              Amnesty International welcomes the circular issued last year by
              Interior Minister Abdulkadir Aksu which was designed to improve the
              right to assembly. While it did bring some much needed clarity to the
              legal status of the reading out of press releases, the organization
              considers that there is still the potential for confusion. The
              organization notes that - in practice - there are still unnecessary
              restrictions to the right to freedom of assembly. The UN Special
              Representative on Human Rights Defenders has noted such restrictions:

              ...in particular with regard to places where public gatherings can be
              held - the law imposes a 300-metre distance from any public building
              or major road crossing. Demonstrations and press releases by nature
              seek to draw public attention, and restricting them to places away
              from crowded streets and areas minimizes their ability to reach
              citizens, and can be seen as defeating the object of the right.

              Amnesty International believes that further steps are needed to
              remove such restrictions to ensure the right to freedom of assembly
              is fully guaranteed. This is especially important since those who
              violate these restrictions peacefully may be subjected to
              disproportionate force by security forces responsible for policing of
              such demonstrations. Amnesty International would like to remind the
              authorities that participation in a demonstration without permission
              does not justify use of disproportionate force.

              11. VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

              Amnesty International has been greatly heartened by the recent steps
              taken by the government to improve the level of protection that women
              enjoy from violence in the family. We view the amendments to the
              Turkish Penal Code as a positive development and welcome the giving
              of legal recognition to the Directorate on the Status of Women
              attached to the Prime Ministry. We especially welcome the article of
              the new Law on Municipalities that requires municipalities to provide
              shelters for women in towns and cities with populations of more than
              50,000 individuals as well as the government's support for the
              Campaign "No to violence against women" which has been organized
              together with the United Nations Population Fund.

              Judging from other recent legal and constitutional reforms in Turkey,
              the passing of laws in itself is not enough - implementation of the
              laws will be key. Effort is needed to make sure that these reforms
              are communicated to women in Turkey as well as to prosecutors,
              governors, judges, police officers and others who may be responsible
              for implementing the law. Amnesty International draws particular
              attention to the Law on the Protection of the Family which was passed
              in 1997 and which is very rarely implemented. The organization
              requests the development of mandatory training programmes for the
              police, medical personnel, gendarmerie officials, members of the
              judiciary and other professionals who may be a first point of contact
              for women who have experienced violence. The training should include
              the recognition of violence, the optimal use of safety procedures -
              such as under the Law on the Protection of the Family, and guidance
              on how to deal with victims in the appropriate manner. Disciplinary
              measures must be taken against those state officials who fail to
              carry out their legal duty to protect women and prevent violence when
              clearly required to do so.

              Amnesty International is particularly concerned that there should be
              a greater availability for women in Turkey to resources that may
              provide advice on and protection from violence. In particular, the
              organization would like to see further steps taken to ensure the
              implementation of the Law on Municipalities so that this legal change
              becomes a meaningful development for women in Turkey. We therefore
              urge the government to ensure that adequate funding is available from
              the central budget for the establishment of shelters and to work with
              women's organizations to draw up guidelines for local authorities on
              the implementation of the law based upon universal shelter
              principles. We further ask the government to emphasize to local
              authorities the importance of working with women's organizations in
              setting up or funding shelters.

              Other resources that Amnesty International considers need to be
              provided are sufficient information and points of access for women to
              report violence, including hotlines covering all regions of Turkey
              staffed by sufficiently trained personnel, brochures and posters
              disseminated at hospitals, primary health care centres and courts,
              and websites.

              At present there is reported to be a direct phone line for women in
              service in 21 provinces (out of 81) providing psychological, legal
              and financial counselling for battered women or those who are under
              threat of violence. The government needs to ensure that this phone
              line service is extended to cover all regions of Turkey and that it
              is staffed by sufficiently trained personnel.

              `********
              "All truth passes through three stages:
              First, it is ridiculed;
              Second, it is violently opposed; and
              Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

              Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

              Comment


              • #27
                ECHR Fines Turkey for 'Freedom of Expression'

                ECHR Fines Turkey for 'Freedom of Expression'
                STRASBOURG (BIA)-- The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) handed Turkey a fine of 400,000 dollars in damages so far this year in legal cases about freedom of expression and fair trial. The court fined Turkey 166,000 dollars in similar cases last year.

                The ECHR ruled that Turkey should pay 20,500 dollars in damages to Socialist Part (SP) leader Dogu Perincek; a total of 36,100 dollars to Gunluk Emek newspaper's chief editor Ahmet Ergin and owner Halit Keskin, and 116,200 dollars to Ilkay Adali, the wife of journalist Kutlu Adali who was killed in northern Cyprus, among other people.

                Since 2004, Turkey has been fined 557,554 dollars in damages for violating article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which oversees freedom of expression, article 6/1, which calls for a fair trial, and article 2, which concerns not "investigating enough" journalist deaths.
                "All truth passes through three stages:
                First, it is ridiculed;
                Second, it is violently opposed; and
                Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

                Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

                Comment


                • #28
                  Foreign Ministry Warns: Return of 8th Article Blocks EU Process

                  Foreign Ministry Warns: Return of 8th Article Blocks EU Process
                  By Suleyman Kurt
                  Published: Friday, August 26, 2005
                  zaman.com


                  The Turkish Foreign Ministry, which voiced its opinion regarding the arrangements in the Fight against Terrorism Bill (TMK) to the Ministry of Justice, gave some warnings prior to October 3rd, the day when Turkey’s negotiations with the European Union (EU) begins.

                  “Steps should be avoided, which will reverse the EU process. Turkey has undergone hard times in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) due to the 8th article. “


                  The Foreign Ministry supported warnings from different parts of the society regarding arrangements in the TMK. The common opinion is recorded as, “Necessary measures should be taken to prevent terror; however, no concessions should be made from the human rights and freedoms.” While the Foreign Ministry disclosed its opinion on the TMK to the Ministry of Justice, which conducts studies on the terror law, it warned that steps that can reverse the EU adaptation process should be avoided. The Foreign Ministry warned that bringing the 8th article of the TMK law back, which was abolished in 2003, would block the EU process. The Foreign Ministry stressed that the article at issue will cause “violation of freedom of expression” as it reminded that many violation cases were filed due to the 8th article of the TMK. Emphasizing that Turkey had faced many problems due to this issue in the past, the Foreign Ministry referred to lawsuits filed against Turkey in the ECHR. It was reminded that all of these lawsuits were lost adding, “Turkey had to pay heavy compensations after losing these lawsuits, because, the article at issue means violation of 10th article of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the freedom of expression. All the lawsuits were lost due to this violation. Putting the 8th article in the legislation again will mean reversion of the EU adaptation process. In addition, this will be against Turkey’s international responsibilities. It will cause questioning of Turkey’s decree of complying with the ECHR decisions”.


                  In line with the 8th article of the TMK, a one to three year penalty of imprisonment was given to people who made written, oral or visual propaganda aiming to endanger the indivisible unity of the republic of Turkey and its national security, secularist order, unitary state structure or public order, which provoked people to resort to violence. And a fine or a broadcasting ban was given to any media or press involved

                  After amendments were made in the new Turkish Penal Code (TCK), the amendments in the TMK came to the agenda and a commission was established in the body of the Ministry of Justice. The suggestion sent to the ministry “to include strict measures, which will restrict individual rights and freedoms” were reflected in the press as an “amendment text.” The ministry refuted the news claiming that they “aim to manipulate”. While the President Ahmet Necdet Sezer was a member of the Constitutional Court, he opposed the amendments in the TMK restricting freedoms, on the grounds that the concepts used in the “definition of terror” were not clear, were very ambiguous and open to subjective implementation. Experts also oppose the amendments in the law, which include strict measures. Many people, primarily Associate Professor Vahit Bicak, who is the Head of the Prime Ministry of Human Rights Committee had made statements suggesting, “The amendment to be made should take into consideration balance between the human rights and the requirements of the state of law.”




                  Ankara
                  "All truth passes through three stages:
                  First, it is ridiculed;
                  Second, it is violently opposed; and
                  Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

                  Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Novelist In Turkey Said To Be Charged With Insulting Nation

                    NOVELIST IN TURKEY SAID TO BE CHARGED WITH INSULTING NATION
                    By Amberin Zaman, Los Angeles Times | September 1, 2005

                    Boston Globe, MA
                    Sept 1 2005

                    ANKARA, Turkey -- Orhan Pamuk, one of Turkey's best-known novelists,
                    has been charged with insulting the nation and its people by speaking
                    out against the mass deaths of Armenians during and after World War
                    I and the more recent killings of Kurds, his publisher said yesterday.

                    Pamuk will go on trial in December and could face three years in prison
                    under the country's revised penal code, which deems denigrating Turks
                    and Turkey a punishable offense, the Iletisim Publishing House said
                    in its written statement.

                    Turkish officials declined to comment on the charges. Another law
                    prohibits Pamuk from commenting on his case while it is still pending.

                    Pamuk drew nationalist ire here and received anonymous death threats
                    after he told the Swiss daily Tagesanzeiger in an interview published
                    Feb. 6 that "30,000 Kurds and 1 million Armenians were killed . . .
                    and nobody but me dares to talk about it."

                    Turkey has long denied that more than 1 million members of its
                    once thriving Armenian community were the victims of systematic
                    annihilation, a campaign that Armenians and many others have labeled
                    genocide. The government position is that several hundred thousand died
                    as a result of exposure, famine, and disease as they journeyed to Syria
                    after being deported for collaborating with invading Russian forces.

                    Pamuk's most recent best-selling novel, "Snow," explores tensions
                    between Turkey's secular elite and religious conservatives.

                    News of Pamuk's case came a day before European Union foreign ministers
                    were to meet in Wales, primarily to discuss Turkey. The EU has long
                    cited Turkey's checkered record on human rights as the chief obstacle
                    to its membership in the 25-nation bloc.

                    Turkey won a date to open membership talks after its parliament passed
                    numerous reforms that, among other steps, eased restrictions on the
                    language spoken by the country's large Kurdish minority. The talks
                    are scheduled to begin Oct. 3. Several countries, including France,
                    are seeking to block Turkey's entry amid mounting public opposition
                    to the inclusion of a large, poor, and predominantly Muslim country.

                    Other critics charge that Turkey's new penal code, which came into
                    force in June, still falls short of EU standards by proscribing free
                    debate of the Armenian tragedy and criticism of Turkey's 1974 invasion
                    of the Mediterranean island of Cyprus.
                    "All truth passes through three stages:
                    First, it is ridiculed;
                    Second, it is violently opposed; and
                    Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

                    Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Turkey Hands Its Enemies An Own Goal

                      TURKEY HANDS ITS ENEMIES AN OWN GOAL
                      Maureen Freely

                      The Independent - United Kingdom; Aug 31, 2005

                      Turkey was never going to have an easy ride into Europe. There was
                      the question of Cyprus, and the question of the Kurds. Turkey's
                      checkered human rights record was a cause for concern, as was the
                      role the military played until very recently. There were also dark
                      mutterings about the Islamicization of Europe.

                      But the ghost at the feast has always been the question of the
                      Armenian massacres in 1915. Europe would like to see Turkey recognise
                      its responsibility and apologise. Turkey continues to maintain that
                      " while several hundred thousand Armenians may have perished " this
                      happened in the context of parallel massacres perpetrated against
                      Muslim Turks.

                      In certain parts of the Turkish intelligentsia, however, there is
                      growing recognition that Turkey will not be successful in its European
                      bid until this issue is aired in an open way and somehow resolved.

                      It was in this spirit that Orhan Pamuk, Turkey's most famous novelist,
                      said, in an interview last winter with the Swiss newspaper Tages
                      Anzeiger that '30,000 Kurds and one million Armenians were killed in
                      these lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it'. His comments,
                      reprinted in the Turkish press the following day, caused a furore,
                      with leading commentators denouncing him as a traitor.

                      There followed death threats, ostensibly from offended members of
                      the public, probably linked to right-wing paramilitaries. Fearing
                      for his safety, Pamuk's friends advised him to leave the country. In
                      his absence, the story ran and ran, with the Turkish press seizing
                      on every comment from abroad to paint him as a Turk who shames his
                      country abroad.

                      As his friend and translator, I would like to make it very clear
                      (here and in the Turkish newspapers where this piece will no doubt
                      appear tomorrow) that this image is wholly false. This is a man who
                      loves his country deeply, defends it fiercely, especially when abroad,
                      and who cannot imagine living anywhere else.

                      Pamuk is not the only Turkish intellectual to have brought the Armenian
                      question into the public domain in recent months. Last May, a group
                      of Turkish academics " some from Turkish universities, some based
                      in the US and Europe " tried to hold a conference on the subject at
                      Bogazici University in Istanbul.

                      Entitled 'The Ottoman Armenians during the Era of Ottoman Decline',
                      its aim was 'to understand and recount a historical issue that
                      ... has become trapped and increasingly politicised between the
                      radical Armenian national and official Turkish theses'. There was
                      also a recognition amongst the (largely pro-EU) participants that
                      if Turkish academics were able to find a space in which to 'own' the
                      issue, this would in itself be proof to the European community that
                      Turkey was a maturing democracy, intent on promoting and protecting
                      freedom of thought.

                      Sadly, the Justice Minister, Cemil Cicek, saw fit to indicate otherwise
                      in the National Assembly the day before the conference was due to
                      open. When an opposition deputy denounced the organisers as traitors,
                      he rose to concur, going on to call the conference a 'dagger in the
                      back of the Turkish people'.

                      The conference was postponed. Many of those who were to have given
                      papers vented their anger in the press, and though they were roundly
                      condemned by very angry others there were those who saw this fiery
                      exchange as proof that matters previously viewed as untouchable were
                      at least getting a public airing.

                      The optimists were vindicated when the conference was rescheduled for
                      late September, and they were further encouraged when Prime Minister
                      Tayyip Erdogan told the organisers that he supported the conference and
                      wanted it to take place before his own talks with the EU on 3 October.

                      But now this same government seems to have decided to shoot itself
                      in the foot. For a public prosecutor has brought a case against Orhan
                      Pamuk, having found his remarks in the Swiss newspaper last winter to
                      be an infringement of Article 301/1 of the Turkish Penal Code. This
                      states that 'the public denigration of Turkish identity' is a crime
                      and recommends that those found guilty be given prison sentences of
                      six to 36 months.

                      Because another law prohibits Pamuk from commenting on his case
                      while it is pending, the statement that his Turkish publishers will
                      be sending out today is a three-sentence affair which sets out the
                      facts and offers no opinion. It is up to us to decide how to read it.

                      There is no doubt that it will raise questions about the wisdom of
                      Turkey's EU membership bid. How can it possibly claim to be a European
                      country if it has such laws on the books, and if public prosecutors
                      can bring such cases? No doubt the censure has already started behind
                      closed doors. No doubt it will be followed by more public denigration
                      of Turkishness in the European press.

                      This does not preclude a fairy-tale ending: common sense could
                      prevail. The government could persuade the public prosecutor to drop
                      his case. It could then put its full weight behind the conference,
                      and signal to the right- wing paramilitaries to stay away.

                      If the government fails to achieve any of the above, it may well be
                      because it can't. Since December of last year, there has been a slow
                      but steady rise of nationalist, anti-EU sentiment inside the ruling
                      party, an even more dramatic rise in nationalist rhetoric in the
                      main opposition party, and a growing recalcitrance in the vast state
                      bureaucracies that must implement the sweeping legal, social, and
                      economic changes Turkey must make if it is join the EU. In the same
                      period, the government's ability to make a case for Europe has been
                      severely weakened by the stream of anti-Turkish voices from Europe.

                      The then French Prime Minister, Jean-Pierre Raffarin, set the tone
                      during the French referendum, when he cast doubt on Turkey's EU bid
                      by wondering if it was wise for the 'river of Islam to enter the
                      riverbed of secularism in Europe'. (Did they forget to tell him that
                      Turkey has been a secular state for more than 80 years?) The great
                      man did not intend his remarks for the Turkish public, but of course,
                      they read it, too. Now, with Merkel and Chirac promising to block
                      Turkey's EU bid altogether, resentment can only grow.

                      This is good news for all those inside Turkey who would like to stay
                      out of the EU, and especially good news to hardliners who would like
                      to see the state and the military returned to their former power, and
                      the intelligentsia muzzled. The badmouthing from Europe has greatly
                      strengthened their cause. The case against Orhan Pamuk is more grist
                      for their mill. Unless it is handled wisely, that is. If you care at
                      all about democracy in Turkey, don't let them use him as a pawn.
                      "All truth passes through three stages:
                      First, it is ridiculed;
                      Second, it is violently opposed; and
                      Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

                      Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X