"insulting Turkish identity"

[Gavur]

Whats worse then a donkey ?

A donkey that doesnt know hes a donkey!

[Gavur]

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.

[Gavur]

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)

[Gavur]

What they left out is all the 'sherefli' things the Turkixh goverment did towards the Armenian people.

[Gavur]

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.

[Gavur]

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

Amnesty International
Aug 1 2005

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR440272005?open&of=ENG-TUR

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.

`********

[Gavur]

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.

[Gavur]

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

[Gavur]

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.

[Gavur]

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.