FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE EU TURKEY AND THE KURDS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE EU, TURKEY AND THE KURDS of this offence on the basis of speeches in which she simply referred to Abdullah Öcalan as a leader of the Kurds and claimed that the PKK was not a terrorist organisation, thus clearly violating her freedom of expression. The example of the Zana case demonstrates the fact that resolving the problem of restrictions on free expression in Turkey is not simply a matter of legislative change; it is also a matter of changing the jurisprudence of the judiciary. However, changes in judicial attitudes do not appear to have been keeping pace with reforms. Freedom of Association and Assembly The right of freedom of association and assembly remained heavily restricted, even after the reforms leading up to the start of accession negotiations in 2004. Open criticism of the government or peaceful activities which touched on taboo subjects such as the military, the Kurdish question or the Armenian genocide met with reprisals. Anti-democratic legislative provisions were used to harass and prosecute dissent; administrative restrictions on the formation of associations resembled those of a police state; and assemblies and public meetings regularly met with police harassment, violence and detention. Scenes of non-violent women demonstrators being beaten with truncheons and dispersed with tear gas in March 2005 were reportedly greeted by the EU with shock and concern at the use of ‘disproportionate force’. 165 However, the EU’s response was insufficient to prevent further human rights violations, and the EU has not assumed the level of responsibility required to pressure Turkey into ensuring that such practices no longer occur. A fact-finding mission sent to the Kurdish region in the south-east in April 2006 166 found that the rule of law was clearly put aside during the security forces’ handling of the violence that erupted following the funerals of PKK armed combatants at the end of March 2006. Police used indiscriminate, disproportionate and lethal force, clearly condoned by their superiors, chillingly reminiscent of the security force’s behaviour under the state of emergency during the 1990s. Ten civilians lost their lives, including three children. Hundreds of civilians were detained, many of whom alleged that they had been tortured during their detention. Minority Rights Limited progress was achieved within the sphere of minority rights between 2004 and 2007. Language rights continued to be hindered; in June 2007 the Council of State dismissed the mayor from office in the Sur municipality and dissolved the Municipal 165 BBC, ‘Turkish police beatings shock EU’, 7 March 2005, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4325347.stm (last accessed 11 October 2006) . 166 See ‘Indiscriminate Use of Force: Violence in South-east Turkey’ KHRP Fact Finding Mission Report, October 2006. 182
FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE EU, TURKEY AND THE KURDS Council for providing multilingual services despite it being an area in which many people speak no Turkish. 167 Following legalisation the first private Kurdish language schools were opened in 2004, but by 2005 they had all closed down, allegedly due to a lack of demand 168 ; Kurdish children continued to be prevented from learning their mother tongue in the public school system. A big step in the right direction was taken in terms of education when the European Court of Human Rights held that Turkey should bring its educational system and domestic legislation into conformity with the ECHR in October 2007. 169 This case was in relation to an Alevi child unable to study her religion in school, which infringed her right to education under Article 2 of Protocol No. 1. It was held that where Contracting States include the study of religion in the curricula pupils’ parents may expect that the subject will be taught in such a way as to meet the criteria of objectivity and pluralism, and with respect for their religious convictions. Elsewhere, there appeared to be regression. State run human rights bodies were sidelined and relieved of any real influence. In March 2005, the Chairman of the Human Rights Advisory Board of the Prime Ministry (BİHDK), felt compelled to resign from his post after he and his colleagues were severely criticised over a government-commissioned report, subsequently known as ‘the Minority Report’, calling for improvements in Turkey’s record on minority rights. The Chairman bitterly criticised the government’s ‘insincere attitude’ towards human rights and its lack of consultation with BİHDK. 170 In February 2006, two members of BİHDK, Professor Baskın Oran and Professor Ibrahim Kaboğlu, were charged under Articles 301 and 216 of the revised Penal Code on the basis that the report argued that ‘Turk’ is an identity of only one ethnic group and that Turkey also includes other ethnic groups such as ‘Kurds’ and ‘Arabs’. These comments were considered to be sufficient ‘denigration’ of the Turkish state to warrant criminal proceedings. 171 This case typified the mistrust which has been shown to the work of human rights defenders by the criminal justice system, which the state’s programme of human rights training seems to have done little to shift. The irony is that the Human Rights Advi- 167 EU Commission Turkey Progress Report 2007, p. 22 168 Opened with a flourish, Turkey’s Kurdish-language schools fold - www.csmonitor.com 169 Hasan and Eylem Zengin v Turkey (App No. 1448/04) 170 Yavuz Önen, ‘Turkey PM rights adviser resigns’, BBC, 25 March 2005, athttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/ hi/europe/4383075.stm> (last accessed 5 October 2005). 171 See: ‘Suppressing Academic Debate: The Turkish Penal Code, a Trial Observation Report’ KHRP, June 2006. 183
Page 1:
FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON T
Page 6 and 7:
Acknowledgments The EUTCC would lik
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133: FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON T
Page 204: FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON T
show all

FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE EU TURKEY AND THE KURDS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?