(WiPC/IFEX) – The news that the court presiding over the case of the world-famous Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk will not proceed with the case is greeted with relief by International PEN members world wide. The decision came after the Ministry of Justice refused to take responsibility for the case. Yet it does little to assuage […]
(WiPC/IFEX) – The news that the court presiding over the case of the world-famous Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk will not proceed with the case is greeted with relief by International PEN members world wide. The decision came after the Ministry of Justice refused to take responsibility for the case. Yet it does little to assuage PEN’s concerns that the right to freedom of expression in Turkey is severely curtailed by the existence of laws that penalise debate on “taboo” topics.
During the past 12 months, PEN has monitored over 60 cases of writers, journalists and publishers who were brought before the courts or faced with prosecution for their writings. Around fifteen of these are currently on trial on charges of “insult” under Article 301, similar charges to those levied against Pamuk. Some recent notable cases include: the editor of an Armenian magazine, Hrant Dink, accused of insult to the State, five journalists accused of “interfering” with the judiciary for their comments on attempts to ban a conference, and publisher Abdullah Yilmaz who is to go on trial for a novel set in the early part of the last century.
On 9 February 2006, there will be another hearing against Dink, the editor of the Armenian-language magazine “Agos”, whose trial opened in April 2005, nine months ago. His “crime” was to make comments at a conference in which he expressed his belief that a phrase in the Turkish national anthem was discriminatory. Originally charged under the old penal code before it was amended in June 2005, the court decided to continue with his case, charging him with offences under Article 301 of the new penal code. Dink faces up to three years in prison. In another case that concluded in October, Dink was sentenced to a six-month suspended prison sentence for an article that discussed the impact on the present day Armenian diaspora of the killings of hundreds of thousands of Armenians by the Ottoman army in 1915-17. As a result, new charges were brought against Dink and three others writing for “Agos” in December 2005 for an article that challenged Dink’s October conviction. The four are accused of attempting to “influence the judiciary” under Article 288 of the Penal Code.
Commentators are surprised to see the emergence of the application of Article 288 of the Penal Code, which was intended to protect the courts from outside influence yet is now being used to penalise legitimate comment on the judicial process. A notable case is that of five journalists working for the mainstream press who will appear in an Istanbul court on 7 February. All are facing charges for their articles on a conference of Turkish historians on the Armenian tragedy. The conference was postponed after being initially prohibited by a court order, eventually taking place at the end of September. However, Ismet Berkan, Erol Katirciolgu, Murat Belge, Haluk Sahin and Hasan Cemal will still be brought before a court in two weeks time. Four of the five are also accused of giving “insult to the state” for the above-mentioned articles, under Article 301, the same law under which Pamuk was charged.
In early April, the editor of the Literatür Publishing House, Abdullah Yilmaz, will be brought to trial under Article 301 for the book by the Greek writer Mara Meimaridi entitled “The Witches of Smyrna”. The book is a novel set in the last years of Ottoman rule in Izmir (known in Greek as Smyrna). Scenes in the book that describe some parts of the Turkish quarter of Izmir as dirty are seen to be “denigrating to Turkish national identity”. What is surprising is that the book has already been in print for a year, selling 50,000 copies in Turkey and 100,000 in Greece, with a film adaptation under way.
These are just some of the cases that are currently causing concern in Turkey. Although to date the trials have not ended with long prison terms, acquittals are not assured, and the result is often fines and suspended sentences. This is a great improvement over the situation in the 1990s, when hundreds of writers and journalists were sent to prison, often for many years. Yet this does not lessen the impact of the present situation, in which judicial harassment is now used to silence criticism of the Turkish state. These trials take months to complete, involve many hearings and cause extensive disruption to the lives of the defendants, generating emotional as well as financial stress. That eminent writers and publishers, as well as mainstream journalists, are not immune from prosecution sends a strong warning to anyone who dares to consider writing on issues considered “taboo”. These include comments on the mass killings of the Armenian population in the early twentieth century, suggestions that the Turkish state and army has carried out human rights abuses, or even simply reporting frankly on the outcome of trials.
While there are court cases against writers, journalists and publishers who challenge “taboos,” and while there exist laws that enable them to be prosecuted, International PEN will continue to call for an end to all trials of those accused solely for having practised their right to freedom of expression. It calls on the Turkish authorities to take note of the international indignation at the court hearings against Pamuk and to take the opportunity to review Turkish legislation with the aim of eliminating the possibility of future trials of this kind once and for all.
