(WiPC/IFEX) – The following is a WiPC background document issued in the context of the organisation’s June 2003 special campaign on Turkey: Writers in Prison Committee, International PEN Special Campaign on Turkey, June 2003 Background document If not now, when? TURKEY: A Nation at the Crossroads Summary: Turkey underwent profound political changes in 2002 and […]
(WiPC/IFEX) – The following is a WiPC background document issued in the context of the organisation’s June 2003 special campaign on Turkey:
Writers in Prison Committee, International PEN
Special Campaign on Turkey, June 2003
Background document
If not now, when?
TURKEY: A Nation at the Crossroads
Summary: Turkey underwent profound political changes in 2002 and adopted several measures to improve its human rights record. As a result, the country is now on course to join the European Union – an outcome it has long desired. In the 1980s and 1990s, the then government’s repression of human rights and freedom of expression was extremely severe and seemed almost intractable. PEN recorded dozens of writers in prison at any one time, some serving sentences of over a hundred years, such as PEN Honorary Member Ismail Besikci. However, the quest for EU membership resulted in a set of democratisation measures being recently implemented and today there is only one writer – the Kurdish politician and journalist Leyla Zana – to PEN’s certain knowledge who is in prison for exercising the right to freedom of expression.
Despite the decreased use of imprisonment to silence dissent, a country free from censorship is still far from being realised. Writers, editors, journalists and publishers continue to face protracted prosecutions, fines and possible imprisonment if they wish explore certain topics which remain ‘taboo’. The country’s ethnic minorities, its relations with its neighbours, Marxism, and human sexuality are among subjects that, if broached, routinely result in court proceedings and book bannings. PEN is mounting a campaign to urge Turkey to take its democratisation process one important stage further, and to allow the free discussion of these and other hitherto censored subjects. It argues that democracies thrive when unfettered debate is encouraged, not proscribed, and that societies without censorship gain much from hearing the multifaceted views of all its members. In particular, it is urging that the many legal charges still facing writers, journalists and publishers be dropped and that Leyla Zana in particular be freed.
Political Backdrop: Since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in the 1920s, Turkey has struggled to emerge as a modern nation-state. It has experienced military coups, fractured leadership, and fraught relations between the different ethnicities that exist within its borders. The last coup was in 1980, after which there was heavy censorship and severe repression of all left-leaning activists. Many writers were also unjustly imprisoned. As the civil war between the authorities and the local Kurdish population in the southeast intensified, discussion of Kurdish matters was especially proscribed.
Today, with a population of some 70 million, Turkey is ruled from Ankara by the Justice and Development Party (AKP), led by President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and his Prime Minister, Abdullah Gul. His government came to power after elections in November 2002, in which the AKP won 363 seats in the 550-strong Turkish Grand National Assembly. The AKP was thus able to form a single-party government, after more than a decade of multi-party coalitions. The AKP is the more moderate of two parties that emerged after the Virtue Party, of Islamic persuasion, was banned. The runner-up in the elections, winning an important number of seats, was the centre-left Republican People’s Party (CHP).
The November elections were called after the previous coalition government fractured. Leading components had wished to back democratisation measures to ensure European Union (EU) membership, but thereby lost the support of the Nationalist Action Party (MHP), a conservative-leaning party that strongly opposed the measures. The MHP and other important elements within Turkey’s political establishment remain adamantly against democratic changes. They argue that they may have a ‘destabilising’ effect on the country, while the more progressive parties wish to see Turkey emerge as a modern democracy and a fully-fledged member of the EU.
Another factor of recent concern to human rights groups was the Turkish government’s repression of peaceful anti-war protestors. The AKP joined with the USA and UK in asking for United Nations authorisation of military action in Iraq against Saddam Hussein and then, in March 2003, supported the invasion of Iraq. Thousands of citizens took part in demonstrations and protests against the war and, as in other countries around the world, some were arbitrarily arrested. In the post-war period, it is unclear how the military situation just beyond Turkey’s border will be played out, especially given Turkey’s own complex relationship with the Kurds within its borders. Given recent events, a full picture of how far the AKP – as the country’s relatively new ruling party – will advance democracy in Turkey, is yet to emerge. Some fear that increased tensions in the region will strengthen the hand of the MHP and other conservative elements, and that the government may be tempted to backtrack on some of its measures promoting democracy.
Turkey is thus ‘Janus-faced’. Its two faces look forward and back, one towards democratic change and inclusion within Europe and the other towards a more ossified situation where repression continues in the name of national security. How writers and freedom of expression fare at this juncture may prove pivotal; whether they prevail or not may radically influence the country’s future path.
PEN is therefore launching a campaign to support freedom of expression and defend writers and publishers who have come under attack. By throwing its weight behind them at this crucial time, it hopes to strengthen those within Turkey who support its path to democracy.
Freedom of Expression in Turkey Today
PEN notes that changes in legislation regarding freedom of expression have resulted in some of the pressure on writers and publishers being eased. However, its case list on Turkey records several continuing violations of the right to freedom of expression.
Leyla Zana, the well-known Kurdish parliamentarian who has also worked in the past as a journalist, is now serving a long prison term for alleged membership of a banned party. WiPC recently learned that part of her prison term includes a two-year jail sentence for an article she wrote, and on these grounds it has taken up her case. It now joins Amnesty International and other human rights groups in calling for her release.
WiPC is also investigating more than a dozen cases of journalists who are currently in prison, most of whom are charged with membership of an illegal organisation. WiPC is still in the process of determining whether or not they ever advocated violence, or the extent to which their imprisonment is connected to their journalistic work.
The current case list also records more than 80 cases of writers and publishers who are being prosecuted merely for what they have written or published, not including a large group of writers who are facing charges for their participation in the Freedom of Expression (FoX) campaign led by Sanar Yurdatapan (see below for more details). In all, WiPC estimates that at any one time about a hundred writers, publishers and journalists are before the courts. One case that is particularly highlighting is that of Ömer Asan, whose book The Culture of the Pontus describes Turkey’s small Pontian minority, a people with a distinct language and ethnicity with Hellenic roots. He is facing imprisonment on charges of spreading ‘separatist propaganda’ with this book and could face between 14 months and 4 years in prison if convicted.
WiPC also notes that hundreds of books are banned in Turkey. While their publishers and writers are rarely imprisoned nowadays, fines are extremely common. Court cases often result in acquittals, but those being tried find their work adversely affected by the emotional and financial toll that comes from having to defend themselves.
The bannings are typically against books and journals that explore four main topics: the Kurds, where any sympathy or support for them is seen as separatist propaganda and hence prohibited; other ethnic minorities (such as the Armenians and the Greeks), discussion of which can result in similar accusations; left-wing ideology, especially when the views espoused are seen as Marxist; and sex, where frank discussion can lead to accusations of obscenity.
PEN believes that while the legal apparatus is in place that allows such trials and book bannings to take place, freedom of expression cannot truly said to be enjoyed in Turkey. The following legal overview summarises the laws that are most commonly employed to prosecute writers.
Laws affecting Freedom of Expression
On 6 February 2002, Law No. 4744 – the ‘Mini-Democracy Package’ – was adopted by the Turkish government. This changed some of the laws that had previously seriously curtailed freedom of expression, but the changes were not always positive. Many of the laws are still being modified. The Human Rights Association of Turkey, evaluating the first three months of 2003, recently concluded that these amendments were ‘partial’ and their piecemeal nature still rendered the ‘constitutional and legal system of Turkey’ not fully democratic. It called for ‘radical democratic change and transformation’.
The association in particular reported that certain radio and TV stations had been subjected to 180-day suspension orders, that journals had been temporarily closed down, and that fresh cases against individuals for having ‘expressed their thoughts’ numbered 50. It cited the Anti-Terror legislation along with Articles 312 and 159 of the Turkish Penal Code as continuing to give rise to many unjust prosecutions.
(Interestingly, on 6 May, just before this report was released, the Association’s national office in Ankara was itself raided; police officers searched the offices thoroughly and confiscated files, computers, books, cassettes, and cited Article 169 of the Turkish Penal code ? ‘aiding and abetting an illegal organisation’ – as the grounds on which the search warrant had been issued).
The culprit laws cited by the Turkish Human Rights Association outlaw the following activities, in vague, over-broad language:
* Producing ‘separatist propaganda’: Turkey’s Anti-Terror legislation, specifically Article 8, remains a major stumbling block for any writers wishing to explore the issue of Turkey’s ethnic minorities. Support for the Kurds, particularly using words such as ‘Kurdistan’, can result in imprisonment for ‘separatist propaganda’.
* ‘Incitement to hatred on the basis of class, religion or race’ if such incitement endangers the ‘public order’, or ‘insulting a segment of the population or people’s honour’: Article 312.2 of the Turkish Penal Code has again been used against those writing about Turkey’s ethnic minorities.
* ‘Insulting the Turkish nation’: Article 159 of the Turkish Penal Code prohibits statements deemed insulting to the State or its organs – whether the military, the judiciary, or government offices. Those criticising alleged human rights abuses committed by the army, or critiquing the legal system, can find themselves on the wrong side of this law.
The Freedom of Expression (FoX) Campaign
Since 1996, an extraordinary campaign has gathered momentum in Turkey, mounted by a group of writers, artists and intellectuals, and headed by musician and composer Sanar Yurdatapan. The campaign is designed to test to the limits Turkey’s laws proscribing freedom of expression and to demonstrate thereby that these laws are both unjust in themselves and unwieldy. The group repeatedly produces booklets that deliberately flout the laws by exploring the issues the laws are designed to censor; sometimes over a thousand activists sign their name to the list as joint publishers, rendering it necessary for the Turkish judiciary to initiate a trial process against each one, for each booklet. The trials are lengthy processes. In most cases, individuals are eventually acquitted or face fines for their involvement in the booklets, although occasionally some have served brief prison terms, most notably Sanar Yurdatapan himself.
For example, two pamphlets produced in 2000 (FoX: 2000 and FoX: For All) gave rise to a series of prosecutions against its authors under, among other laws, Articles 159 and 312 of the Turkish Penal Code, as well as the Anti-Terror legislation. Some of these cases have resulted in acquittals, while others are ongoing. The cases against Fox: For All are proving especially unwieldy. This pamphlet has been signed by several writers, 65 MPs, and other leading intellectuals in Turkey – at the last count 77,663 people had signed on, declaring themselves as ‘co-publishers’ and thereby technically indictable. The trial is continuing. Three PEN Centres – San Miguel PEN Centre, English PEN and Perth PEN – have adopted and endorsed the FoX campaign as ‘an area of special interest’.
Conclusion
Turkey is at a crossroads, and the signs as to which path it will choose for the future are confused. Attempts to modify its hitherto very repressive legislation have been made and there are clearly bona fide efforts among some elements of Turkey’s governing bodies to strengthen the democratic processes in the country. However, there are also many instances of serious censorship and backward-looking oppression. Writers, if rarely imprisoned, are still severely harassed.
