Tweet
Turkish PM denies university bullied into cancelling conference on Armenians
Yeni Safak website, Istanbul
4 Jun 05
Excerpt from interview with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
published by Turkish newspaper Yeni Safak website on 4 June
[Passage omitted]
[Question] The draft law [on the new penal code] does not refer to
slander only. There is a provision about basic national interests. For
example national interests could include issues such as the withdrawal
of troops from Cyprus and the Armenian genocide.
[Erdogan] The law has its own language. I am not a lawyer. I do not
know what is said in the reasoning for basic national interests but
I do not agree with that example. No judge could evaluate the matter
that way.
On the Armenian genocide issue I do not think that it could be
discussed as something pertaining to the state. I ask you then: Why
did the organizers of this symposium [Istanbul's Bosphorus University
conference on Armenians in the Ottoman Empire] change their minds?
[Question] The justice minister's remarks intimidated the president
of Bosphorus University.
[Erdogan] Was it absolutely necessary to hold the conference
there? Hold it somewhere else. Are Mr [Justice Minister Cemil]
Cicek's remarks the law of this land? Mr Cicek expressed his own views.
[Question] When the minister of justice calls the organizers
"traitors", then the university president would naturally be
intimidated.
[Erdogan] If activities in this country could be stopped with such
remarks then many things would not get done. Whoever the organizing
committee was, not the lady president - it could have been held in
another hall. We did this ourselves for many years. When they banned
us we held our meetings in another hall.
[Question] There were charges that this incident marred academic
freedom.
[Erdogan] This is the information I have. Sabanci, Bilgi and
Bosphorus universities are participants and part of the organizing
committee. This is the legal dimension of this matter. If a problem
surfaced and the lady was apprehensive or troubled, then the committee
should or could have held the meeting at another location. There is
not much sense in postponing it to one and a half months later. I was
overseas when this incident occurred. When they asked me about it I
said that this was the personal view of the minister of justice. It
is not the view of either our government or the state. Our laws and
everything is clear on this issue. The EU process is clear. First of
all it is wrong to talk about something that has not been done. We
do not know in advance who will say what there. Anyone can come out
and say positive or negative things. I think that it would be more
appropriate if Mr Cicek commented on those things afterwards. Later
I said this to the minister of justice.
Yeni Safak website, Istanbul
4 Jun 05
Excerpt from interview with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
published by Turkish newspaper Yeni Safak website on 4 June
[Passage omitted]
[Question] The draft law [on the new penal code] does not refer to
slander only. There is a provision about basic national interests. For
example national interests could include issues such as the withdrawal
of troops from Cyprus and the Armenian genocide.
[Erdogan] The law has its own language. I am not a lawyer. I do not
know what is said in the reasoning for basic national interests but
I do not agree with that example. No judge could evaluate the matter
that way.
On the Armenian genocide issue I do not think that it could be
discussed as something pertaining to the state. I ask you then: Why
did the organizers of this symposium [Istanbul's Bosphorus University
conference on Armenians in the Ottoman Empire] change their minds?
[Question] The justice minister's remarks intimidated the president
of Bosphorus University.
[Erdogan] Was it absolutely necessary to hold the conference
there? Hold it somewhere else. Are Mr [Justice Minister Cemil]
Cicek's remarks the law of this land? Mr Cicek expressed his own views.
[Question] When the minister of justice calls the organizers
"traitors", then the university president would naturally be
intimidated.
[Erdogan] If activities in this country could be stopped with such
remarks then many things would not get done. Whoever the organizing
committee was, not the lady president - it could have been held in
another hall. We did this ourselves for many years. When they banned
us we held our meetings in another hall.
[Question] There were charges that this incident marred academic
freedom.
[Erdogan] This is the information I have. Sabanci, Bilgi and
Bosphorus universities are participants and part of the organizing
committee. This is the legal dimension of this matter. If a problem
surfaced and the lady was apprehensive or troubled, then the committee
should or could have held the meeting at another location. There is
not much sense in postponing it to one and a half months later. I was
overseas when this incident occurred. When they asked me about it I
said that this was the personal view of the minister of justice. It
is not the view of either our government or the state. Our laws and
everything is clear on this issue. The EU process is clear. First of
all it is wrong to talk about something that has not been done. We
do not know in advance who will say what there. Anyone can come out
and say positive or negative things. I think that it would be more
appropriate if Mr Cicek commented on those things afterwards. Later
I said this to the minister of justice.