Tweet
Newropeans Magazine
June 8 2005
Turkey legalizes the Denial of the Armenian Genocide - 3rd Part -
Written by Houry Mayissian
Wednesday, 08 June 2005
90 years have passed since Ottoman Turkey committed genocide against
its Christian Armenian subjects in 1915. Although several parliaments
have recognized the Armenian Genocide and many historians have
established that it is a historical fact, the Turkish government
still refuses to acknowledge it. It has, in the past 90 years,
implemented several methods to deny the genocide ever happened. The
latest of these measures was the recent criminalization of the
acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide in the new Turkish Penal
Code, which took effect on June 1.
On 4th October 2004, the office of US Congressman Frank Pallone
(D-NJ), who also is the co-chairman of the Congressional Caucus on
Armenian Issues, informed in a press release that the congressman had
urged the State Department to condemn article 305 of the Penal Code
(1). The congressman wrote a letter to the Secretary of State, Colin
Powell, urging him to condemn the article and pointing out that its
adoption is `an imprudent step on the part of a nation that is
desperately trying to establish an image of having a free and
democratic society.'
Given that the new penal code was adopted by demands from the
European Union and considered `one of the key elements in the
country's bid to start membership negotiations with the European
Union'(2), The European Union also made references to article 305 in
several reports on Turkey's membership.
On 30th November 2004, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European
Parliament adopted a proposal for a resolution on the `2004 regular
report and the recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's
progress towards accession'. In its report the Foreign Affairs
Committee adopted an amendment welcoming the reform of criminal
procedure, but considered that `article 305 of the new Turkish penal
code which sanctions alleged `threats to fundamental national
interests' and the explanatory statement of which targets freedom of
expression, in particular related to the Cyprus and Armenia issues,
is incompatible with the 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.'(3) The Committee called for the
repeal of the article. In December, prior to the European Union
summit that would give the green light for accession talks with
Turkey, the European Parliament adopted the parliamentary report on
Turkey's progress toward accession. In its report, the Parliament
included the amendment mentioned above (4).
The OSCE representative on Freedom of the Media Haraszti, described
article 305 in his May 2005 review as a de facto censorship
provision, given that it can be used to punish any speech that is not
in conformity with the views of the Government on the issues listed
in paragraph 4 (5). Referring to the clause about receiving benefits
for spreading propaganda, Haraszti pointed out that the article does
not `exclude any interpretation of journalistic salaries as pecuniary
benefits for spreading propaganda.' (5)
The article was also criticized by Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF),
the Writers in Prison Committee (WiPC) of International PEN, the
International Publishers Association (IPA) and Amnesty International.
RSF considered that article 305 `specifically targets freedom of
expression' (6). The IPA sent letters to the EU Dutch presidency,
Romano Prodi (then president of the European Commission) and
Jose-Manuel Barroso, its new president, calling on them to urge the
Turkish Government to abandon the criminalization of the recognition
of the Armenian Genocide (7). IPA considered the article a move that
jeopardizes freedom of expression and the freedom to publish. IPA and
PEN issued in December a joint guide entitled `New Turkish Penal
Code: A Long Way to Freedom of Expression'. In the guide, the
organizations called for the repealing of the explanatory report of
article 305 that includes the examples on the Armenian Genocide and
the withdrawal of Turkish troops from Cyprus. The organizations
pointed out:
`Allegations of genocide against Armenians and Kurds' is a ground
that is sometimes brought against writers and publishers. This was
for instance the case of publisher Ali Varis and writer Mamo Bayram
for the book entitled: `Kocgiri - Northwest Dersim'. This book was
banned. Mr. Varis faced the risk of imprisonment. We are not sure
whether the case is still pending or not. However, Article 305 of the
New Turkish Penal Code will provide prosecutors with a new legal
device to prevent an open and democratic debate from taking place in
Turkey on two fundamental issues: the Armenian Genocide and the
presence (occupation) of Turkish troops in Cyprus(8).Part l 4th Part
Amnesty International issued an action alert on May 13 considering
that the imposing of criminal penalty for statements that acknowledge
the Armenian Genocide as a historical fact or call for the withdrawal
of Turkish troops from Cyprus `would be a clear breach of
international standards safeguarding freedom of expression.' (9)
(1) Pallone urges state department to condemn new Turkish Penal Code
punishing Turks who object to government's policy toward Armenia &
Cyprus. Retrieved 14-12-2004.
(2) Lungescu, O. Turkey's quest to join Europe. Retrieved 01-01-2005.
(3) Turkey: The Foreign Affairs Committee against the European
Parliament. Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(4) European Parliament calls on Turkey to explicitly recognize the
Armenian Genocide. Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(5) Haraszti, M. Review of the Draft Turkish Penal Code: Freedom of
Media Concerns. Retrieved 19-05-2005.
(6) Turkey still far from European standards of Press Freedom.
Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(7) IPA calls for amendment to Penal Code to allow for free
expression on Armenian genocide. Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(8) New Turkish Penal Code: A long way to freedom of expression.
Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(9) Turkey: Freedom of expression/torture/prisoners of conscience.
Retrieved 19-05-2005.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
June 8 2005
Turkey legalizes the Denial of the Armenian Genocide - 3rd Part -
Written by Houry Mayissian
Wednesday, 08 June 2005
90 years have passed since Ottoman Turkey committed genocide against
its Christian Armenian subjects in 1915. Although several parliaments
have recognized the Armenian Genocide and many historians have
established that it is a historical fact, the Turkish government
still refuses to acknowledge it. It has, in the past 90 years,
implemented several methods to deny the genocide ever happened. The
latest of these measures was the recent criminalization of the
acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide in the new Turkish Penal
Code, which took effect on June 1.
On 4th October 2004, the office of US Congressman Frank Pallone
(D-NJ), who also is the co-chairman of the Congressional Caucus on
Armenian Issues, informed in a press release that the congressman had
urged the State Department to condemn article 305 of the Penal Code
(1). The congressman wrote a letter to the Secretary of State, Colin
Powell, urging him to condemn the article and pointing out that its
adoption is `an imprudent step on the part of a nation that is
desperately trying to establish an image of having a free and
democratic society.'
Given that the new penal code was adopted by demands from the
European Union and considered `one of the key elements in the
country's bid to start membership negotiations with the European
Union'(2), The European Union also made references to article 305 in
several reports on Turkey's membership.
On 30th November 2004, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European
Parliament adopted a proposal for a resolution on the `2004 regular
report and the recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's
progress towards accession'. In its report the Foreign Affairs
Committee adopted an amendment welcoming the reform of criminal
procedure, but considered that `article 305 of the new Turkish penal
code which sanctions alleged `threats to fundamental national
interests' and the explanatory statement of which targets freedom of
expression, in particular related to the Cyprus and Armenia issues,
is incompatible with the 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.'(3) The Committee called for the
repeal of the article. In December, prior to the European Union
summit that would give the green light for accession talks with
Turkey, the European Parliament adopted the parliamentary report on
Turkey's progress toward accession. In its report, the Parliament
included the amendment mentioned above (4).
The OSCE representative on Freedom of the Media Haraszti, described
article 305 in his May 2005 review as a de facto censorship
provision, given that it can be used to punish any speech that is not
in conformity with the views of the Government on the issues listed
in paragraph 4 (5). Referring to the clause about receiving benefits
for spreading propaganda, Haraszti pointed out that the article does
not `exclude any interpretation of journalistic salaries as pecuniary
benefits for spreading propaganda.' (5)
The article was also criticized by Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF),
the Writers in Prison Committee (WiPC) of International PEN, the
International Publishers Association (IPA) and Amnesty International.
RSF considered that article 305 `specifically targets freedom of
expression' (6). The IPA sent letters to the EU Dutch presidency,
Romano Prodi (then president of the European Commission) and
Jose-Manuel Barroso, its new president, calling on them to urge the
Turkish Government to abandon the criminalization of the recognition
of the Armenian Genocide (7). IPA considered the article a move that
jeopardizes freedom of expression and the freedom to publish. IPA and
PEN issued in December a joint guide entitled `New Turkish Penal
Code: A Long Way to Freedom of Expression'. In the guide, the
organizations called for the repealing of the explanatory report of
article 305 that includes the examples on the Armenian Genocide and
the withdrawal of Turkish troops from Cyprus. The organizations
pointed out:
`Allegations of genocide against Armenians and Kurds' is a ground
that is sometimes brought against writers and publishers. This was
for instance the case of publisher Ali Varis and writer Mamo Bayram
for the book entitled: `Kocgiri - Northwest Dersim'. This book was
banned. Mr. Varis faced the risk of imprisonment. We are not sure
whether the case is still pending or not. However, Article 305 of the
New Turkish Penal Code will provide prosecutors with a new legal
device to prevent an open and democratic debate from taking place in
Turkey on two fundamental issues: the Armenian Genocide and the
presence (occupation) of Turkish troops in Cyprus(8).Part l 4th Part
Amnesty International issued an action alert on May 13 considering
that the imposing of criminal penalty for statements that acknowledge
the Armenian Genocide as a historical fact or call for the withdrawal
of Turkish troops from Cyprus `would be a clear breach of
international standards safeguarding freedom of expression.' (9)
(1) Pallone urges state department to condemn new Turkish Penal Code
punishing Turks who object to government's policy toward Armenia &
Cyprus. Retrieved 14-12-2004.
(2) Lungescu, O. Turkey's quest to join Europe. Retrieved 01-01-2005.
(3) Turkey: The Foreign Affairs Committee against the European
Parliament. Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(4) European Parliament calls on Turkey to explicitly recognize the
Armenian Genocide. Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(5) Haraszti, M. Review of the Draft Turkish Penal Code: Freedom of
Media Concerns. Retrieved 19-05-2005.
(6) Turkey still far from European standards of Press Freedom.
Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(7) IPA calls for amendment to Penal Code to allow for free
expression on Armenian genocide. Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(8) New Turkish Penal Code: A long way to freedom of expression.
Retrieved 02-01-2005.
(9) Turkey: Freedom of expression/torture/prisoners of conscience.
Retrieved 19-05-2005.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress