Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turkey: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2004

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Turkey: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2004

    U.S. Department of State
    Turkey: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2004
    Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
    February 28, 2005

    Turkey is a constitutional republic with a multiparty parliamentary system
    and a president with limited powers elected by the single-chamber
    parliament, the Turkish Grand National Assembly. In the 2002 parliamentary
    elections, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) won the majority of seats
    and formed a one party government. In March 2003, AKP Chairman Recep Tayyip
    Erdogan was named Prime Minister. The State and Government remain separate,
    and sometimes conflicting, concepts. The State, including the presidency and
    bureaucracy, is seen as the embodiment of the core principles of the
    republic, while the elected Government is more closely tied to the popular
    will. The military exercised indirect influence over government policy and
    actions in the belief that it was the constitutional protector of the State.
    The Constitution provides for an independent judiciary; however, the
    judiciary was sometimes subject to outside influences.
    The Turkish National Police (TNP), under Interior Ministry control, has
    primary responsibility for security in urban areas, while the Jandarma,
    paramilitary forces under joint Interior Ministry and military control,
    carries out this function in the countryside. The Government maintained a
    heavy security presence in parts of the southeast. A civil defense force
    known as the village guards was less professional and disciplined than other
    security forces and was concentrated in the southeast. Civilian and military
    authorities generally maintained effective control of the security forces.
    Some members of the security forces committed serious human rights abuses.
    The country has a market economy and a population of approximately 67.8
    million. Industry and services are dominant sectors of the economy; the
    agricultural sector also remains important. During the year, the real gross
    domestic product was expected to grow by over 10 percent and consumer prices
    were expected to rise by less than 12 percent. Approximately 9.3 percent of
    the workforce was unemployed. There were major disparities in income,
    particularly between the relatively developed west and the much less
    developed east.
    The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens;
    although there were significant improvements in a number of areas, serious
    problems remained. Security forces reportedly killed 18 persons during the
    year; torture, beatings, and other abuses by security forces remained
    widespread. Conditions in most prisons remained poor. Security forces
    continued to use arbitrary arrest and detention, although the number of such
    incidents declined. Lengthy trials remained a problem. Convictions of
    security officials accused of torture remained rare, and courts generally
    issued light sentences when they did convict. In politically sensitive
    cases, the judiciary continued to reflect a legal structure that favors
    State interests over individual rights. The State and Government continued
    to limit freedom of speech and press; harassment of journalists and others
    for controversial speech remained a serious problem. At times, the
    Government restricted freedom of assembly and association. Police beat,
    abused, detained, and harassed some demonstrators. The Government maintained
    some restrictions on religious minorities and on some forms of religious
    expression. At times, the Government restricted freedom of movement. The
    Government restricted the activities of some political parties and leaders,
    and sought to close the pro-Kurdish Democratic People's Party (DEHAP). The
    Government continued to harass, indict, and imprison human rights monitors,
    journalists, and lawyers for the views they expressed in public. Violence
    against women remained a serious problem, and discrimination against women
    persisted. Trafficking in persons, particularly women, remained a problem.
    Child labor was a widespread problem.
    The Government carried out extensive legal reforms during the year aimed at
    meeting the requirements for European Union (EU) membership. In September,
    Parliament adopted a new Penal Code and, in May, approved a package of
    constitutional amendments. Elements of the new Penal Code included:
    Sentences for torture convictions were increased; "honor killings"--the
    killing by immediate family members of women suspected of being
    unchaste--were defined as aggravated homicides; the statutes of limitations
    for all crimes were lengthened; and actions aimed at preventing free
    religious expression were defined as a crime punishable by 1 to 3 years' in
    prison. Constitutional amendments included: International agreements were
    given precedence over national law; military and defense expenditures were
    placed under Audit Court review; the State was assigned responsibility for
    ensuring gender equality; and the military lost its authority to name
    members of government boards overseeing higher education and broadcasting.
    Legislative amendments abolished the State Security Courts (SSCs); however,
    they created comparable high penal courts that picked up the caseload of the
    former SSCs.
    The Government implemented a number of reforms adopted in 2003 and 2002.
    While security forces applied torture and ill-treatment widely, particularly
    in the southeast, the overall use of torture appeared to decrease during the
    year. Police and local authorities demonstrated more tolerance for
    controversial speech and were more flexible in handling nonviolent
    demonstrations. Kurdish language courses and news and cultural broadcasts
    began during the year, under tight restrictions.
    RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
    Section 1
    Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From:
    a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life
    There were no known political killings; however, there were credible reports
    that security forces committed a number of unlawful killings. Police,
    Jandarma, and soldiers killed a number of persons, particularly in the
    southeast and east, for allegedly failing to obey stop warnings. The Human
    Rights Foundation (HRF) estimated that there were 18 killings by security
    forces between January and September, including shootings by village guards
    and border patrols. For example, in August, security forces in Van Province
    shot and killed Senol Kizil after he allegedly failed to heed a stop
    warning. In November, Jandarma officers shot and killed Fevzi Can in Hakkari
    Province, also alleging that he failed to heed a stop warning. One officer
    was arrested in the case and was awaiting trial at year's end. HRF estimated
    there were 43 killings by security forces in 2003.
    The courts investigated most alleged unlawful killings by security forces;
    however, the number of arrests and prosecutions in such cases remained low
    compared with the number of incidents, and convictions remained rare (see
    Section 1.d.).
    In May, Adana police shot and killed Siar Perincek after he allegedly
    ignored a stop warning and shot at police. However, three human rights
    organizations--HRF, the Human Rights Association (HRA), and Mazlum-Der--and
    the Confederation of Public Sector Trade Unions conducted a joint
    investigation and concluded that the evidence indicated police shot Perincek
    at close range while he was lying on the ground unarmed. The organizations
    also stated that police apparently tortured two men who were detained in the
    incident. Prosecutors charged one police officer with manslaughter and two
    others with torture; their trials began in October and were ongoing at
    year's end.
    In November, Mardin police shot and killed Ahmet Kaymaz and his 12-year-old
    son in front of their home in Kiziltepe. Security officials alleged that
    Kaymaz and his son were planning a terrorist attack and had fired on police;
    however, a number of witnesses reportedly denied those claims. HRA
    representatives investigated the incident and stated that the victims had
    been shot at close range and there was no evidence they had exchanged fire
    with police. A parliamentary subcommittee also concluded there was no
    evidence that the victims had fired at police. Prosecutors opened a case
    against four police officers involved in the incident. Legal proceedings
    continued at year's end.
    According to the HRF and press reports, four trials in cases of past alleged
    killings by security officials ended during the year, resulting in nine
    acquittals and no convictions. Civilian judges transferred cases against six
    soldiers to military courts.
    Court proceedings continued in the trial of 10 village guards arrested in
    connection with the 2002 killing of 3 internally displaced persons (IDPs)
    returning to their homes in Ugrak village. One defendant remained in
    detention during the trial while the others were released pending a verdict.
    In November, the High Court of Appeals upheld the conviction of a police
    officer charged with the 1999 death in detention of trade unionist Suleyman
    Yeter and sentenced the officer, Mehmet Yutar, to 4 years and 2 months in
    prison. According to the law under which convicts serve a portion of their
    sentences, Yutar would spend 1 year and 8 months in prison. A second officer
    charged in connection with the death, Ahmet Okuducu, failed to attend the
    trial; the court issued a warrant for his arrest. In November, an Istanbul
    court closed a separate trial of four police officers charged with torturing
    Yeter (see Section 1.c.).
    In April, a prosecutor in Mus Province opened a case against seven village
    guards in connection with the 1994 killing of Ramazan Oznarci. The case
    continued at year's end.
    According to the Government, seven persons died while in police or Jandarma
    custody during the year: Four deaths were recorded as suicides, two as heart
    attacks, and one was under investigation at year's end to determine the
    cause of death.
    According to the HRF, landmines and unattended explosives killed 31
    civilians and injured 78 during the year. Both security forces and the
    Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK)--a terrorist organization that in 2003 changed
    its name to the Kurdistan Freedom and Democracy Congress (KADEK) and later
    to the Kurdistan People's Congress (KHK, or Kongra-Gel)--used landmines; it
    was not possible to verify which side was responsible for the mines involved
    in the incidents.
    The Government, as well as the PKK/KADEK/KHK, continued to commit human
    rights abuses against noncombatants in the southeast. According to the
    military, 18 civilians, 62 members of the security forces, and 79 terrorists
    died between January 1 and October 7 as a result of armed clashes.
    b. Disappearance
    There were no reports of politically motivated disappearances.
    The Government continued to investigate and explain some reported
    disappearances. The Ministry of Interior operated the Bureau for the
    Investigation of Missing Persons, which was open 24 hours a day. According
    to the Government, 14 persons were reported missing during the year due to
    suspected terrorist activities and 4 missing persons were located alive.
    There were no new developments in the 2002 disappearance of Coskun Dogan.
    In March, a Diyarbakir SSC determined that there was insufficient evidence
    to prosecute 47 soldiers for their alleged involvement in the 2001
    disappearance of Serdar Tanis and Ebubekir Deniz.
    c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
    The Constitution prohibits such practices; however, members of the security
    forces continued to torture, beat, and otherwise abuse persons regularly,
    particularly in the southeast. Security forces most commonly tortured
    leftists and Kurdish rights activists.
    According to the HRF, there were 918 credible cases of torture and
    mistreatment reported at its 5 national treatment centers during the year.
    Human rights advocates claimed that hundreds of detainees were tortured
    during the year in the southeast, where the problem was particularly
    serious, but that only a small percentage of detainees reported torture and
    ill-treatment because they feared retaliation or believed that complaining
    was futile.
    During the year, senior HRF and HRA officials stated that there had not been
    a significant change in the frequency of torture over previous years.
    However, officials at a number of HRA branch offices, including in the
    southeast, said they had observed a decline in the practice. A number of
    attorneys in the southeast and other regions also reported that torture and
    ill-treatment had become significantly less common. Observers reported that
    police demonstrated greater restraint in their treatment of detainees and
    protestors during the year due to legal reforms and government directives.
    In June, Mehmet Nurettin Basci and Mehmet Gazi Aydin claimed Adana police
    tortured them while they were being held in detention. Basci said police
    administered electric shocks to his testicles and squeezed them, and hung
    him by his arms. Aydin said police hung him by his arms. Prosecutors charged
    three police officers in the case, which continued at year's end. In July, a
    14-year-old claimed that Izmir police officers repeatedly kicked him, struck
    him with a truncheon, threw him down a staircase, and then released him
    without charges. In October, an attorney for Sezai Karakus filed a complaint
    with prosecutors alleging that Istanbul police tortured Karakus during 4
    days of detention between late September and early October. Karakus claimed
    police squeezed his testicles, struck his head against the wall, beat him
    repeatedly, and forced him to sign a confession. Authorities did not file
    charges in the case. Karakus committed suicide in prison in November. In
    November, several persons detained by police during a raid of the Yeniden
    Ozlem publishing house in Istanbul filed a complaint alleging that police
    tortured them. They claimed police repeatedly struck them with pistol butts
    and kicked them.
    In January, an Istanbul prosecutor opened a case against police officers Ali
    Senoz and Yilmaz Savas for allegedly torturing two juveniles in November
    2003. The police were charged with hanging the juveniles by their arms,
    squeezing their testicles, and spraying them with cold water and forcing
    them to stand in front of an air conditioner. The trial continued at year's
    end.
    There were no developments in the alleged rape and torture of DEHAP official
    Gulbahar Gunduz in 2003.
    In July, a Burdur court convicted three Jandarma officers for torturing 17
    farmers in 2000; it sentenced 1 officer to 6 years in prison and the other 2
    officers each to 2 years in prison. The court acquitted four co-defendants.
    The case was under appeal at year's end.
    Proceedings continued in the 5-year-old Iskenderun trial of four police
    officers - Murat Cikar, Halil Ozkan, Aysun Yuksel, and Gurkan Ilhan - on
    charges of torturing and raping two teenage girls in detention in 1999. The
    trial had experienced repeated delays related to the handling of forensic
    evidence. In March, the court rejected a request by prosecuting attorneys to
    bring charges against the chairman of the Forensic Medicine Institute for
    not submitting evidence in a timely manner. The defendants remained on duty
    and were promoted during the trial; one of the alleged victims was released
    from prison in November, while the other remained in prison at year's end on
    charges of membership in an illegal organization.
    In November, an Istanbul court closed the trial of four police officers
    charged with torture because the statute of limitations on the charges had
    expired. The defendants were accused of torturing trade unionist Suleyman
    Yeter and 13 other detainees in 1999.
    Human rights observers said that, because of reduced detention periods,
    security officials mainly used torture methods that did not leave physical
    traces, including repeated slapping, exposure to cold, stripping and
    blindfolding, food and sleep deprivation, threats to detainees or family
    members, dripping water on the head, squeezing of the testicles, and mock
    executions. They reported a continued reduction, compared with past years,
    in the use of methods such as electric shocks, high-pressure cold water
    hoses, beatings on the soles of the feet (falaka) and genitalia, hanging by
    the arms, and burns.
    The HRA reported that women detainees were sometimes subject to rape,
    including vaginal and anal rape with truncheons, and sexual harassment.
    Female detainees sometimes faced sexual humiliation and, less frequently,
    more severe forms of sexual torture. After being forced to strip in front of
    male officers, female detainees were sometimes touched, insulted, and
    threatened with rape.
    Human rights attorneys and physicians who treated victims said torture
    generally occurred during police or Jandarma detention before detainees
    appeared in court. Because arresting officers were responsible for
    interrogating suspects, they sometimes used torture to obtain a confession
    that would justify the arrest.
    Treatment of those arrested for ordinary crimes reportedly differed from
    treatment of those arrested for political crimes. Observers said that
    security officials sometimes tortured political detainees to intimidate them
    and send a warning to others with similar political views.
    Government-employed doctors administered all medical examinations of
    detainees. Examinations occurred once during detention and a second time
    before either arraignment or release; however, the examinations generally
    were brief and informal. According to the Society of Forensic Medicine
    Specialists, only approximately 300 of 80,000 doctors in the country were
    forensic specialists, and most detainees were examined by general
    practitioners and specialists not qualified to detect signs of torture.
    There were forensic medical centers in 27 of 81 provinces. Some former
    detainees asserted that doctors did not conduct proper examinations and that
    authorities denied their requests for a second examination.
    A Justice Ministry regulation requires doctor-patient privacy during the
    examination of suspects, except where the doctor requests police presence
    for security reasons. Under a legal amendment adopted in January, a suspect
    cannot request the presence of police; international and domestic human
    rights observers had argued that police could intimidate suspects into
    requesting their presence. However, the Society of Forensic Medicine
    Specialists reported that security officials often remained in the room
    despite objections, although this occurred less often than in past years.
    According to the Medical Association and human rights observers, the
    presence of a security officer could lead physicians to refrain from
    examining detainees, perform cursory examinations and not report findings,
    or to report physical findings but not draw reasonable medical inferences
    that torture occurred.
    In June, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT)
    published a report on its September 2003 inspection of prisons and detention
    facilities in the country. The report noted that a majority of former
    detainees interviewed by the CPT said law enforcement officials had been
    present during their medical examinations. However, some medical staff told
    CPT representatives that police had become more cooperative when asked to
    leave the room during examinations.
    Authorities opened an investigation against Dr. Ilker Mese for "insulting
    soldiers" and "failing to examine a prisoner in the presence of soldiers"
    after he asked soldiers to leave the room while he was examining a prisoner
    at the Tekirdag State Hospital in December 2003. Dr. Mese was also
    transferred to another medical facility.
    The law mandates heavy prison sentences and fines for medical personnel who
    falsify reports to hide torture, those who knowingly use such reports, and
    those who coerce doctors into making them. The law provides the highest
    penalties for doctors who falsify reports for money. In practice, there were
    few prosecutions for violation of these laws. The Medical Association may
    fine and suspend for up to 6 months the license of any doctor who falsifies
    a report. However, Association officials said they were unable to enforce
    these sanctions in many cases because most doctors worked at least partly
    for the Government, which protected them.
    The CPT's June report stated that, due to recent reforms, the legislative
    and regulatory framework necessary for combating torture and ill-treatment
    had been established. The Committee's report stated that the challenge
    facing the Government involved implementing the reforms and "transforming
    mentalities" among law enforcement and judicial officials.
    The CPT found clear evidence that local and regional authorities were
    attempting to comply with the Government's stated zero tolerance policy on
    torture. The Committee's report concluded that there had been a sharp
    decline over previous years in the use of the more severe forms of torture.
    At the same time, the CPT reported that it continued to find credible claims
    of recent torture and ill-treatment.
    In September, Parliament adopted a new Penal Code that provides increased
    punishment for torture (see Section 1.d.).
    During the year, courts tried and convicted members of the security forces
    for torture and abusive treatment (see Section 1.d.).
    Police harassed, beat, and abused demonstrators (see Section 2.b.).
    The Government continued to organize, arm, and pay a civil defense force of
    approximately 58,000, mostly in the southeast region. This force, known as
    the village guards, was reputed to be the least disciplined of the security
    forces and continued to be accused repeatedly of drug trafficking, rape,
    corruption, theft, and other human rights abuses. Inadequate oversight and
    compensation contributed to this problem, and in some cases Jandarma
    allegedly protected village guards from prosecution. In addition to the
    village guards, Jandarma and police special teams were viewed as those most
    responsible for abuses.
    Conditions in most prisons remained poor, although the Government made
    significant improvements in the system, and the country's best prisons
    maintained high standards. Underfunding, overcrowding, and insufficient
    staff training remained common problems. The HRF reported that the
    Government provided insufficient funds for prison food, resulting in
    poor-quality meals; food sold at prison shops was too expensive for most
    inmates, and there was a lack of potable water in some prisons. According to
    the Medical Association, there were insufficient doctors, and psychologists
    were only available at some of the largest prisons. Some inmates claimed
    they were denied appropriate medical treatment for serious illness.
    According to the HRF, six people died during the year in hunger strikes
    protesting F-type (small cell) prisons. The Government reported that, since
    2000, the President pardoned 189 inmates on hunger strike. As of September,
    six hunger strikers remained in prison, according to the HRF.
    In March, an Istanbul court ruled that authorities had used disproportionate
    force during the "Return to Life" prison operation in 2000, during which 12
    prisoners were killed and 77 wounded. The court ordered $32,750 (44 billion
    lira) in compensation for each victim.
    At any given time, at least one-quarter of those in prison were awaiting
    trial or the outcome of a trial. Men and women were held separately; most
    female prisoners were held in the women's section of a prison. Despite the
    existence of separate juvenile facilities, at times juveniles and adults
    were held in adjacent wards with mutual access. According to the Government,
    detainees and convicts were held either in separate facilities or in
    separate sections of the same facility. However, some observers reported
    that detainees and convicts were sometimes held together.
    The Government permitted prison visits by representatives of some
    international organizations, such as the CPT; however, domestic
    nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) did not have access to prisons. The CPT
    visited in March, and conducted ongoing consultations with the Government.
    Requests by the CPT to visit prisons were routinely granted.
    d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention
    The law prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention; however, the Government
    did not always observe these prohibitions in practice. During the year,
    police routinely detained demonstrators (see Section 2.b.). Police detained
    dozens of members of the legal pro-Kurdish party DEHAP on several occasions
    (see Section 3). Police continued to detain and harass members of human
    rights organizations and monitors (see Section 4). The Government continued
    to detain persons, particularly in the southeastern province of Batman, on
    suspicion of links to Hizballah.
    The Turkish National Police (TNP), under Interior Ministry control, are
    responsible for security in large urban areas. The Jandarma, paramilitary
    forces under joint Interior Ministry and military control, are responsible
    for policing rural areas. The Jandarma are also responsible for specific
    border sectors where smuggling is common; however, the military has overall
    responsibility for border control. There were allegations of police
    corruption.
    In September, Parliament adopted a new Penal Code that provides increased
    punishment for torture. Under the new law, the sentence for most torture
    convictions is 3 to 12 years in prison. Previously, the maximum penalty was
    8 years per victim, and most persons sentenced to jail terms received 2
    years. The new Code also establishes higher penalties, including life
    imprisonment, for aggravated torture, and prison terms of up to 3 years for
    police who fail to report torture. The new Penal Code increases the maximum
    statute of limitations for torture cases and other felonies from 15 years to
    30 years and allows for the statute to be suspended in certain
    circumstances. The law requires that trials, including appeals, be completed
    before the statute of limitations expires; otherwise, the trial ends without
    a verdict. The extension of the statute of limitations was expected to make
    it difficult for defendants in torture cases to avoid a verdict by delaying
    court proceedings.
    During the year, prosecutors opened trials against 2,395 security personnel
    on torture or ill-treatment charges. Through September, courts reached final
    verdicts in 625 torture and ill-treatment cases begun in previous years,
    convicting 345 defendants and acquitting 1,094. Seven security officers
    received short suspensions from duty during the year for ill-treatment.
    Courts investigated many allegations of ill-treatment and torture by
    security forces; however, they rarely convicted or punished offenders. When
    courts did convict offenders, punishment generally was minimal; monetary
    fines did not keep pace with the rate of inflation, and sentences were
    sometimes suspended. The rarity of convictions and generally light sentences
    in torture cases contradicted the Government's official policy of zero
    tolerance for torture. Authorities typically also allowed officers accused
    of abuse to remain on duty and, in some cases, promoted them during their
    trial, which often took years.
    Administrative and bureaucratic barriers impeded prosecutions and
    contributed to the low number of torture convictions. Under the law, courts
    could not convict unless a defendant attended at least one trial session.
    Police defendants sometimes failed to attend hearings in order to avoid
    conviction; prosecuting attorneys claimed courts failed to make serious
    attempts to locate such defendants, even in cases where the defendants
    received salary or pension checks at their home address.
    In separate decisions in March and September, an Ankara court convicted five
    police defendants in the 1991 Birtan Altinbas death-in-detention case and
    sentenced them each to 4 years and 5 months in prison. The court acquitted
    five codefendants. In November, the High Court of Appeals overturned the
    verdict on the grounds that the sentences were too lenient, sending the case
    back to the lower court.
    The TNP and Jandarma were effective and received specialized training in a
    number of areas, including human rights and counterterrorism. The armed
    forces emphasized human rights in training for officers and noncommissioned
    officers. Noncommissioned police officers received 2 years of training.
    The Government's Ten Year Human Rights Education Committee held regional
    seminars to educate civil servants and others on human rights problems.
    Regional bar associations and the EU held training seminars with police,
    judges, and prosecutors across the country, focusing on EU human rights
    standards. The Justice and Interior ministries conducted numerous training
    programs for law enforcement and security officials, judges, and prosecutors
    on recent legal reforms and European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) case law.
    Except when police apprehend suspects in the commission of a crime, a
    prosecutor must issue a detention order for a person to be taken into
    custody. The maximum detention period for persons charged with individual
    common crimes is 24 hours. Persons charged with collective common crimes can
    be held for 48 hours.
    The law provides that detainees are entitled to immediate access to an
    attorney and to meet and confer with an attorney at any time. In practice,
    authorities did not always respect these provisions and most detainees did
    not exercise these rights, either because they were unaware of them or
    feared antagonizing authorities. Once formally charged by the prosecutor, a
    detainee is arraigned by a judge and allowed to retain a lawyer. After
    arraignment, the judge may release the accused upon receipt of an
    appropriate assurance, such as bail, or order detention if the court
    determines that the accused is likely to flee the jurisdiction or destroy
    evidence.
    Private attorneys and human rights monitors reported uneven implementation
    of these regulations, particularly with respect to attorney access.
    According to HRA and a number of local bar associations, only approximately
    5 percent of detainees consulted with attorneys. HRA claimed police
    intimidated detainees who asked for attorneys, sometimes telling them a
    court would assume they were guilty if they consulted an attorney during
    detention. A number of attorneys stated that, unlike in past years, law
    enforcement authorities did not generally interfere with their efforts to
    consult with detainees charged with common crimes; however, they said they
    continued to face difficulties working with detainees charged with
    terrorism.
    The CPT reported that, during its September 2003 visit to the southeastern
    region, it discovered that only between 3 and 7 percent of recent detainees
    in the area had consulted with an attorney. A number of former detainees
    told CPT officials they did not know they had the right to consult with an
    attorney at no cost if they could not afford to hire one. Several said
    police refused their requests for access to an attorney or discouraged them
    from consulting an attorney, for example by implying they would have to pay
    the attorney. The CPT stated it was skeptical of records indicating that a
    high proportion of detainees held in antiterror departments had waived their
    right to consult an attorney and concluded that authorities in these
    departments were reluctant to allow attorney access.
    In June, the General Directorate of Security issued a circular directing law
    enforcement authorities to notify detainees of their right to consult with
    an attorney and to retain an attorney at no cost if they lack the means to
    hire one. The circular warned police that failure to inform detainees of
    their rights could render an arrest illegal.
    Regulations on detention and arrest procedures require authorities to notify
    relatives as soon as possible of an arrest, and authorities generally
    observed this requirement.
    Lengthy pretrial detention was a problem. The Constitution provides
    detainees the right to request speedy arraignment and trial; however, judges
    have ordered that some suspects be detained indefinitely, at times for
    years. Most such cases involved persons accused of violent crimes, but there
    were cases of those accused of nonviolent political crimes being held in
    custody until the conclusion of their trials.
    Detainees could be held for up to 6 months during the preliminary
    investigation period. If a case was opened, the pretrial detention period
    could be extended for up to 2 years. If the detainee was charged with a
    crime carrying a maximum punishment of more than 7 years, a court could
    further extend the detention period.
    Persons detained for individual crimes under the Antiterror Law have to be
    brought before a judge within 48 hours. Persons charged with crimes of a
    collective, political, or conspiratorial nature can be detained for an
    initial period of up to 4 days at a prosecutor's discretion and for up to 7
    days with a judge's permission, which was almost always granted.
    International humanitarian organizations were allowed access to "political"
    detainees, provided the organization obtained permission from the Ministry
    of Justice. With the exception of the CPT, which had good access, the
    Ministry granted organizations such permission few times.
    e. Denial of Fair Public Trial
    The Constitution provides for an independent judiciary; however, the
    judiciary was sometimes subject to outside influences. There were
    allegations of judicial corruption.
    In June, the Court of Appeals President's Council, headed by Court President
    Eraslan Ozkaya, rejected a request by prosecutors to investigate eight Court
    of Appeals judges for corruption in a bribery-related case. Prosecutors
    sought to pursue evidence obtained from wiretaps indicating that the suspect
    in a bribery ring investigation had been in contact with the eight judges.
    In August, the press reported allegations that organized crime figure
    Alaaddin Cakici maintained links to two High Court of Appeals
    judges--Eraslan Ozkaya and Court Deputy Secretary General Ercan
    Yalcinkaya--as well as to officials of the Turkish National Intelligence
    Organization. Cakici allegedly was informed about the status of his case at
    the Court of Appeals and used this information to escape the country in May.
    Yalcinkaya resigned from the Court of Appeals in October and was reassigned
    as public prosecutor for Kazan, Ankara. In October, the Court of Appeals
    President's Council decided not to pursue either a criminal or disciplinary
    investigation of Ozkaya. A Justice Ministry investigation of Yalcinkaya
    continued at year's end.
    The Constitution prohibits the Government from issuing orders or
    recommendations concerning the exercise of judicial power; however, the
    Government and the National Security Council (NSC), an advisory body to the
    Government composed of civilian government leaders and senior military
    officers, periodically issued announcements or directives about threats to
    the State, which could be interpreted as general directions to the
    judiciary. The seven-member High Council of Judges and Prosecutors,
    appointed by the President and chaired by the Minister of Justice, selects
    judges and prosecutors for the higher courts and is responsible for
    oversight of the lower courts. The High Council, which is located in the
    Ministry of Justice and does not have its own budget, was widely criticized
    for restricting judicial independence. While the Constitution provides for
    security of tenure, the High Council controlled the careers of judges and
    prosecutors through appointments, transfers, promotions, reprimands, and
    other mechanisms.
    The judicial system is composed of general law courts; specialized heavy
    penal courts; military courts; the Constitutional Court, the nation's
    highest court; and three other high courts. The High Court of Appeals
    (Yargitay) hears appeals for criminal cases; the Council of State (Danistay)
    hears appeals of administrative cases or cases between government entities,
    and the Audit Court (Sayistay) audits state institutions. Most cases were
    prosecuted in the general law courts, which include civil, administrative,
    and criminal courts. During the year, Parliament adopted legislation
    providing for the establishment of regional appeals courts to relieve the
    Yargitay caseload and allow the judiciary to operate more efficiently.
    In June, Parliament adopted legislation closing the SSCs, special courts
    designed to try crimes against the State. The courts had been widely
    criticized for proprosecution bias, and the ECHR had overturned many SSC
    convictions over the years on the grounds that the defendants had been
    denied a fair trial. However, the legislation established new, specialized
    heavy penal courts to take most of the former SSC caseload. Since the new
    courts have special powers similar to those of the SSCs, a number of
    attorneys and human rights activists asserted that the legislation amounted
    to little more than a name change.
    The Constitutional Court examined the constitutionality of laws, decrees,
    and parliamentary procedural rules and heard cases involving the prohibition
    of political parties. If impeached, ministers and prime ministers could be
    tried in the Constitutional Court. However, the Court could not consider
    "decrees with the force of law" issued under a state of emergency, martial
    law, in time of war, or in other situations as authorized by Parliament.
    Military courts, with their own appeals system, heard cases involving
    military law for members of the armed forces.
    The law provides prosecutors far-reaching authority to supervise police
    during investigations; however, prosecutors complained that they had few
    resources to do so. In December, Parliament adopted legislation establishing
    judicial police, who will be assigned to take direction from prosecutors
    during investigations; however, the Interior Ministry maintains authority
    over judicial police, including their promotions. Prosecutors also were
    charged with determining which law had been broken and objectively
    presenting facts to the court.
    Defense lawyers did not have equal status with prosecutors. In heavy penal
    courts, prosecutors sat alongside judges, while defense attorneys sat apart.
    In courts with computers, prosecutors were generally provided with computers
    and had access to the hearing transcript; defense attorneys were not
    provided computer access. Judges and prosecutors lived in the same
    government apartment complexes, and some defense attorneys claimed that the
    social ties between judges and prosecutors disadvantaged the defense in
    court.
    Defense attorneys in politically sensitive cases sometimes faced harassment,
    although human rights groups and bar associations said this was less common
    than in the past. Attorneys could face threats and other harassment,
    particularly if they defended clients accused of terrorism or illegal
    political activity, pursued torture cases, or sought prompt access to their
    clients, which police often viewed as interference.
    There is no jury system; a judge or a panel of judges decides all cases. The
    Constitution provides for the right to a speedy trial; however, at times
    trials lasted for years (see Section 1.d.). Proceedings against security
    officials often were delayed because officers did not submit statements
    promptly or attend trials. In some cases, such delays extended beyond the
    statute of limitations, causing the trial to end without a verdict.
    The law prohibits the use of evidence obtained by torture in court; however,
    prosecutors sometimes failed to pursue torture allegations, and exclusion of
    evidence only occurred after a separate case on the legality of the evidence
    was resolved. In practice, a trial based on a confession allegedly coerced
    under torture could proceed and even conclude before the court had examined
    the merits of the torture allegations.
    The law requires bar associations to provide free counsel to indigents who
    request it from the court, and bar associations across the country did so in
    practice.
    The legal system did not discriminate in law or in practice against ethnic,
    religious or linguistic minorities; however, legal proceedings were
    conducted solely in Turkish, with interpreting available sometimes, which
    seriously disadvantaged some defendants whose native language was not
    Turkish.
    In September, Parliament adopted a new Penal Code that reduced sentences for
    some crimes and decriminalized some acts that had previously been considered
    crimes. As a result, the Government released 3,240 convicts through
    November.
    There were no developments in the appeal of the 2003 ECHR ruling that jailed
    PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan did not receive a fair trial during the
    proceedings that led to his 1999 conviction.
    The HRA estimated that there were approximately 6,000 to 7,000 political
    prisoners, including leftists, rightists and Islamists. Of these,
    approximately 1,500 were alleged members of Hizballah or other radical
    Islamist political organizations. The Government claimed that alleged
    political prisoners were in fact charged with being members of, or
    assisting, terrorist organizations. According to the Government, there were
    4,508 convicts and detainees held on terrorism charges at year's end.
    International humanitarian organizations were allowed access to "political"
    prisoners, provided they could obtain permission from the Ministry of
    Justice. With the exception of the CPT, which generally had good access,
    such organizations were seldom granted permission in practice.
    f. Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence
    The Constitution prohibits such actions, and the Government generally
    respected these provisions in practice.
    The law allows officials to enter a private residence and intercept or
    monitor private correspondence with a judicial warrant. If delay might cause
    harm to a case, prosecutors could authorize a search without a warrant.
    The law permits wiretaps on national security grounds with a written court
    order or, in an emergency situation, written permission of a prosecutor, and
    the Government generally respected these requirements in practice.
    Section 2
    Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:
    a. Freedom of Speech and Press
    The Constitution provides for freedom of speech and of the press; however,
    the Government continued to limit these freedoms in some cases.
    The Government, particularly the police and judiciary, limited freedom of
    expression through the use of constitutional restrictions and numerous laws,
    including articles of the Penal Code prohibiting insults to the Government,
    the State, or the institutions and symbols of the Republic. Other laws, such
    as those governing the press and elections, also restrict speech. In
    September, Parliament adopted legislation prohibiting imams, priests,
    rabbis, and other religious leaders from "reproaching or vilifying" the
    Government or the laws of the State while performing their duties (see
    Section 2.c.). The "reasoning" attached to the Penal Code states that
    persons could be found in violation for accepting payment from foreign
    sources for the purpose of conducting propaganda in favor of withdrawing
    troops from Cyprus or (quoting from the text of the "reasoning") "saying
    that Armenians were subject to a genocide at the end of the First World
    War." The reasoning is not law, but serves as guidance to judges and
    prosecutors on how to apply the law.
    According to HRA, in the first 9 months of the year, courts tried 416
    persons on charges relating to spoken or written expression.
    Individuals could not criticize the State or Government publicly without
    fear of reprisal, and the Government continued to restrict expression by
    individuals sympathetic to some religious, political, and Kurdish
    nationalist or cultural viewpoints. Active debates on human rights and
    government policies continued, particularly on issues relating to the
    country's EU membership process, the role of the military, Islam, political
    Islam, and the question of Turks of Kurdish origin as "minorities"; however,
    persons who wrote or spoke out on such topics risked prosecution.
    In January, prosecutors opened a case against Vetha Aydin, chairman of the
    HRA Siirt branch, for distributing posters featuring slogans in both Turkish
    and Kurdish. Aydin was charged with hanging posters without permission and
    was later acquitted.
    In February, an Ankara prosecutor indicted Fusun Sayek, president of the
    Turkish Medical Association, and Metin Bakkalci, Association vice president,
    on charges of insulting the Health Minister. The two were charged for public
    comments made in response to the Minister's criticism of a stop-work action
    by physicians. According to the indictment, Sayek said the Minister "has a
    problem understanding" and Bakkalci said, "Not seeing the greatness of this
    action is a kind of pathological case." In June, a court acquitted the
    defendants on criminal charges. Civil charges were also filed against the
    Medical Association officials; a civil court acquitted Sayek but fined
    Bakkalci, whose appeal of the ruling continued at year's end.
    In May, a prosecutor in Marmaris indicted Mehmet Yurek, editor of the
    newspaper Degisim, for insulting former President Evren in an article
    published in April.
    In June, police detained and released DEHAP official Nedim Bicer for using
    the expression "sayin" ("esteemed") in reference to Abdullah Ocalan during a
    May press conference.
    In September, an Istanbul prosecutor opened a case against journalist Mehmet
    Ali Birand and three attorneys for jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan in
    connection with an April CNN Turk broadcast during which Birand interviewed
    the attorneys. Birand and the attorneys--Irfan Dundar, Mahmut Sakar, and
    Dogan Erbas--were charged with aiding the PKK.
    During the year, there were indications that some judges in speech-related
    cases were conforming their rulings to recent, EU-related legal reforms. In
    May, SSCs in Van and Erzurum acquitted DEHAP President Tuncer Bakirhan on
    charges of separatism and spreading terrorist propaganda in public speeches.
    The courts determined that Bakirhan's comments did not encourage violence
    and were within the realm of legally protected speech. In August, a Van
    court acquitted Selahattin Demirtas, president of the HRA Diyarbakir branch,
    on charges of making terrorist propaganda, reportedly basing its ruling on
    the European Convention on Human Rights.
    There were no new developments in the appeal of DEHAP parliamentary
    candidate Ruknettin Hakan's 2003 conviction and 6-month suspended prison
    sentence for "making propaganda in a language other than Turkish."
    In January, an Istanbul SSC sentenced Sefika Gurbuz, chairwoman of the
    Social Support and Culture Association of Migrants, to 10 months
    imprisonment in connection with the organization's 1999 2001 report on
    forced displacement. The court converted the sentence to a fine of $1,430
    (1.9 billion lira).
    Freedom of the press was restricted; however, the Government took a number
    of steps during the year to ease some of the restrictions. In June,
    Parliament adopted a law to expand press freedom. The new law replaces
    prison sentences with fines for a number of crimes, reduces fines, permits
    noncitizens to own periodicals and serve as responsible editors, protects
    editors and reporters from being forced to disclose sources, provides
    punishment for preventing the distribution of a publication, allows law
    enforcement authorities to confiscate a maximum of three copies of a
    publication under investigation, generally prohibits courts from converting
    fines to prison sentences in press-related cases, and prohibits authorities
    from closing publications or preventing their distribution due to violations
    of the Press Law.
    In May, Parliament amended the Constitution so that it no longer authorizes
    law enforcement authorities to seize printing presses or other publishing
    equipment.
    Independent domestic and foreign periodicals that provided a broad spectrum
    of views and opinions, including intense criticism of the Government, were
    widely available, and the newspaper business was extremely competitive.
    However, news items reflected a proauthority bias.
    The Government owned and operated the Turkish Radio and Television
    Corporation (TRT). According to the High Board of Radio and Television
    (RTUK), there were 226 local, 15 regional, and 16 national officially
    registered television stations, and 959 local, 104 regional, and 36 national
    radio stations. Other television and radio stations broadcast without an
    official license. The wide availability of satellite dishes and cable
    television allowed access to foreign broadcasts, including several
    Kurdish-language private channels. Most media were privately owned by large
    holding companies that had a wide range of outside business interests; the
    concentration of media ownership influenced the content of reporting and
    limited the scope of debate.
    The RTUK monitored broadcasters and sanctioned them if they were not in
    compliance with relevant laws. Parliament elected the RTUK Council members,
    who were divided between ruling and opposition parties. In July, Parliament
    revised the RTUK law to eliminate the NSC-nominated member from the Council,
    reducing Council membership from nine to eight. Although nominally
    independent, the RTUK was subject to political pressures. The RTUK penalized
    private radio and television stations for the use of offensive language,
    libel, obscenity, instigating separatist propaganda, or broadcasting
    programs in Kurdish. RTUK decisions could be appealed to the Provincial
    Administrative Court and then to the Council of State (Danistay). The RTUK
    reported that, in the first 9 months of the year, it closed 4 television
    stations and 6 radio stations for periods of 30 days each.
    In March, the RTUK ordered Ozgur Radio and Serhat Television to cease
    broadcasting for 30 days for inciting people to hatred and violence. Ozgur
    was sanctioned in connection with an August 2003 broadcast during which
    articles from the newspaper Evrensel were read on the air; Serhat was
    sanctioned due to a July 2003 program titled "Isildak." In April, the RTUK
    ordered ART Television of Diyarbakir to cease broadcasting for 30 days on
    the grounds that an August 2003 broadcast featuring Kurdish music
    constituted separatist propaganda. In June, the RTUK banned one broadcast of
    the Show TV program "Valley of Wolves" for encouraging violence and inciting
    racial hatred. In September, RTUK ordered Gun TV of Diyarbakir to cease
    broadcasting for 30 days as punishment for a December 2003 broadcast that
    authorities deemeded to be "against the values of Ataturk, against the unity
    of the State." The sanction stemmed from Gun TV's live broadcast of a
    symposium on local administration, human rights, and the media. In October,
    the RTUK ordered Imaj Radyo to cease broadcasting for 30 days for playing a
    song that it considered incited hatred and violence.
    Prosecutors harassed writers, journalists, and political figures by bringing
    dozens of cases to court each year under various laws that restrict media
    freedom; however, judges dismissed many of these charges. Authorities often
    closed periodicals temporarily, issued fines, or confiscated periodicals for
    violating speech codes. Despite government restrictions, the media
    criticized government leaders and policies daily and adopted an adversarial
    role with respect to the Government.
    In May, an Ankara court ordered three journalists of the Islamist-oriented
    Vakit newspaper--owner Nuri Aykon, editor Harum Aksoy, and writer Mehmet
    Dogan--to pay $408,000 (551 billion lira) to 312 generals for insulting
    them. The charges stemmed from an article published in August 2003 titled,
    "The Country Where a Soldier Who Does Not Deserve to be Sergeant Becomes a
    General." An appeals court upheld the ruling.
    In October, a Bursa court convicted Genc Party leader Cem Uzan, sentenced
    him to 8 months in prison, and fined him $462 (623 million lira) for
    insulting the Government in a 2003 speech in which he called Prime Minister
    Erdogan "godless." The case was under appeal at year's end.
    There were no new developments in the case of Sabri Ejder Ozic, who appealed
    his December 2003 conviction for insulting and mocking Parliament in a radio
    broadcast.
    At year's end, writer and scholar Fikret Baskaya continued to face charges
    involving the 2003 republishing of an article he wrote in 1993.
    According to the Government, there were no journalists held on speech
    violations during the year; however, at year's end, there were 43 prisoners
    claiming to be journalists who were charged with a variety of crimes.
    Authorities sometimes used forms of censorship against periodicals with
    pro-Kurdish or leftist content, particularly in the southeast. In January,
    Sinan Kutluk claimed police kidnapped him and threatened to kill him as he
    was distributing the leftist daily Ozgur Gundem in Adana. In June, a
    juvenile said plainclothes police beat him as he was distributing Ozgur
    Gundem in Van. Journalists practiced self-censorship.
    While there were improvements during the year, the Government maintained
    significant restrictions on the use of Kurdish and other minority languages
    in radio and television broadcasts. In June, state television and radio
    began limited broadcasts in Kurdish and three other minority languages. RTUK
    regulations limited the minority-language broadcasts, including news and
    cultural programming, to 60 minutes per day, 5 hours per week on radio, and
    45 minutes per day, 4 hours per week on television. The regulations also
    require that non Turkish radio programs be followed by the same program in
    Turkish and that non-Turkish television programs have Turkish subtitles. At
    year's end, local stations were prohibited from broadcasting similar
    non-Turkish programs pending the completion of a RTUK viewer-listener
    profile.
    In October, the Government's Human Rights Consultation Board issued a
    report, which found that legal restrictions on the use of minority languages
    violated the country's commitments under the 1923 Lausanne Treaty to provide
    Turkish nationals the right to use any language in the press, commerce,
    religion, public meetings, and private life without restriction. A number of
    Government officials harshly criticized the report and Ankara prosecutors
    opened an investigation against the report's principal authors. There were
    no developments in the investigation at year's end.
    In November, the High Court of Appeals reinstated a case against the
    teachers' union Egitim-Sen on charges stemming from an article in the
    union's statute supporting the rights of individuals to receive education in
    their mother tongue; the case continued at year's end.
    While Kurdish-language audio cassettes and publications were available
    commercially, local authorities periodically prohibited specific cassettes
    or singers, particularly in the southeast. Prosecutors ordered the
    confiscation of numerous issues of leftist, Kurdish nationalist, and pro-PKK
    periodicals and prohibited several books on a range of topics. Police
    frequently raided the offices of such publications.
    The Government did not restrict access to the Internet; however, the law
    authorizes RTUK to monitor Internet speech and to require Internet service
    providers to submit advance copies of pages to be posted online. The law
    also allows police to search and confiscate materials from Internet cafes to
    protect "national security, public order, health, and decency" or to prevent
    a crime. Police must obtain authorization from a judge or, in emergencies,
    the highest administrative authority before taking such action.
    The Government did not overtly restrict academic freedom; however, there was
    some self-censorship on sensitive topics.
    b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association
    The Constitution provides for freedom of assembly; however, the Government
    restricted this right in practice. Significant prior notification to
    authorities was required for a gathering, and authorities could restrict
    meetings to designated sites.
    Police beat, abused, detained, or harassed some demonstrators. In April,
    Istanbul police reportedly prevented students from marching in Taksim Square
    to protest the Higher Education Council. Police allegedly beat students with
    truncheons, used tear gas, and detained 48 demonstrators. In July,
    Diyarbakir police reportedly prevented a group of women from staging a
    demonstration in support of jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan. Police
    allegedly beat demonstrators, injuring 6 persons and detaining 38.
    In August, the Interior Ministry issued a circular directing governors and
    law enforcement authorities to take measures to avoid the use of excessive
    force in responding to demonstrations. The circular instructed authorities
    to identify the root causes of excessive force, working with NGOs and other
    civil institutions as necessary, and to punish law enforcement officials who
    engage in the practice.
    There were no new developments in the court appeal by police officers of
    their postponed prison sentences for beating Veli Kaya during a 2002 protest
    against the Higher Education Council.
    On March 21, most celebrations of Nevruz, the Kurdish New Year, took place
    without incident, according to the HRF; however, the HRF reported that
    police beat celebrants at a number of locations. In Agri Province,
    authorities refused to allow celebrations because the application featured
    the Kurdish spelling "Newruz," including the letter "w," which is not found
    in Turkish.
    In February, an Aliaga court sentenced Alp Ayan, a psychiatrist with the HRF
    Izmir Treatment and Rehabilitation Center, to 1½ years in prison for holding
    an unauthorized demonstration. The court also sentenced 31 codefendants in
    the case and acquitted 34; the ruling was under appeal at year's end.
    The HRF reported that authorities in most cases did not interfere in
    celebrations of May Day (May 1); however, police detained a number of
    celebrants. Organizers canceled May Day celebrations in Diyarbakir because
    the Governor designated a site 12 kilometers from the city center.
    The Constitution provides for freedom of association; however, there were
    some restrictions on this right in practice.
    In March, prosecutors opened a case seeking the closure of the Human Rights
    Agenda Association for allegedly failing to make required changes to its
    statute. In September, an Izmir court decided to drop the case, determining
    that the changes were not necessary.
    In April, Istanbul police sealed the headquarters of the Association of
    Prisoners' Relatives under a closure order from the Governor for alleged
    violations of the Associations Law.
    In May, the Directorate General for Foundations issued a circular stating
    that all foundations were required to seek government permission prior to
    applying to participate in projects funded by international organizations.
    In June, an Ankara court ordered the closure of the National Youth
    Foundation for promoting "Arab nationalism." In December, the High Court of
    Appeals upheld the ruling.
    In June, the Interior Ministry issued a circular that directed local
    authorities to regard public statements by civil society organizations as
    constitutionally protected speech. It also instructed law enforcement
    officials not to film or photograph meetings and activities of organizations
    unless so instructed by the governor's office.
    In August, a Diyarbakir prosecutor opened a case against the local branch of
    the Kurdish Writers Association for "receiving a committee from the EU"
    without permission from the governor's office. A court acquitted the
    defendants in October.
    In November, Parliament adopted a law that reduces limits on the right to
    form and join associations by removing restrictions on the establishment of
    associations based on race, religion, sect, region, or minority status, and
    on student associations. The law also allows associations to cooperate with
    foreign organizations and establish branches abroad without prior
    permission. The law removes the requirement that associations inform local
    authorities of general assembly meetings and prohibits law enforcement
    authorities from searching association premises without a court order.
    However, the new law maintains the requirement that foreign associations
    receive permission from the Interior Ministry, in consultation with the
    Ministry of Foreign Affairs, before engaging in activity in the country.
    c. Freedom of Religion
    The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government
    generally respected this right in practice; however, the Government imposed
    some restrictions on Muslim and other religious groups and on Muslim
    religious expression in government offices and state-run institutions,
    including universities, usually for the stated reason of preserving the
    "secular State."
    The Constitution establishes the country as a secular state and provides for
    freedom of belief, freedom of worship, and the private dissemination of
    religious ideas; however, other constitutional provisions regarding the
    integrity and existence of the secular state restrict these rights. The
    Constitution prohibits discrimination on religious grounds. The state
    bureaucracy has played the role of defending traditional Turkish secularism
    throughout the history of the Republic. In some cases, elements of the
    bureaucracy have opposed policies of the elected government on the grounds
    that they threatened the secular state.
    The Government oversees Muslim religious facilities and education through
    its Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet), which reports directly to
    the Prime Ministry. The Diyanet has responsibility for regulating the
    operation of the country's 75,000 registered mosques and employing local and
    provincial imams, who are civil servants. Some groups, particularly Alevis,
    claim that the Diyanet reflects mainstream Sunni Islamic beliefs to the
    exclusion of other beliefs; however, the Government asserts that the Diyanet
    treats equally all who request services.
    There are an estimated 7 to 9 million Alevis, including ethnic Turks, Kurds,
    and Arabs. In general, Alevis follow a belief system that incorporates
    aspects of both Shi'a and Sunni Islam and draws on the traditions of other
    religions found in Anatolia as well. Alevis in Central Anatolia base their
    beliefs on 12er Shi'ism. Alevi Kurds in the Tunceli area follow the Kurdish
    "Cult of Angels," or Yarsanism. The Government considers Alevism a heterodox
    Muslim sect; however, some Turkish Alevis and radical Sunnis maintain that
    Alevis are not Muslims.
    A separate government agency, the General Directorate for Foundations
    (Vakiflar Genel Mudurlugu), regulates some activities of non Muslim
    religious groups and their affiliated churches, monasteries, synagogues, and
    related religious property. There are 161 "minority foundations" recognized
    by the Vakiflar, including Greek Orthodox foundations with approximately 70
    sites, Armenian Orthodox foundations with approximately 50 sites, and Jewish
    foundations with 20 sites, as well as Syrian Christian, Chaldean, Bulgarian
    Orthodox, Georgian, and Maronite foundations. The Vakiflar also regulates
    Muslim charitable religious foundations, including schools, hospitals, and
    orphanages.
    Secularists in the military, judiciary, and other branches of the
    bureaucracy continued to wage campaigns against what they label as
    proponents of Islamic fundamentalism. These groups view religious
    fundamentalism--which they do not clearly define, but which they assert is
    an attempt to impose the rule of Shari'a law in all civil and criminal
    matters--as a threat to the secular State. The NSC categorizes religious
    fundamentalism as a threat to public safety.
    According to the human rights NGO Mazlum-Der and other groups, some
    government ministries have dismissed or barred from promotion civil servants
    suspected of antistate or Islamist activities. Reports by Mazlum-Der, the
    media, and others indicated that the military regularly dismisses
    religiously observant Muslims from military service. Such dismissals were
    based on behavior that military officials believed identified these
    individuals as Islamic fundamentalists, which they were concerned could
    indicate disloyalty to the secular State. According to Mazlum-Der, the
    military charged individuals with lack of discipline for activities that
    included performing Muslim prayers or being married to women who wore
    headscarves. According to the military, officers were sometimes dismissed
    for maintaining ties to what the military considered to be Islamic
    fundamentalist organizations, despite repeated warnings from superior
    officers.
    The law prohibits mystical Sufi and other religious-social orders (tarikats)
    and lodges (cemaats). The military ranked tarikats among the most harmful
    threats to secularism; however, tarikats remained active and widespread and
    some prominent political and social leaders associated with tarikats,
    cemaats, and other Islamic communities.
    The Government did not recognize the ecumenical status of the Greek Orthodox
    Patriarch, acknowledging him only as the head of the country's dwindling
    Greek Orthodox community. As a result, the Government has long maintained
    that only citizens of the country could be members of the Church's Holy
    Synod and participate in Patriarchal elections. Members of the Greek
    Orthodox community said these restrictions threatened the survival of the
    Patriarchate in Istanbul, because, with fewer than 2,500 Greek Orthodox left
    in the country, the community was becoming too small to maintain the
    institution. In March, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I appointed six non
    Turkish-citizen metropolitans to the Holy Synod, representing the first time
    in the 80-year history of the country that noncitizens had been appointed to
    the body. At year's end, the Government was still conducting a legal
    analysis of the unprecedented move.
    The law restricts religious services to designated places of worship.
    Municipal codes mandate that only the Government can designate a place of
    worship; if a religious group has no legal standing in the country, it may
    not be eligible for a designated site. Non-Muslim religious services,
    particularly for groups that do not own property recognized by the Vakiflar,
    often took place on diplomatic property or in private apartments. Police
    occasionally prohibited Christians from holding services in private
    apartments, and prosecutors sometimes opened cases against Christians for
    holding unauthorized gatherings.
    In May, a Diyarbakir court acquitted Ahmet Guvener, pastor of the Diyarbakir
    Evangelical Church, of multiple charges of operating an illegal church after
    the prosecutor told the court that Guvener's actions no longer constituted a
    crime due to international law and recent domestic legal reforms. In
    November, a local board charged with protecting cultural and historic sites
    approved the church's application to have its property zoned as a place of
    worship, reversing its May ruling against the church. In December 2003, the
    Interior Ministry issued a circular directing provincial governors to
    facilitate efforts by non-Muslim communities to open places of worship;
    however, some local officials continued to impose standards, such as minimum
    space requirements, on churches while failing to apply them to mosques.
    In March, authorities approved an application by a group of expatriate,
    German-speaking Christians to establish a religious/charity association in
    Alanya, Antalya Province. In the past, authorities rejected such
    applications on the grounds that the law prohibited associations based on
    religion. The arrangement authorizes group members to build and maintain a
    church, but does not explicitly allow them to worship.
    The Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul continued to seek to reopen the
    Halki seminary on the island of Heybeli in the Sea of Marmara, which was
    closed in 1971 when the State nationalized private institutions of higher
    learning. The Ecumenical Patriarchate faced a series of other problems
    related to its properties. Under existing restrictions, religious
    communities other than Sunni Muslims cannot legally train new clergy in the
    country for eventual leadership. Coreligionists from outside the country
    have been permitted to assume leadership positions in rare cases, but in
    general all religious community leaders, including Patriarchs and Chief
    Rabbis, were required to be citizens.
    In September, Parliament adopted a law prohibiting imams, priests, rabbis,
    or other religious leaders from "reproaching or vilifying" the Government or
    the laws of the State while performing their duties. Violations are
    punishable by prison terms of 1 month to 1 year, or 3 months to 2 years if
    the crime involves inciting others to disobey the law, which was scheduled
    to go into effect in April 2005.
    While no law explicitly prohibits proselytizing or religious conversions,
    many prosecutors and police regard proselytizing by non-Muslims and
    religious activism with suspicion. Police occasionally prohibited Christians
    from handing out religious literature and sometimes arrested proselytizers
    for disturbing the peace, insulting Islam, conducting unauthorized
    educational courses, or distributing literature that has criminal or
    separatist elements. Courts usually dismissed such charges. Proselytizing is
    often considered socially unacceptable; Christians performing missionary
    work are sometimes beaten and insulted. If proselytizers are foreigners,
    they may be deported, but generally they are able to reenter the country.
    Police may report students who meet with Christian missionaries to their
    families or to university authorities.
    Authorities enforced the long-standing prohibition on the wearing of
    headscarves at universities and by civil servants in public buildings. Women
    who wore headscarves and persons who actively showed support for those who
    defied the prohibition were disciplined or lost their jobs in the public
    sector. Students who wear head coverings are officially not permitted to
    register for classes. Many secular Turkish women accused Islamists of using
    advocacy for wearing the headscarf as a political tool and expressed fear
    that efforts to remove the headscarf ban would lead to pressure against
    women who chose not to wear a head covering. Secular women also maintained
    that many women wore headscarves under pressure from men. In June, the ECHR
    ruled that Turkish universities have the right to ban Muslim headscarves;
    the ruling was under appeal at year's end.
    The law establishes 8 years of compulsory secular education for students.
    After completing the 8 years, students may pursue study at imam hatip
    (Islamic preacher) high schools. Imam hatip schools are classified as
    vocational, and graduates of vocational schools faced an automatic reduction
    in their university entrance exam grades if they applied for university
    programs outside their field of high school specialization. This reduction
    effectively barred imam hatip graduates from enrolling in university
    programs other than theology. Most families that enroll their children in
    imam hatip schools did so to expose them to more extensive religious
    education, not to train them as imams. In May, President Sezer vetoed a bill
    that would have eliminated the disadvantage faced by graduates of imam hatip
    and other vocational schools seeking to enroll in the full range of
    university social sciences programs.
    Only the Diyanet is authorized to provide religion courses outside of
    school, although clandestine private courses existed. Students who complete
    5 years of primary school may enroll in Diyanet Koran classes on weekends
    and during summer vacation. Many Koran courses functioned unofficially. Only
    children 12 and older could legally register for official Koran courses, and
    Mazlum-Der reported that police often raided illegal courses for younger
    children.
    Members of the Christian community reported that the Government revised
    school textbooks in response to complaints about inaccurate, negative
    references to Christianity. They said the revised versions represented a
    significant improvement.
    The 1923 Lausanne Treaty exempts non-Muslim minorities--which the Government
    interprets as referring exclusively to Greek Orthodox Christians, Armenian
    Orthodox Christians, and Jews--from Islamic religious and moral instruction
    in public schools upon written notification of their non-Muslim background.
    These students may attend Muslim religious courses with parental consent.
    Others, such as Catholics, Protestants, and Syriac Christians, are not
    exempted legally; however, in practice they were allowed to obtain
    exemptions. Officially recognized minorities may operate schools under the
    supervision of the Ministry of Education. Such schools are required to
    appoint a Muslim as deputy principal; reportedly these deputies had more
    authority than their nominal supervisors. The curriculum of these schools
    included Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, and Jewish instruction. In May,
    the Education Ministry stated that children with non-Muslim mothers could
    attend minority schools; previously, only those with non-Muslim fathers were
    permitted.
    Some religious groups, particularly the Greek and Armenian Orthodox
    communities, have lost property to the Government in the past and continued
    to fight ongoing efforts by the Government to expropriate properties. Many
    such properties were lost because the law allows the Vakiflar to assume
    direct administration of properties that fall into disuse when the size of
    the local non-Muslim community drops significantly. The Government
    expropriated other properties that were held in the name of individual
    community members who emigrated or died without heirs. The Vakiflar also
    took control of non-Muslim foundations after the size of the non-Muslim
    community in a particular district dropped below the level required to elect
    foundation board members. In September, the Government adopted a regulation
    allowing governors to expand the boundaries of electoral districts in cases
    where there are not enough voters in a district to hold foundation board
    elections.
    The law allows the 161 minority foundations recognized by the Vakiflar to
    acquire property and the Vakiflar has approved 292 applications by
    non-Muslim foundations to acquire legal ownership of properties. However,
    the legislation does not allow the foundations to reclaim hundreds of
    properties expropriated by the State over the years. Foundations have also
    been unable to acquire legal ownership of properties registered under names
    of third parties, including properties registered under the names of saints
    or archangels, during periods when foundations could not own property in
    their own name.
    In February, the Vakiflar expropriated an orphanage on the Prince's Islands
    that had belonged to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, asserting that the deed,
    in the name of the Patriarch, was invalid and that the property belonged to
    a Greek Orthodox foundation that had previously been expropriated by the
    Government. In November, the High Court of Appeals upheld the expropriation.
    By year's end, the Patriarchate was unable to receive permission to repair
    churches, including one damaged in the November 2003 terrorist bombings in
    Istanbul.
    In January, the Government replaced the Minorities Subcommittee, a body that
    monitored minorities as potential threats to the country, with the Board to
    Assess Problems of Minorities. Unlike the subcommittee, the board does not
    include representatives of the military and intelligence agencies and is
    charged with supporting the rights of non-Muslims. However, there were no
    indications that the new board made any serious efforts to address the
    concerns of non-Muslims during the year.
    In September, Parliament adopted a law that prohibits forcing persons to
    declare or change their religious, political, or philosophical beliefs or
    preventing them from expressing or spreading such beliefs. The law
    specifically prohibits the use of force or threats to prevent persons from
    gathering for worship or religious ceremonies. Violations of the law are
    punishable with 1 to 3 years in prison.
    At year's end, members of the Baha'i community continued to seek
    authorization from a local board to renovate a sacred property in Edirne.
    National identity cards list a person's religious affiliation. Some
    religious groups, such as Baha'is, alleged that they were not permitted to
    state their religion on their cards; however, there were reports that
    authorities have become more flexible regarding the religious affiliation
    that may be listed. In September, an Ankara court approved the application
    of a family requesting permission to leave the religion portion of their
    children's identity cards blank until they reach 18 years of age. Conversion
    to another religion entails amending a person's identity card; there were
    reports that local officials harassed persons who converted from Islam to
    another religion when they sought to amend their cards. Some persons who
    were not Muslim maintained that listing religious affiliation on the cards
    exposed them to discrimination and harassment.
    In March, two bombers attacked an Istanbul Masonic Lodge, killing two and
    wounding seven. It was widely believed in the country that Masons have
    Zionist and anti-Islamic tendencies; evidence gathered in the subsequent
    investigation suggested that anti-Semitism was at least a partial motivating
    factor in the attack. According to press reports, one of the suspects
    arrested also confessed to the August 2003 murder of a Jewish dentist in
    Istanbul. Reports suggested that the crime's perpetrator used his victim's
    address book and subsequently telephoned a number of Jewish board members of
    a retirement home and threatened them with violence.
    At year's end, court proceedings continued in the Istanbul trial of 69
    suspects charged in connection with the November 2003 terrorist bombings of
    two synagogues, the British Consulate, and a bank. In an incident that arose
    out of the bombings, a court case was opened in September against the
    17-year-old son of one of the alleged perpetrators and three journalists on
    anti-Semitism charges. The charges stemmed from an interview with the daily
    Milliyet in which the youth said, "the attacks did not touch the hearts of
    the members of my family because the target was Jews," and, "if Muslims
    hadn't been killed, we would have been happy. We don't like Jews." Three
    Milliyet journalists were charged with providing a platform for incitement
    against members of another religion.
    Some Muslims, Christians, Jews, and Baha'is faced societal suspicion and
    mistrust. Jews and Christians from most denominations freely practiced their
    religions and reported little discrimination in daily life. However, there
    were regular reports that citizens who converted from Islam to another
    religion were sometimes attacked and often experienced social harassment.
    Proselytizing on behalf of non-Muslim religions was socially unacceptable
    and sometimes dangerous. A variety of newspapers and television shows have
    featured anti Christian and anti-Jewish messages, and anti-Semitic
    literature was common in bookstores.
    In October, the Government's Human Rights Consultation Board issued a report
    on minorities, which stated that non-Muslims are effectively barred from
    holding positions in State institutions, such as the armed forces, the
    Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the National Police, and the National
    Intelligence Agency. A number of representatives of non-Muslim communities
    confirmed the report's conclusions (see Section 5).
    During the observance of Ramazan in October-November, there were reportedly
    several incidents of university students attacking students who were not
    fasting. In October, the rector of Gaziosmanpasa University in Tokat opened
    an investigation against 10 students and a faculty member in connection with
    such attacks. In November, police intervened after fasting students at
    Ankara University attacked nonfasting students, according to press reports.
    In March, the Bursa court trying three members of the Nationalist Movement
    Party accused of severely beating Yakup Cindilli, a convert to Christianity,
    postponed hearings for 15 months on the grounds that such a period of time
    was needed before a medical evaluation could be conducted to determine the
    full extent of Cindilli's injuries.
    In April, an Ankara SSC sentenced Kerim Akbas of Baskent TV to 23 months in
    prison for inciting attacks against local Protestants and their places of
    worship. The court convicted Akbas for a series of broadcasts claiming
    Protestants were bribing Muslims to convert and attempting to disturb the
    peace. The ruling was under appeal at year's end. Following the broadcasts,
    vandals damaged several local Protestant facilities.
    In September, Bodrum police closed a Protestant church and confiscated its
    signs under orders from the Governor. Authorities reopened the church
    several days later.
    Members of a Protestant church in Kecioren, Ankara, said local residents
    opposed to their presence repeatedly threatened them, attempted to attack
    church members, and vandalized the church. They said police were dismissive
    of their reports; church members filed a complaint against the local police
    chief. Church members opened a case against the alleged organizer of the
    harassment; however, at year's end the suspect remained at large and the
    threats and vandalism continued.
    In September, an estimated 1,000 protestors gathered outside the Greek
    Orthodox Patriarchate in Istanbul and burned an effigy of Ecumenical
    Patriarch Bartholomew I. The protest was organized by the youth wing of the
    Nationalist Movement Party, whose leaders accused the Patriarch of
    interfering in internal politics by commenting on religious reform and the
    country's EU candidacy. In October, unknown persons threw a homemade bomb
    over the wall of the Patriarchate; the bomb blew out several windows and
    damaged the roof of a cathedral.
    Jehovah's Witnesses reported increasing official harassment of their worship
    services because they were not members of an officially recognized religion.
    On several occasions during the year, members of Jehovah's Witnesses in
    Mersin and Istanbul were fined for conducting religious meetings without
    permission. Members also reported some difficulties in claiming
    conscientious objector status and exemption from military service. Jehovah's
    Witnesses who were conscripted into the military refused to take the
    military oath or carry weapons and, as a result, faced arrest and detention;
    such detention generally lasted for about a month, after which the
    individual was released pending trial.
    For a more detailed discussion, see the 2004 International Religious Freedom
    Report.
    d. Freedom of Movement Within the Country, Foreign Travel, Emigration, and
    Repatriation
    The law provides for these rights; however, at times the Government limited
    some of these rights. The Constitution provides that a citizen's freedom to
    leave the country could be restricted only in the case of a national
    emergency, civic obligations (military service, for example), or criminal
    investigation or prosecution. The Government maintained a heavy security
    presence in the southeast, including numerous roadway checkpoints.
    Provincial authorities in the southeast, citing security concerns, denied
    some villagers access to their fields and high pastures for grazing.
    The Constitution prohibits forced exile, and the Government did not employ
    it. There were no new cases of internal exile during the year.
    Various NGOs estimated that there were from 1 to 3 million IDPs remaining
    from PKK conflict, which reached its height between 1984 and 1990. The
    Government reported that 378,000 residents "migrated" from the southeast
    during the conflict, with many others departing before the fighting. In
    July, Parliament adopted a law allowing persons who suffered material losses
    during the conflict with the PKK to apply for compensation. Under the law,
    IDPs who fled the region are eligible for cash or in-kind payment for losses
    caused by terrorism or by the State's antiterror operations. However, the
    Foundation for Society and Legal Studies and a number of international
    organizations criticized the law because some villagers who fled the region,
    particularly those who fled the country, would have difficulty meeting the
    1-year deadline for applying for payment and because villagers who received
    token amounts of compensation in the past would be ineligible for benefits.
    Residents of the southeast and representatives of regional bar associations
    also said the law established unreasonable documentation requirements and
    awarded levels of compensation far below standards established by the ECHR.
    According to human rights activists, villagers, and some southeast members
    of Parliament, the Government did not allow some displaced villagers to
    return to the southeast unless they signed a document stating that they had
    left their homes due to PKK terrorism, rather than government actions, and
    that they would not seek government assistance in returning. Village guards
    occupied homes abandoned by IDPs and have attacked or intimidated IDPs
    attempting to return to their homes with official permission. Voluntary and
    assisted resettlements were ongoing. In some cases, persons could return to
    their old homes; in other cases, centralized villages have been constructed.
    The Government claimed that a total of 127,927 displaced persons had
    returned to the region as of November and that it had assisted in the
    reopening of more than 400 villages and hamlets.
    In August, the HRA reported that soldiers forcibly evacuated residents from
    the village of Ilicak in Sirnak Province, marking the first such evacuation
    in 3 years. Local officials arranged for the return of the villagers 3 days
    later.
    In September, the Governor and Jandarma officials in Sirnak Province evicted
    village guards who were preventing a group of Syriac Christians from
    returning to their homes. The Syriacs, who fled due to the PKK conflict,
    returned during the year and found 20 village guards occupying their homes
    in the village of Sarikoy. The Sirnak Governor cut off electricity to the
    village, and Jandarma officers evacuated the village and disarmed the
    village guards. The Syriacs reportedly paid local authorities $93,700 (126
    billion lira) for the relocation effort.
    Foreign governments and national and international human rights
    organizations continued to criticize the Government's program for assisting
    the return of IDPs as secretive and inadequate.
    There were no new developments in the Mersin trial of seven members of the
    Migration and Humanitarian Aid Foundation (GIYAV) on charges of aiding and
    abetting an illegal organization. There were also no new developments in the
    separate Mersin trial in which prosecutors are seeking to disband GIYAV on
    charges of establishing relations with foreign associations without seeking
    the required approval from the Interior and Foreign ministries.
    An administrative regulation provides for the granting of asylum or refugee
    status in accordance with the definition in the 1951 U.N. Convention
    Relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 Protocol; however, the
    Government exercised its option under the Convention of accepting
    obligations only with respect to refugees from Europe. The Government has
    established a system for providing protection to refugees. In practice, the
    Government provided protection against refoulement, the return of persons to
    a country where they feared persecution. According to the Government,
    Europeans recognized as refugees could remain in the country and eventually
    acquire citizenship; however, it was not clear how often this happened in
    practice. The Government cooperated with the U.N. High Commissioner for
    Refugees (UNHCR) and other humanitarian organizations in assisting the small
    number of European refugees and asylum seekers. Chechens, many of whom
    arrived in 2001, reported problems making asylum applications with the
    Government and renewing temporary residence permits.
    The Government offered non-European refugees temporary asylum while they
    were waiting to be resettled in another country. The UNHCR conducted refugee
    status determination for applicants from non European countries and
    facilitated the resettlement of those recognized as refugees.
    The UNHCR reported that no recognized refugees were returned to a country
    where they feared persecution during the year; however, three asylum seekers
    whose applications remained under review by the UNHCR were deported to their
    country of origin.
    Detained illegal immigrants found near the country's eastern border areas
    were more likely to be questioned about their asylum status and referred for
    processing than those caught while transiting or attempting to leave the
    country. Even along the eastern border, however, access to the national
    procedure for temporary asylum was hindered by the lack of reception
    facilities for groups of interdicted migrants, potentially including asylum
    seekers, and interpreters to assist security officials.
    The UNHCR experienced difficulty gaining access to some persons who
    expressed a wish to seek asylum while in detention and facing deportation.
    According to the UNHCR, the Government deported 23 persons in this situation
    during the year, in most cases to their country of origin, without giving
    the UNHCR an opportunity to assess their possible need for international
    protection.
    Regulations require asylum seekers to apply within 10 days of arrival and
    submit proof of identity in order to register for temporary asylum. An
    appeal can be lodged within 15 days of a decision by authorities not to
    receive an asylum claim; after the appeal procedure, rejected applicants are
    issued a deportation order that can be implemented after 15 days. According
    to the UNHCR, the Government demonstrated greater flexibility than in past
    years in applying these regulations; however, asylum seekers arriving in the
    country after transiting through one or more other countries continued to
    face difficulties in lodging an application. As a result, some of the
    refugees and asylum seekers registered with the UNHCR were unable to
    register with the Government or otherwise legalize their status in the
    country.
    The Government provided free medical care to non-Europeans recognized as
    refugees by the UNHCR, pending efforts to resettle them abroad. Local
    authorities also extended support to non-European refugees in some cases.
    The UNHCR remained the main source of support to refugees, working with the
    Government and civil society organizations.
    Section 3
    Respect for Political Rights: The Right of Citizens to Change their
    Government
    The Constitution provides citizens with the right to change their government
    peacefully, and citizens generally exercised this right in practice through
    periodic free and fair elections held on the basis of universal suffrage;
    however, the Government restricted the activities of some political parties
    and leaders.
    The 2002 parliamentary elections were held under election laws that the
    Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) found established
    a framework for democratic elections in line with international standards;
    however, the OSCE mission noted that several parties--notably the AKP, the
    winner of the elections--faced action aimed at closing them down, and many
    candidates were also prohibited from running. The mission reported that,
    while there were a substantial number of cases of harassment reported by
    some political parties and by human rights groups, the situation had
    improved markedly compared with previous elections.
    Political parties and candidates could freely propose themselves and be
    freely nominated by various elements in the country; however, the High Court
    of Appeals Chief Prosecutor could seek to close political parties for
    unconstitutional activities by bringing a case before the Constitutional
    Court.
    There were no new developments during the year in the legal case seeking the
    closure of the pro-Kurdish DEHAP on charges of separatism.
    In February, the Constitutional Court ordered the Felicity Party to stop
    using the abbreviation "SP," which was the abbreviation used by the banned
    Socialist Party.
    In July, the High Court of Appeals overturned the April conviction of Leyla
    Zana, Hatip Dicle, Orhan Dogan, and Selim Sadak, former members of
    Parliament from the Democracy Party. An Ankara SSC had convicted the four
    defendants in their retrial on charges of being members of, or supporting,
    the PKK. The Court of Appeals ruled that the SSC had failed to conform to
    recent legal reforms in its conduct of the retrial. The Court of Appeals'
    reasons for overturning the verdict included the SSC's rejection without
    explanation of a defense request for the replacement of the chief judge, the
    use of statements and testimony by the prosecution that were not read in
    court, the SSC's refusal to permit some defense witnesses to testify, and
    the failure to have audio and video recordings used as evidence transcribed
    by impartial parties. In June, the Court of Appeals ordered the release of
    the defendants. As a result of the Court of Appeals ruling, a heavy penal
    court in October began a new trial for the defendants.
    In October, a Bursa court sentenced Genc Party leader Cem Uzan to 8 months
    in prison for insulting the Government (see Section 2.a.).
    During the year, police raided dozens of DEHAP offices, particularly in the
    southeast, and detained hundreds of DEHAP officials and members. Jandarma
    and police regularly harassed DEHAP members, through verbal threats,
    arbitrary arrests at rallies, and detention at checkpoints. Security forces
    also regularly harassed villagers they believed were sympathetic to DEHAP.
    Although security forces released most detainees within a short period, many
    faced trials, usually for supporting an illegal organization, inciting
    separatism, or for violations of the law. In January, an Erzurum prosecutor
    opened a case against DEHAP Chairman Tuncer Bakirhan on charges relating to
    a 2002 speech. A court convicted Bakirhan and sentenced him to 1 year in
    prison, but postponed the sentence. In February, the High Court of Appeals
    upheld the conviction of DEHAP Party Assembly member Abdulkerim Bingol on
    charges relating to a 2003 speech. Bingol began serving his 18-month prison
    sentence in April. In April, DEHAP official Giyasettin Torun claimed that
    Istanbul police kidnapped him, blindfolded him, and subjected him to threats
    and beatings for several hours before releasing him without charge. In June,
    a prosecutor in Van indicted local DEHAP Chairman Hasan Ozgunes, HRA
    official Zuleyha Cinarli, and 11 others on terrorism charges stemming from
    their participation in a press conference on the Kurdish problem and the
    prison conditions of jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan. A court acquitted
    them in August. In December, a Bursa prosecutor opened a case against eight
    DEHAP members, including Murat Avci, head of the party branch in Bursa, in
    connection with slogans allegedly shouted at a DEHAP event in June.
    Corruption was a problem. Former Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz and former
    State Minister Gunes Taner were charged with corruption during the year and
    were scheduled to be tried in 2005. Other former high-level officials faced
    trial for allegedly abusing their authorities. Several retired military
    officers were also charged with corruption, including former Naval Forces
    Commander Ilhami Erdil, former NSC Secretary General Tuncer Kilinc, and
    former Jandarma Commander Sener Eruygur. Prosecutors dropped the charges
    against Kilinc because the statute of limitations had expired; legal
    proceedings against the other former officers continued at year's end.
    Opposition party members criticized the ruling AKP for refusing to lift the
    immunity of AKP parliamentarians suspected of corruption and other abuses.
    In October 2003, the Government adopted the Freedom of Information Law,
    under which citizens could apply to government institutions for information.
    The HRF maintained that the law gives the Government broad leeway to reject
    applications on national security and other grounds; HRF requests for
    information during the year were denied, and there was no opportunity to
    appeal. The Press Council reported that it received no complaints during the
    year from journalists making applications under the law.
    There were 24 women in the 550-seat Parliament. There was 1 female minister
    in the 24-member Cabinet. There were no female governors but approximately
    20 female subgovernors. Following the March local elections, there were 25
    women among the 3,209 mayors in the country.
    Some minority groups were active in political affairs. Many members of
    Parliament and senior government officials were Kurds.
    Section 4
    Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental
    Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights
    A number of domestic and international human rights groups operated in many
    regions, but faced government obstruction and restrictive laws regarding
    their operations, particularly in the southeast. The Government met with
    domestic NGOs (which it defined broadly to include business organizations
    and labor unions), responded to their inquiries, and sometimes took action
    in response to their recommendations.
    The HRA had 34 branches nationwide and claimed a membership of approximately
    14,000. The HRF, established by the HRA, operated torture rehabilitation
    centers in Ankara, Izmir, Istanbul, Diyarbakir, and Adana and served as a
    clearinghouse for human rights information. Other domestic NGOs included the
    Istanbul based Helsinki Citizens Assembly, the Ankara-based Turkish
    Democracy Foundation, the Turkish Medical Association, human rights centers
    at a number of universities, and Mazlum Der.
    Human rights organizations and monitors, as well as lawyers and doctors
    involved in documenting human rights violations, continued to face
    detention, prosecution, intimidation, harassment, and formal closure orders
    for their legitimate activities. For example, the HRA reported that
    prosecutors opened 98 court cases and investigations against the
    organization between October 2003 and August, and 58 cases remained ongoing
    at year's end.
    In March, prosecutors dropped a case against the members of the HRF
    Executive Board on charges of translating HRF reports into English and
    distributing them without permission, soliciting donations on the Internet,
    and encouraging protestors to engage in hunger strikes by providing
    treatment to ill strikers. If convicted, the board members would have been
    forced to resign.
    There were no developments in the Government's investigation of the HRA
    headquarters and Ankara branch office. The investigation was opened
    following the May 2003 police raid of the facilities.
    Amnesty International maintained a headquarters in Istanbul and reported
    good cooperation with the Government during the year. The Government also
    cooperated with international governmental organizations such as the CPT,
    UNHCR, and the International Organization for Migration. In October, the
    Government permitted the visit of and met with the U.N. Special
    Representative for Human Rights Defenders.
    In October, the Interior Ministry issued a circular directing local
    authorities to comply with U.N. and EU guidelines for protecting the rights
    of human rights defenders.
    Representatives of diplomatic missions who wished to observe human rights
    developments were free to speak with private citizens, groups, and
    government officials. However, security officials routinely placed such
    official visitors in the southeast under visible surveillance. Visiting
    foreign government officials and legislators were able to meet with human
    rights observers. There were no public reports that the Government denied
    permission for foreign officials to make such visits; however, police
    reportedly harassed and intimidated some human rights activists in the
    southeast after they met with foreign diplomats.
    There were government-sponsored human rights councils in all 81 provinces
    and 850 subprovinces to serve as a forum for human rights consultations
    among NGOs, professional organizations, and the Government. The councils
    investigated complaints and, when deemed appropriate, referred them to the
    prosecutor's office. However, some councils failed to hold regular meetings
    or effectively fulfill their duties. Human rights NGOs generally refused to
    participate on the councils, maintaining that they lacked authority and were
    not independent, in part because unelected governors and subgovernors served
    as chairmen.
    A Human Rights Presidency monitored the implementation of legislation
    relating to human rights, coordinated with NGOs, and educated public
    officials. The Presidency was attached to the Prime Ministry; it did not
    have a separate budget, and its resources were limited. Other government
    human rights bodies include the High Human Rights Board, an interministerial
    committee responsible for making appointments to human rights posts; a Human
    Rights Consultation Board, which serves as a forum for the exchange of ideas
    between the Government and NGOs; and a Human Rights Investigative Board, a
    special body to be convened only in cases where lower-level investigations
    are deemed insufficient by the Human Rights Presidency. The Human Rights
    Investigative Board has never been convened.
    The parliamentary Human Rights Committee, which has a mandate to oversee
    compliance with the human rights provisions of domestic law and
    international agreements, investigated alleged abuses, prepared reports, and
    carried out detention center inspections.
    Section 5
    Discrimination, Societal Abuses, and Trafficking in Persons
    The Constitution regards all citizens as equal and prohibits discrimination
    on ethnic or racial grounds; however, societal and official violence and
    discrimination against women and minorities remained problems.
    In May, Parliament amended the Constitution to specify that men and women
    have equal rights and that it is the duty of the State to ensure that this
    protection is put into practice. Before the amendment, the Constitution only
    stated broadly that all individuals were equal before the law.
    Women
    Violence against women remained a chronic problem, and spousal abuse was
    serious and widespread. The law prohibits spousal abuse; however, complaints
    of beatings, threats, economic pressure, and sexual violence continued.
    Beating in the home was one of the most frequent forms of violence against
    women. A March 2003 study by Istanbul Bilgi University of married or
    divorced women in 25 provinces found that 31.5 percent of the women were
    beaten by their husbands; 21.5 percent were beaten by their fathers before
    marriage; and 41 percent had entered into arranged marriages. While
    approximately 35 percent of the group said they would file a complaint if
    their husbands beat them, a 2003 study by Hacettepe University found that 39
    percent of women believed husbands were justified in beating their wives
    under certain circumstances. Citizens of either sex could file civil or
    criminal charges for abuse but rarely did so. Spousal abuse was considered
    an extremely private matter involving societal notions of family honor, and
    few women went to the police in practice. Police were reluctant to intervene
    in domestic disputes and frequently advised women to return to their
    husbands.
    The law provides that victims of spousal violence may apply directly to a
    judge for assistance and authorizes judges to warn abusive spouses and order
    them to stay away from the household for 6 months. Judges may order further
    punishments for those who violate such orders. According to women's rights
    advocates, authorities enforced the law effectively, although outside of
    major urban areas few spouses sought assistance under the law.
    The law prohibits rape, including spousal rape; however, laws and ingrained
    societal notions made it difficult to prosecute sexual assault or rape
    cases. Women's rights advocates believed cases of rape were underreported.
    In September, Parliament adopted a new Penal Code that considers rape a
    crime against the individual, rather than a crime against society. The Code
    eliminates several rape-related laws that women's rights advocates
    criticized as discriminatory, including a measure that allowed rapists to
    escape punishment by marrying their victims and another that linked
    punishment for rape to the victim's marital status or virginity.
    Women's rights advocates reported there were eight government operated guest
    houses and three municipal shelters that provided services to battered
    women. The Social Services and Child Protection Institution operated 53
    family centers, and a number of NGOs operated community centers. Bar
    associations in more than 30 provinces provided legal services for women. In
    July, Parliament adopted a law requiring municipalities with populations of
    over 50,000 to provide shelters for women and children.
    Honor killings--the killing by immediate family members of women suspected
    of being unchaste--continued in rural areas and among new immigrants to
    cities. Women's advocacy groups reported that there were dozens of such
    killings every year, mainly in conservative Kurdish families in the
    southeast or among migrants from the southeast living in large cities. In
    September, Parliament adopted a law under which murders committed with a
    motive related to "moral killing" are considered aggravated homicides,
    requiring a life sentence. The law is designed to discourage the practice of
    issuing reduced sentences in honor killing cases; however, some human rights
    advocates argued that the wording of the law is not explicit enough to
    prevent judges from viewing the honor killing tradition as a mitigating
    factor for sentencing.
    Because of sentence reductions for juvenile offenders, observers noted that
    young male relatives often were designated to perform the killing.
    In April, 14-year-old Nuran Halitogullari was killed by her father and
    brother in Istanbul. According to press reports, a 32-member family council
    had ordered her killing to "clean the family honor" after she was kidnapped
    and raped earlier in the year. Prosecutors opened a case against the father,
    whose trial continued at year's end.
    In February, 22-year-old Guldunya Toren was killed by two of her brothers in
    an Istanbul hospital. According to press reports, a family member raped and
    impregnated Toren in 2003. Toren fled Bitlis, in the southeast, for
    Istanbul, where she gave birth. Two of her brothers later tracked her down
    and shot her. She survived and was taken to a hospital, where her brothers
    shot and killed her in front of witnesses. Prosecutors opened a case against
    several family members; trial proceedings continued at year's end.
    Trial proceedings continued in the case of Semse Allak, who was killed by
    relatives in Mardin Province in 2003 for becoming pregnant out of wedlock.
    Trial proceedings also continued in the case of Kadriye Demirel, who was
    killed by her 16-year-old brother in Diyarbakir in 2003 for becoming
    pregnant out of wedlock.
    In March, a Sanliurfa court sentenced the brother of 14-year-old Emine
    Kizilkurt to life imprisonment for murdering her in 2002 because a neighbor
    had raped her; the court sentenced 8 other family members to 17 years in
    prison for approving the killing. The case was under appeal at year's end.
    Human rights organizations continued to report a high rate of suicide among
    girls, particularly in the southeast and east. Observers said forced
    marriages and economic problems contributed to the suicides.
    Prostitution was legal; however, police made numerous arrests involving
    foreigners working illegally as prostitutes.
    Women continued to face discrimination in employment to varying degrees and
    were generally underrepresented in managerial level positions as well as in
    government. Women generally received equal pay for equal work in
    professional, business, and civil service positions, although a large
    percentage of women employed in agriculture and in the trade, restaurant,
    and hotel sectors worked as unpaid family labor.
    In March, Senol Demiroz, the newly appointed director of the state-owned TRT
    broadcasting company, fired 13 female employees from high-level
    administrative positions and replaced them with men. Demiroz told a reporter
    that a rivalry among female employees at the company had made them
    unproductive. Women's advocacy groups and the women's auxiliary of the
    Republican People's Party said the move reflected Government opposition to
    women in leadership positions in the workplace.
    The Directorate General on the Status and Problems of Women, under the State
    Minister for Women's and Children's Affairs, is responsible for promoting
    equal rights and raising awareness of discrimination against women. In
    October, Parliament adopted legislation that allows the Directorate General
    to expand its limited staff.
    Independent women's groups and women's rights associations existed but have
    not significantly increased their numbers or activities, mostly due to
    funding problems. There were many women's committees affiliated with local
    bar associations. Other organizations included the Association for
    Supporting and Training Women Candidates (Ka-Der), Flying Broom, the Turkish
    Women's Union, the Association for Researching and Examining Women's Social
    Life, and the Foundation for the Evaluation of Women's Labor. Women
    continued to be very active in ongoing debates between secularists and more
    religiously oriented persons, particularly with respect to the right to
    choose whether to wear religious head coverings in public places, such as
    government offices and universities (see Section 2.c.).
    According to Flying Broom, there was a sharp increase during the year in the
    level of media attention to women's issues. The status of women at times
    became an issue in the context of the country's EU candidacy. Flying Broom
    prepared 26 1-hour radio programs during the year; the print media also
    covered women's issues more closely than in the past.
    Children
    The Government was committed to furthering children's welfare and worked to
    expand opportunities in education and health, including a further reduction
    in the infant mortality rate. The Minister for Women's and Children's
    Affairs oversaw implementation of official programs for children. The
    Children's Rights Monitoring and Assessment High Council focused on
    children's rights issues.
    Government-provided education through age 14 or the eighth grade is
    compulsory. Traditional family values in rural areas placed a greater
    emphasis on education for sons than for daughters. According to the Ministry
    of Education, 95.7 percent of girls and 100 percent of boys in the country
    attended primary school; however, a UNICEF report released during the year
    indicated that, in the rural areas of some provinces, over 50 percent of
    girls between 7 and 13 and over 60 percent of girls between 11 and 15 did
    not attend school.
    Gaps in social security and health insurance programs left approximately 20
    percent of families and their children without coverage. Persons not covered
    by insurance may use a special program to access public health care.
    Immunization rates in some eastern and southeastern provinces lagged behind
    the rest of the country. According to UNICEF, the infant mortality rate
    dropped to 29 per 1,000 in 2003.
    Child abuse was a problem. There were a significant number of honor killings
    of girls by immediate family members, sometimes by juvenile male relatives
    (see Section 5, Women).
    In September, Parliament eliminated an article of the Penal Code under which
    a mother who killed an illegitimate child to protect family honor could
    receive a reduced sentence.
    Child labor was a problem (see Section 6.d.).
    Trafficking in Persons
    The law prohibits trafficking in persons; however, there were numerous
    confirmed cases of trafficking of women and children to and within the
    country for the purposes of sexual exploitation and forced labor.
    The law provides penalties for trafficking ranging from 8 to 12 years in
    prison and, at judicial discretion, an additional penalty of up to 10,000
    days (approximately 27.4 years) in prison.
    As of November, the Government reported that prosecutors opened 12 cases
    against alleged traffickers. Two cases resulted in seven convictions;
    several other cases were ongoing at year's end. In February, a Yalova court
    convicted four of five defendants on trafficking charges and sentenced them
    to 50 month prison terms and fines of $976 (1.3 billion lira). In May, a
    Fethiye court convicted three defendants on trafficking charges and
    sentenced them to 58-month prison terms and fines of $716 (966 million
    lira).
    In August, September, and October, police raided villages near the southern
    city of Adana, freeing more than 20 victims from forced labor camps. Many of
    the victims were orphaned minors or infirmed elderly with mental and
    physical disabilities that prevented them from escaping. Police detained 11
    patrons in the raids but later released them when the victims settled out of
    court for compensation. Child protective services returned juvenile victims
    to family members. Jandarma forces remanded elderly victims to state shelter
    facilities if family could not be located.
    In typical scenarios, victims were falsely led to believe that payment for
    agricultural work (for male victims) and sex work (for female victims) was
    forthcoming. Most victims reportedly lacked the capacity to understand the
    terms of the agreements presented to them by their traffickers or to seek
    redress when payment was continuously delayed.
    Ambassador Murat Ersavci of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the National
    Coordinator for the Government's Task Force on Human Trafficking, which is
    composed of representatives from the Ministries of Health, Interior,
    Justice, and Labor, plus the Directorate General for Social Services and
    Child Protection, the Directorate General on the Status and Problems of
    Women, and scholars from Marmara University.
    The Government participates in antitrafficking initiatives through the OSCE,
    the Southeast European Cooperative Initiative (SECI), the Council of Europe,
    the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the International Center for
    Migration Policy Development, Interpol, Europol, and the Stability Pact Task
    Force on Trafficking in Human Beings. During the year, the Government
    expanded bilateral and multilateral protocols with neighboring countries and
    regional groups to include antitrafficking law enforcement agreements. The
    Government's effectiveness in assisting other countries in combating
    trafficking varied. Counterparts in source countries reported that, in many
    instances, Turkish law enforcement agencies refused to share intelligence,
    evidence, and other critical trafficking case information. For example, a
    February survey conducted through the National Bureau of Interpol in Ukraine
    of 32 local law enforcement officers from 8 Ukrainian cities found that
    nearly half of the Ukrainian officers polled asserted Turkish authorities
    did not respond to repeated requests for information critical to their
    investigations. In the remaining cases, local and national Turkish law
    enforcement agencies reportedly failed to reply by legal deadlines. Typical
    requests involved details about the location of brothels where victims were
    exploited, the names of traffickers and their accomplices, the names of
    Ukrainian trafficking victims awaiting repatriation from the country, and
    statements from witnesses who were either citizens or residents of the
    country.
    In May, TNP officers raided the Flash Hotel in Istanbul, arresting a group
    of traffickers and recovering evidence that led to the arrests of the
    syndicate's operators in Romania. TNP officers shared photos, financial
    records, and customer logbooks with Romanian police officials, who acted on
    the leads.
    In June, the country joined 12 other member countries from the SECI Regional
    Center for Combating Transborder Crime to conduct a sweep of regional sex
    trafficking networks. Internationally, more than 1,000 police officers
    reportedly coopeated to identify 594 victims and 545 traffickers. Teams from
    the country were involved in at least five of the arrests.
    In July, the Government assisted visiting federal police officers from a
    destination country in their efforts to investigate possible trafficking
    crimes and to obtain testimony against organizers of a migrant smuggling
    network. The visiting officers complained of rigid bureaucratic hurdles that
    hampered the speed of the investigation, but agreed that Turkish authorities
    assisted in the investigation.
    The country was a destination and transit point for human trafficking. Most
    trafficking activity within the country, including for forced labor,
    occurred in Antalya, Istanbul, Izmir, and Trabzon. Trafficking syndicates
    also used the country as a transit country to supply the sex trade in
    Central Asia, the Middle East, Africa, the former Yugoslavia, and Western
    Europe. The Government placed the number of trafficking victims during the
    year at more than 200; however, the Government did not have a reliable
    system for victim identification. Various NGOs operating in the country and
    in neighboring source countries estimated the number of trafficking victims
    to be closer to 1,500. NGOs in Moldova reported assisting more than 105
    Moldovan trafficking victims. While reliable data was not available, NGOs in
    Azerbaijan, Armenia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Iran, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz
    Republic, Macedonia, Romania, Russia, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan reported cases
    totaling well over the Government's estimate.
    Some victims reportedly arrived in the country knowing that they would work
    illegally in the sex industry; however, most arrived believing they would
    work as models, waitresses, dancers, domestic servants, or in other regular
    employment. Victims additionally reported the use of fraudulent documents,
    sham marriages, and falsified work contracts. Traffickers typically
    confiscated victims' documents and confined them, then raped and beat them,
    intimidated them by threatening their families, and forced them into
    prostitution. In May, police took testimony from a 17-year-old Romanian
    victim who described a common trafficking scenario. The victim reported that
    when she was in ninth grade she came in contact with traffickers who
    promised her a job with good wages in Istanbul as a baby sitter or
    housekeeper. In October 2003, traffickers brought her to Istanbul by bus
    with other Romanian girls and put her up in a hotel. Her captors destroyed
    her passport and other identification documents, gave her false documents,
    and threatened to kill her if she spoke to police. She was forced to have
    intercourse with approximately 200 persons over an 8-month period.
    Foreign victims trafficked to the country were typically recruited by small
    networks of foreign nationals and Turkish citizens who relied on referrals
    and recruitment from friends and family members in the source country. Such
    groups could be as small as four or five persons. Trafficking networks
    operating as tourist agencies or service firms in source countries brought
    women to the country with official work permits. Most reports indicated that
    profits were channeled into expanding the network's capacity and affluence,
    by adding computers, automobiles, and amenities for traffickers.
    Networks tended to deposit proceeds in source country bank accounts, usually
    through Turkish banking system transfers. Turkish Jandarma and officials at
    the Interior Ministry maintained that trafficking in humans, arms, and
    narcotics was closely connected.
    Young women seeking employment, particularly from Moldova, Ukraine, Romania
    and Russia, were at the greatest risk of being trafficked to the country.
    There were allegations that police corruption at all levels contributed to
    the trafficking problem and may have been responsible for the delays in
    implementation of certain cooperative agreements, antitrafficking
    operations, and other law enforcement measures.
    During the year, the Ministry of Justice continued to investigate
    allegations of further police misconduct in Erzurum following the 2003
    conviction of police officers for trafficking.
    In Istanbul, police confiscated a notebook in which traffickers required
    victims to record customers' names and personal information. News media
    reported that the notebook included the names of police officers and
    government officials.
    In October, a shelter operated by the Municipality of Istanbul and the Human
    Resource Development Foundation, an NGO, began accepting victims. The
    facility was the first shelter for trafficking victims in the country; more
    than 20 victims received health care as well as psychological and legal
    assistance at the shelter during the year. While the 12-bed shelter remained
    filled to capacity, the Government continued to shelter trafficking victims
    in other locations on a case-by-case basis, using police safe houses,
    shelters for elderly citizens and abused women, and hotels. Some local law
    enforcement officers reportedly found accommodation for victims at their
    personal expense.
    Through the Health and Justice Ministries, the Government also implemented
    programs to provide free medical and legal services to foreign victims who
    chose to remain in the country. During the year, the Government amended its
    humanitarian visa regulations to allow victims to remain in the country for
    a maximum of 6 months. During their stay, victims are entitled to medical
    and social services and are allowed to engage in regular work in the
    economy. During the year, the Government issued 26 such humanitarian visas.
    The Government did not have a repatriation program for victims, although
    authorities repatriated some on a case by case basis.
    There were credible reports that the Government continued its practice of
    processing trafficking cases as cases of voluntary prostitution and illegal
    migration, failing to pursue traffickers under available laws and summarily
    deporting victims, who were often subjected to retrafficking.
    Traffickers reportedly used a network of contacts to identify and intercept
    deported victims at the port of departure, arrival, and in transit.
    The Security Directorate published and distributed widely a comprehensive
    guidebook on trafficking-related issues for law enforcement officers. The
    guidebook was reportedly incorporated into police and Jandarma academy
    training seminars for new officers.
    To deter trafficking, the Government amended the law to require a
    provisional period of 3 years before a foreign applicant may obtain
    citizenship based on a marriage petition. The Ministry of Tourism further
    established and implemented a questionnaire, in various languages, designed
    to identify potential victims through the visa application process. The
    Government also reported that warnings on visa applications now printed in
    Russian direct potential victims to an emergency law enforcement hotline.
    Persons with Disabilities
    There was no discrimination against persons with disabilities in employment,
    education, access to health care, or in the provision of other state
    services, although they did suffer from a lack of economic opportunity. The
    law does not mandate access to buildings and public transportation for
    persons with disabilities. Persons with disabilities have some privileges,
    such as the right to purchase products of State economic enterprises at a
    discount or acquire them at no cost.
    The Administration of Disabilities Office under the Prime Ministry has a
    mandate to develop cooperation and coordination among national and
    international institutions and to conduct research into issues such as
    delivery of services to persons with disabilities. Companies with more than
    50 employees were required to hire persons with disabilities as 2 percent of
    their employee pool, although the requirement was not consistently enforced.
    National/Racial/Ethnic Minorities
    The Constitution provides a single nationality designation for all Turks and
    does not recognize ethnic groups as national, racial, or ethnic minorities.
    Citizens of Kurdish origin constituted a large ethnic and linguistic group.
    Millions of the country's citizens identified themselves as Kurds and spoke
    Kurdish. Kurds who publicly or politically asserted their Kurdish identity
    or publicly espoused using Kurdish in the public domain risked censure,
    harassment, or prosecution.
    While there were some improvements during the year, the Government
    maintained significant restrictions on the use of Kurdish and other ethnic
    minority languages in radio and television broadcasts and in publications
    (see Section 2.a.).
    During the year, the HRF recorded fewer complaints that authorities
    prevented parents from registering their children under traditional Kurdish
    names.
    During the year, private Kurdish language instruction courses were opened in
    Istanbul and six southeastern cities (Van, Batman, Sanliurfa, Diyarbakir,
    Kiziltepe, and Adana) pursuant to legislation adopted in 2002. According to
    observers, officials had delayed the courses by raising bureaucratic
    obstacles. For example, authorities in Batman required the school to expand
    classroom doorframes by 5 centimeters, while authorities in Sanliurfa
    required the school to install a fire escape for its two-story building,
    even though many taller buildings in the area did not have fire escapes.
    Kurdish rights advocates said students enrolling in the courses were
    required to provide extensive application documents, including police
    records, that were not required for other courses. They maintained that the
    requirements intimidated prospective applicants, who feared police were
    keeping records on students taking the courses.
    No official estimate of the Romani population existed, but the population
    may be significant in regions near Bulgaria and Greece, and Roma were found
    in many cities throughout Anatolia. Human rights observers said many Roma
    did not disclose their ethnic identity for fear of discrimination. The law
    states that "nomadic Gypsies" are among the four categories of people not
    admissible as immigrants.
    In February, the Hurriyet newspaper's publication of a report that Sabiha
    Gokcen--an adopted daughter of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who was the country's
    first female pilot--was of Armenian descent drew a number of racist public
    statements. The Turkish General Staff issued a statement criticizing the
    reports on Gokcen's Armenian ancestry as "a claim that abuses national
    values and feelings" while the Turkish Air Association called the report "an
    insult" to Gokcen and to Ataturk.
    Other Societal Abuses and Discrimination
    While the law does not explicitly discriminate against homosexuals,
    representatives of the gay and lesbian rights organizations Lambda Istanbul
    and Kaos GL claimed that vague references in the law relating to "the morals
    of society" and "unnatural sexual behavior" were sometimes used to punish
    homosexuality. Gay and lesbian rights activists maintained that homosexuals
    risked losing their jobs if they disclosed their sexual orientation and said
    the law did not protect their rights in such circumstances. In July, Kaos GL
    reported that unknown persons smashed two windows at the organization's
    Ankara center.
    Section 6
    Worker Rights
    a. The Right of Association
    The Constitution provides workers, except police and military personnel, the
    right to associate freely and to form representative unions, and they
    generally did so in practice. However, the Government maintained some
    limited restrictions on the right of association. Unions were required to
    obtain official permission to hold meetings or rallies and to allow
    government representatives to attend their conventions and record the
    proceedings; however, these requirements were not always enforced.
    Prosecutors could ask labor courts to order a trade union or confederation
    to suspend its activities or to go into liquidation for serious infractions
    based on alleged violation of specific legal norms; however, the Government
    could not dissolve a union summarily. Approximately 1.6 million of the 11 to
    12 million wage and salary earners were unionized. The labor force numbered
    approximately 24 million, with approximately 35 percent employed in
    agriculture.
    The law prohibits antiunion discrimination; however, such discrimination
    occurred occasionally in practice. Union representatives claimed that
    employers sometimes layed off workers because they had joined a union, using
    alleged incompetence or economic crises as a pretext.
    b. The Right to Organize and Bargain Collectively
    The law allows unions to conduct their activities without interference, and
    the Government protected this right in practice. Industrial workers and
    civil servants have the right to bargain collectively, and approximately 1.3
    million workers, or 5.4 percent of the workforce, were under collective
    contracts. The law requires that, in order to become a bargaining agent, a
    union must represent 50 percent plus one of the employees at a given work
    site and 10 percent of all the workers in that particular industry. This
    requirement favored established unions, particularly those affiliated with
    Turk-Is, the confederation that represented approximately 80 percent of
    organized labor. In June, the International Confederation of Free Trade
    Unions reported that the law resulted in workers in many sectors not being
    covered by collective agreement.
    The law prohibits strikes by civil servants, public workers engaged in the
    protection of life and property, the mining and petroleum industries,
    sanitation services, national defense, and education; however, many workers
    conducted strikes in violation of these restrictions with general impunity.
    The majority of strikes during the year were illegal; while some illegal
    strikers were dismissed, in most cases employers did not retaliate.
    The law requires a union to take a series of steps, including collective
    bargaining and nonbinding mediation, before calling a strike; a union that
    fails to comply with these steps forfeits its right to strike. The law
    prohibits unions from engaging in secondary (solidarity), political, or
    general strikes or in work slowdowns. In sectors in which strikes are
    prohibited, labor disputes are resolved through binding arbitration.
    The law allows the Government to suspend strikes for 60 days on national
    security or public health and safety grounds. Unions may petition the
    Council of State to lift such a suspension. If an appeal fails, and the
    parties and mediators fail to resolve the dispute, a strike is subject to
    compulsory arbitration at the end of the 60-day period. During the year, the
    Government suspended a strike by the glass industry union Kristal-Is on
    national security grounds.
    There are no special laws or exemptions from regular labor laws in the
    country's 21 free trade and export processing zones.
    c. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor
    The Constitution and law prohibit forced or compulsory labor, including by
    children; however, there were reports that such practices occurred. Some
    parents forced their children to work on the streets and to beg (see Section
    6.d.).
    d. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment
    The law prohibits the employment of children younger than 15 and prohibits
    children under 16 from working more than 8 hours a day. At 15, children may
    engage in light work provided they remain in school. The Constitution
    provides that no person shall be required to perform work unsuitable for
    their age, gender, or capabilities, and the Government prohibited children
    from working at night or in areas such as underground mining. The law
    prohibits children attending school from working more than 2 hours per day
    or 10 hours per week.
    Child labor was widespread. The State Statistical Institute reported that
    the number of child laborers between the ages of 12 and 17 dropped from
    948,000 in 2003 to 764,000 during the year; however, some observers claimed
    that the actual number of working children was rising. An informal system
    provided work for young boys at low wages, for example, in auto repair
    shops. Girls rarely were seen working in public, but many were kept out of
    school to work in handicrafts, particularly in rural areas. According to the
    Labor Ministry, 65 percent of child labor occurred in the agricultural
    sector. However, some observers maintained that the bulk of child labor had
    shifted to urban areas as rural families migrated to cities. Many children
    worked in areas not covered by labor laws, such as agricultural workplaces
    with fewer than 50 workers or the informal economy. According to the Labor
    Ministry, the Government allocated $15 million (20.3 trillion lira) for
    programs to eliminate child labor during the year.
    Small enterprises preferred child labor because it was cheaper and provided
    practical training for the children, who subsequently had preference for
    future employment in the enterprise. If children employed in these
    businesses were registered with a Ministry of National Education Training
    Center, they were required to go to the center once a week for training, and
    the centers were obliged by law to inspect their workplaces. There were 346
    centers located in 81 cities; these centers provided apprenticeship training
    in 113 occupations. The Government identified the worst forms of child labor
    as children working in the streets, in industrial sectors where their health
    and safety were at risk, and as agricultural migrant workers. In December
    2003, the Government completed its report on the worst forms of child labor
    and identified 18 provinces where the problem was most serious.
    The Ministry of Labor effectively enforced these restrictions in workplaces
    that were covered by the labor law, which included medium and large-scale
    industrial and service sector enterprises. A number of sectors were not
    covered by the law, including small-scale agricultural enterprises, maritime
    and air transportation, family handicraft businesses, and small shops.
    In June and April, the Labor Ministry issued regulations on child employment
    that identified specific jobs that could threaten the physical or mental
    well-being of children.
    There were no reliable statistics for the number of children working on the
    streets nationwide. The Government operated 28 centers to assist such
    children.
    e. Acceptable Conditions of Work
    The Minimum Wage Commission, a tripartite government-industry-union body
    that reviews the minimum wage every 6 months, set the minimum monthly wage
    for the second half of the year at $328 (444 million lira). The minimum wage
    did not provide a decent standard of living for a worker and family;
    however, most workers earned considerably more than the minimum wage.
    Approximately one-third of the labor force was covered by the labor law and
    received fringe benefits that, according to the Turkish Employers'
    Association, accounted for approximately 63 percent of total compensation.
    The law establishes a 45-hour workweek and a weekly rest day, and limits
    overtime to 3 hours per day for up to 90 days a year. The Labor Inspectorate
    of the Ministry of Labor effectively enforced wage and hour provisions in
    the unionized industrial, service, and government sectors, which covered
    approximately 12 percent of workers.
    The law mandates occupational health and safety regulations; however, in
    practice the Government did not carry out effective inspection and
    enforcement programs. The law allows for the shutdown of an operation if a
    five-person committee, which included safety inspectors, employee, and
    employer representatives, determined that the operation endangered workers'
    lives. In practice, financial constraints, limited safety awareness,
    carelessness, and fatalistic attitudes resulted in scant attention to
    occupational safety and health by workers and employers alike. The law
    allows workers to remove themselves from hazardous conditions without
    risking loss of employment, and they did so in practice.

    --Boundary_(ID_K3bHUvvssmk44Lp88GmW0Q)--
Working...
X