Tweet
FREE SPEECH FOR TURKEY
Washington Post, DC
Wednesday, September 7, 2005; Page A24
Orhan Pamuk, one of Turkey's most acclaimed writers, is facing
up to three years in prison. His offense, according to the state
prosecutor? "Public denigrating of Turkish identity." Specifically,
Mr. Pamuk told a Swiss newspaper in February that certain topics were
off-limits for discussion in Turkey -- citing the massacre of Armenians
in 1915 and the more recent conflicts between Turkish security forces
and Kurdish separatists. "Thirty-thousand Kurds were killed here,
1 million Armenians as well. And almost no one talks about it,"
he said. "Therefore, I do."
As mild as these comments sound to American ears, they touched off a
firestorm in Turkey, where the government line is that the Armenian
deaths were the consequence of war, not genocide, and public discussion
of the issue is hazardous. The uproar over Mr. Pamuk's remarks,
which included death threats and burnings of his books, culminated
with the filing of the criminal case under Article 301/1 of the
Turkish Penal Code, which applies criminal penalties to "a person
who explicitly insults being a Turk, the Republic or Turkish Grand
National Assembly." Under Turkish law, Mr. Pamuk isn't even permitted
to comment on the charges before his case is heard in December.
The prosecution of Mr. Pamuk is, of course, outrageous; the charges
should be dropped as soon as possible. The ill-advised use of
this ill-advised provision to punish Mr. Pamuk contravenes Turkey's
commitment to comply with the free-speech provisions of international
agreements such as the European Convention on Human Rights. It's
exactly the wrong signal for Turkey to be sending as Europe debates
its admission to the European Union. As Mr. Pamuk's translator,
Maureen Freely, wrote in the British newspaper the Independent,
"There is no doubt that it will raise questions about the wisdom of
Turkey's EU membership bid. How can it possibly claim to be a European
country if it has such laws on the books, and if public prosecutors
can bring such cases?"
This reaction, indeed, may be exactly what those pushing for a
prosecution intended; the timing of the charges, as European ministers
meet in Wales to discuss Turkey's membership, is suspicious. That
makes it even more important for the national government, though it
doesn't control the prosecutor who brought the case, to do what it
can to halt this case and others like it. Turkey has made important
strides in protecting freedom of expression in recent years, including
reforming its penal code. The charges against Mr. Pamuk underscore
how far it still has to go.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Washington Post, DC
Wednesday, September 7, 2005; Page A24
Orhan Pamuk, one of Turkey's most acclaimed writers, is facing
up to three years in prison. His offense, according to the state
prosecutor? "Public denigrating of Turkish identity." Specifically,
Mr. Pamuk told a Swiss newspaper in February that certain topics were
off-limits for discussion in Turkey -- citing the massacre of Armenians
in 1915 and the more recent conflicts between Turkish security forces
and Kurdish separatists. "Thirty-thousand Kurds were killed here,
1 million Armenians as well. And almost no one talks about it,"
he said. "Therefore, I do."
As mild as these comments sound to American ears, they touched off a
firestorm in Turkey, where the government line is that the Armenian
deaths were the consequence of war, not genocide, and public discussion
of the issue is hazardous. The uproar over Mr. Pamuk's remarks,
which included death threats and burnings of his books, culminated
with the filing of the criminal case under Article 301/1 of the
Turkish Penal Code, which applies criminal penalties to "a person
who explicitly insults being a Turk, the Republic or Turkish Grand
National Assembly." Under Turkish law, Mr. Pamuk isn't even permitted
to comment on the charges before his case is heard in December.
The prosecution of Mr. Pamuk is, of course, outrageous; the charges
should be dropped as soon as possible. The ill-advised use of
this ill-advised provision to punish Mr. Pamuk contravenes Turkey's
commitment to comply with the free-speech provisions of international
agreements such as the European Convention on Human Rights. It's
exactly the wrong signal for Turkey to be sending as Europe debates
its admission to the European Union. As Mr. Pamuk's translator,
Maureen Freely, wrote in the British newspaper the Independent,
"There is no doubt that it will raise questions about the wisdom of
Turkey's EU membership bid. How can it possibly claim to be a European
country if it has such laws on the books, and if public prosecutors
can bring such cases?"
This reaction, indeed, may be exactly what those pushing for a
prosecution intended; the timing of the charges, as European ministers
meet in Wales to discuss Turkey's membership, is suspicious. That
makes it even more important for the national government, though it
doesn't control the prosecutor who brought the case, to do what it
can to halt this case and others like it. Turkey has made important
strides in protecting freedom of expression in recent years, including
reforming its penal code. The charges against Mr. Pamuk underscore
how far it still has to go.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress