Tweet
TERRY DAVIS CALLED ON TURLEY TO REPEAL ARTICLE 301
PanARMENIAN.Net
03.04.2008 16:49 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Mr
Terry Davis published an article titled 'Modernity and progress must
be protected through modern and progressive means' in two Turkish
newspapers, the Turkish Daily News and Radikal.
The article reads:
"Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was one of Europe's most important 20th
century personalities. Against the background of a bloody world
conflict and in a situation which was turbulent and unpredictable,
at a time when centuries old empires collapsed and future terrible
conflicts had already started to foment, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk made
a series of courageous, visionary and groundbreaking decisions to
transform Turkey into a modern, European State. He made history,
and he influenced the future of his own country, and Europe as a whole.
It is therefore not surprising that the Turkish authorities - and
the Turkish people - hold this historic leader in such a high esteem,
and that they are so vigilant in protecting his historic and political
legacy.
It is always delicate for an outsider to comment on personalities
of such stature, but I shall do so, with all humility and respect,
for three reasons.
First, because Turkey is a European country and a member of the
Council of Europe of which I am Secretary General.
Second, because Mustafa Kemal Ataturk not only changed the history
of Turkey, but also influenced the history of Europe as a whole.
And finally, because sometimes an outside view can provide fresh
food for thought and constructively challenge established ideas
and attitudes.
I dare to think that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk would not have
disapproved. After all, when it comes to challenging established
ideas and attitudes, there are very few people in history who can
match his record.
He was a bold and visionary reformer with one central objective in
mind - a modern, well functioning European society for the benefit
of the people of Turkey. He managed to achieve great things before
he passed away, far too early, but there is no doubt that if he had
lived longer or even if he lived today, he would have continued to
work for the benefit of Turkey -he would have continued to reform!
Against this background, I should like to make a few brief comments
on a very topical issue which causes a great deal of attention not
only in Turkey, but also elsewhere in Europe, namely the effect of
Article 301 of the Turkish Criminal Code on freedom of expression
in Turkey. Article 301 provides for something up to 3 years of
imprisonment for any public criticism of the Turkish identity and
insult to being Turk, the Turkish Republic, the organs and the
institutions of the State. Most recently, this has come to the
forefront when Istanbul lawyer and human rights activist Ms Eren
Keskin was sentenced to more than 6 months in prison for an interview
published in a German daily in June 2006. In the past, people such
as Orhan Pamuk and Hrant Dink have been prosecuted under Article 301.
First of all I want to say that the primary vocation of the Council
of Europe is not to criticize or ostracize its member states - and we
are definitely not in the business of criticizing judicial decisions.
But we do have a problem with the law on the basis of which the Court
has reached its decision.
The role of the Council of Europe is to help its member states to meet
the obligations to human rights and democratic standards expected from
a member of the Council of Europe. The obligation to guarantee freedom
of expression, protected by Article 10 of the European Convention on
Human Rights, is one of these standards.
Many friends of Turkey believe that Article 301, and the way it is
being used by the Turkish Courts, violates Article 10. This is why
I have repeatedly urged the Turkish authorities to amend or simply
revoke Article 301. This is also why, a few months ago, I publicly
welcomed the announcement that this would happen shortly. I believe
the time has come to do it, not shortly, but now.
In conclusion, I should like to return to the founder of the modern
Turkish State. Article 301 is often justified by the need to protect
his legacy, but I would also suggest an alternative view. The fact is
that Article 301 sets Turkey apart from all the other modern European
democracies which do not have or apply such restrictions on freedom
of expression.
It follows that the question to ask is what would have been the
attitude of the person who did so much to make Turkey a modern European
society and a modern European state.
I believe that the Turkish society and democracy are mature, modern
and resilient enough not only to survive, but also to thrive without
Article 301 and other restrictions on freedoms guaranteed by the
European Convention on Human Rights. I also believe that this is
the best way to protect and promote the legacy of Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk. He, for one, clearly understood that modernity can be neither
achieved nor preserved, with outdated means."
PanARMENIAN.Net
03.04.2008 16:49 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Mr
Terry Davis published an article titled 'Modernity and progress must
be protected through modern and progressive means' in two Turkish
newspapers, the Turkish Daily News and Radikal.
The article reads:
"Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was one of Europe's most important 20th
century personalities. Against the background of a bloody world
conflict and in a situation which was turbulent and unpredictable,
at a time when centuries old empires collapsed and future terrible
conflicts had already started to foment, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk made
a series of courageous, visionary and groundbreaking decisions to
transform Turkey into a modern, European State. He made history,
and he influenced the future of his own country, and Europe as a whole.
It is therefore not surprising that the Turkish authorities - and
the Turkish people - hold this historic leader in such a high esteem,
and that they are so vigilant in protecting his historic and political
legacy.
It is always delicate for an outsider to comment on personalities
of such stature, but I shall do so, with all humility and respect,
for three reasons.
First, because Turkey is a European country and a member of the
Council of Europe of which I am Secretary General.
Second, because Mustafa Kemal Ataturk not only changed the history
of Turkey, but also influenced the history of Europe as a whole.
And finally, because sometimes an outside view can provide fresh
food for thought and constructively challenge established ideas
and attitudes.
I dare to think that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk would not have
disapproved. After all, when it comes to challenging established
ideas and attitudes, there are very few people in history who can
match his record.
He was a bold and visionary reformer with one central objective in
mind - a modern, well functioning European society for the benefit
of the people of Turkey. He managed to achieve great things before
he passed away, far too early, but there is no doubt that if he had
lived longer or even if he lived today, he would have continued to
work for the benefit of Turkey -he would have continued to reform!
Against this background, I should like to make a few brief comments
on a very topical issue which causes a great deal of attention not
only in Turkey, but also elsewhere in Europe, namely the effect of
Article 301 of the Turkish Criminal Code on freedom of expression
in Turkey. Article 301 provides for something up to 3 years of
imprisonment for any public criticism of the Turkish identity and
insult to being Turk, the Turkish Republic, the organs and the
institutions of the State. Most recently, this has come to the
forefront when Istanbul lawyer and human rights activist Ms Eren
Keskin was sentenced to more than 6 months in prison for an interview
published in a German daily in June 2006. In the past, people such
as Orhan Pamuk and Hrant Dink have been prosecuted under Article 301.
First of all I want to say that the primary vocation of the Council
of Europe is not to criticize or ostracize its member states - and we
are definitely not in the business of criticizing judicial decisions.
But we do have a problem with the law on the basis of which the Court
has reached its decision.
The role of the Council of Europe is to help its member states to meet
the obligations to human rights and democratic standards expected from
a member of the Council of Europe. The obligation to guarantee freedom
of expression, protected by Article 10 of the European Convention on
Human Rights, is one of these standards.
Many friends of Turkey believe that Article 301, and the way it is
being used by the Turkish Courts, violates Article 10. This is why
I have repeatedly urged the Turkish authorities to amend or simply
revoke Article 301. This is also why, a few months ago, I publicly
welcomed the announcement that this would happen shortly. I believe
the time has come to do it, not shortly, but now.
In conclusion, I should like to return to the founder of the modern
Turkish State. Article 301 is often justified by the need to protect
his legacy, but I would also suggest an alternative view. The fact is
that Article 301 sets Turkey apart from all the other modern European
democracies which do not have or apply such restrictions on freedom
of expression.
It follows that the question to ask is what would have been the
attitude of the person who did so much to make Turkey a modern European
society and a modern European state.
I believe that the Turkish society and democracy are mature, modern
and resilient enough not only to survive, but also to thrive without
Article 301 and other restrictions on freedoms guaranteed by the
European Convention on Human Rights. I also believe that this is
the best way to protect and promote the legacy of Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk. He, for one, clearly understood that modernity can be neither
achieved nor preserved, with outdated means."