Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turkey: Government Amendments Will Not Protect Free Speech

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

  • Turkey: Government Amendments Will Not Protect Free Speech

    TURKEY: GOVERNMENT AMENDMENTS WILL NOT PROTECT FREE SPEECH

    Reuters
    April 18 2008

    Reuters and AlertNet are not responsible for the content of this
    article or for any external internet sites. The views expressed are
    the author's alone.

    (Istanbul, April 17, 2008) The government's proposed revision to the
    infamous Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, which has been used to
    investigate and prosecute hundreds of people for peacefully expressing
    themselves, will not remove the article's restrictions on free speech,
    Human Rights Watch said today. The government's draft revision of
    the article is likely to be considered by the Turkish parliament in
    the coming days. Since the article's adoption in June 2005, writers,
    broadcasters, academics, politicians, artists, representatives of
    civil society, and public figures across the political spectrum have
    been, and continue to be investigated and prosecuted for comments
    "publicly denigrating Turkishness, the Republic, the Parliament ... the
    Government, judicial institutions, military or security organizations
    of the state."

    "Article 301 should have been abolished a long time ago. The revisions
    proposed by the government will not change the fundamental flaws in
    the law," said Holly Cartner, Europe and Central Asia director of
    Human Rights Watch. "The government's half-hearted revision is a real
    disappointment. The government has missed an important opportunity
    to reinvigorate the reform process and underscore its commitment to
    free speech."

    Prosecutors broadly interpret the vaguely worded article and use it
    against those who have raised human rights issues or debated matters
    of history and politics.

    Civil society groups have long called for the repeal of Article 301
    and similar provisions in the Penal Code and Anti-terror Law that
    allow prosecution of peaceful expression. Finally, under intense
    pressure from the European Union, the government submitted the
    proposed rewording of Article 301, which is expected to be adopted
    by the parliament next week.

    However, the government's proposal merely tinkers with the wording
    of the law, while maintaining its most problematic features. It
    substitutes "Turkishness" with "Turkish nation," and the Republic with
    "the Republic of Turkey." The government does propose a reduction
    of the maximum sentence from three to two years of imprisonment,
    which means that the sentence would be automatically suspended for
    first-time offenders. However, someone with a second conviction could
    face imprisonment. Under the proposed revision, the president would be
    responsible for granting permission for prosecutors to proceed with
    a prosecution. (In the past, the Minister of Justice was responsible
    for authorizing investigation under Article 159, 301's predecessor in
    the previous Penal Code.) Additionally, the revised article removes
    the current requirement that the sentence be increased by one-third
    when the crime is committed abroad.

    The government has repeatedly argued that laws similar to Article
    301 exist in other European countries and that Turkey needs such a
    law. However, the government fails to note that in those countries
    such antiquated laws are rarely if ever used. The situation is
    entirely different in Turkey. According to figures supplied by
    Turkey's Ministry of Justice, 1,533 individuals stood trial under
    Article 301 during 2006; the comparable figure for the first quarter
    of 2007 was 1,189. In any event, the European Convention on Human
    Rights allows for state interference in free speech only in strictly
    limited circumstances. Criminal prosecution of persons for exercising
    their freedom of speech in an entirely peaceful way is a violation
    of the European Convention.

    The draft revision of Article 301 has been sent by the speaker of
    the Turkish Parliament to the Parliamentary Justice Commission. If
    the commission approves it, the draft will then be submitted to
    parliament and then on to the president. The main opposition parties
    (the Republican Peoples' Party and the Nationalist Action Party)
    have stated their strong opposition to any alteration of Article 301,
    including even the cosmetic changes proposed by the government.

    Article 301 achieved particular notoriety when journalist and
    human rights defender Hrant Dink was prosecuted three times,
    receiving a six-month suspended prison sentence in July
    2006. The repeated prosecution and conviction under Article
    301 appears to have made Dink a target of nationalist groups
    as an Armenian traitor who had been convicted for "publicly
    denigrating Turkishness." Dink was assassinated in January 2007
    (http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/01/18/turke y17817.htm). Although
    few others have actually been convicted, many who were prosecuted �
    including novelist Orhan Pamuk in 2005 � found themselves harassed
    by ultra-nationalist groups at court hearings.

    "The history of 301 is a tragic one. It is a cruel irony that the
    government has found it impossible to take a principled position
    and repeal this law," Cartner said. "The real reason to repeal 301 is
    because Turkey's citizens deserve the right to be able to speak, write,
    and publish freely and peacefully on all issues, without the threat
    of criminal investigation or other harassment under cover of this law."

    There are also many other laws in Turkey that are used to restrict free
    speech through criminal prosecutions and investigations including:
    The Anti-terror Law and related articles in the Turkish Penal Code;
    The law on crimes against Atat�rk;

    Many articles of the Penal Code including Article 318: alienating
    people from military service; Article 288: the attempt to influence
    a fair trial; and Article 216: inciting enmity and hatred among
    the population on the basis of social class, race, religion, sect,
    language or regional differences.

    One of the major problems in Turkey is that prosecutors and judges
    do not interpret these restrictions on freedom of speech narrowly,
    as required by the European Convention on Human Rights.

    --Boundary_(ID_ZTTxqZyzZ9eUPNmiUllFgw)--
Working...
X