Tweet
COURT SAYS "FEEL FREE TO INSULT THOSE APOLOGISING TO ARMENIANS"
Erol Onderoa~^Lu - [email protected]
BIA Magazine
Feb 24 2009
Turkey
An Istanbul court has decreed that journalist Can Ataklı's claim
that some people have received money from the EU to sign an apology
campaign falls within the boundaries of freedom of thought. Lawyers
have accused the judges of subjectivity.
Vatan newspaper journalist Can Ataklı wrote an article entitled "What
did they get that money for?" on 31 December 2008. In the article he
claimed that there was a list circulating on the Internet which made
connections between individuals who had signed an apology campaign
for "the events of 1915" and money received from the EU. Ataklı also
put this claim forward.
Court sees no reason for refutation
Academics Ahmet Ä°nsel and Murat Belge and writer Adalet Agaoglu
sent letters of refutation to the Vatan newspaper, but they were not
printed. They then applied to the Istanbul 1st Criminal Court of Peace.
However, the court's decision of 29 January 2009 seems more concerned
with the apology campaign than the journalist's controversial claim.
In its decision, it said that those starting the campaign and demanding
a refutation had taken part in an "apparently innocent campaign which,
according to some, brings a great responsibility to the past and
history of the Turkish Nation, and may even hold the Turkish Nation and
the Turkish State legally responsible on the international platform -
a campaign which assumes that a crime was committed and that regret
was felt."
The court said that even if this campaign was organised within the
framework of the freedom of thought and expression, "and even if
it was presented like a moral and righteous act, and even if it was
accepted as such, there is no doubt that those who do not share this
opinion and their resistance in terms of history and thought are also
within their rights."
The court also said that parts of the letters of refutation made it
clear that it was no crime to accept money from the EU if certain
conditions were fulfilled, and that the journalist's article was thus
within the right to freedom of the press.
No result with appeal
Haluk İnanıcı, the lawyer for İnsel, Belge and Agaoglu, criticised
the judge for writing a justification that was unrelated to their
complaint, saying, "I have been a lawyer for 25 years, and I have
demanded hundreds of refutations, and find this attitude strange."
Judge Cavit Marancı reacted angrily, saying that he had taken great
care in his 30-year career to differentiate between objective and
subjective information. He accused the lawyer of disrespect and of
personalising the issue.
Lawyer İnanıcı filed an appeal to the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court,
but the result did not change. Judge Sevim Efendiler decreed that
the prior decree was appropriate.
Prof. Dr. Baskın Oran, political scientist at Ankara University,
argued in this week's supplement to the Radikal newspaper that the
court decree was debating the apology campaign rather than whether
a refutation was necessary.
The controversial article by Can Ataklı has also affected bianet's
Ertugrul Kurkcu; he is general secretary of the IPS Communication
Foundation which received money from the EU Human Rights and Democracy
Programme from 2003 and 2006. The article implied that he personally
was given this money. A letter written to Tayfun Devecioglu, the
editor-in-chief of Vatan newspaper, was not published. Nadire Mater,
president of the foundation, and Ertugrul Kurkcu are also preparing
to go to court.
Erol Onderoa~^Lu - [email protected]
BIA Magazine
Feb 24 2009
Turkey
An Istanbul court has decreed that journalist Can Ataklı's claim
that some people have received money from the EU to sign an apology
campaign falls within the boundaries of freedom of thought. Lawyers
have accused the judges of subjectivity.
Vatan newspaper journalist Can Ataklı wrote an article entitled "What
did they get that money for?" on 31 December 2008. In the article he
claimed that there was a list circulating on the Internet which made
connections between individuals who had signed an apology campaign
for "the events of 1915" and money received from the EU. Ataklı also
put this claim forward.
Court sees no reason for refutation
Academics Ahmet Ä°nsel and Murat Belge and writer Adalet Agaoglu
sent letters of refutation to the Vatan newspaper, but they were not
printed. They then applied to the Istanbul 1st Criminal Court of Peace.
However, the court's decision of 29 January 2009 seems more concerned
with the apology campaign than the journalist's controversial claim.
In its decision, it said that those starting the campaign and demanding
a refutation had taken part in an "apparently innocent campaign which,
according to some, brings a great responsibility to the past and
history of the Turkish Nation, and may even hold the Turkish Nation and
the Turkish State legally responsible on the international platform -
a campaign which assumes that a crime was committed and that regret
was felt."
The court said that even if this campaign was organised within the
framework of the freedom of thought and expression, "and even if
it was presented like a moral and righteous act, and even if it was
accepted as such, there is no doubt that those who do not share this
opinion and their resistance in terms of history and thought are also
within their rights."
The court also said that parts of the letters of refutation made it
clear that it was no crime to accept money from the EU if certain
conditions were fulfilled, and that the journalist's article was thus
within the right to freedom of the press.
No result with appeal
Haluk İnanıcı, the lawyer for İnsel, Belge and Agaoglu, criticised
the judge for writing a justification that was unrelated to their
complaint, saying, "I have been a lawyer for 25 years, and I have
demanded hundreds of refutations, and find this attitude strange."
Judge Cavit Marancı reacted angrily, saying that he had taken great
care in his 30-year career to differentiate between objective and
subjective information. He accused the lawyer of disrespect and of
personalising the issue.
Lawyer İnanıcı filed an appeal to the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court,
but the result did not change. Judge Sevim Efendiler decreed that
the prior decree was appropriate.
Prof. Dr. Baskın Oran, political scientist at Ankara University,
argued in this week's supplement to the Radikal newspaper that the
court decree was debating the apology campaign rather than whether
a refutation was necessary.
The controversial article by Can Ataklı has also affected bianet's
Ertugrul Kurkcu; he is general secretary of the IPS Communication
Foundation which received money from the EU Human Rights and Democracy
Programme from 2003 and 2006. The article implied that he personally
was given this money. A letter written to Tayfun Devecioglu, the
editor-in-chief of Vatan newspaper, was not published. Nadire Mater,
president of the foundation, and Ertugrul Kurkcu are also preparing
to go to court.