Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ankara: As Their Hostage, I Cannot Criticize This Government

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

  • Ankara: As Their Hostage, I Cannot Criticize This Government

    AS THEIR HOSTAGE, I CANNOT CRITICIZE THIS GOVERNMENT
    By Orhan Kemal Cengýz

    Today's Zaman
    03 July 2009, Friday

    This week I attended a luncheon in Ankara with foreign diplomats who
    wanted to discuss Turkey's human rights problems. We were two human
    rights experts invited to this meeting to give a briefing about recent
    developments in the human rights field.

    My colleague, the other expert, gave a fairly balanced briefing on
    human rights questions that we have been going through recently. I,
    however, found myself only talking about the Ergenekon case. I had a
    good excuse for that. Since my colleague covered quite a large area
    on the subject, I could focus on the Ergenekon case. However, at the
    end of the meeting it suddenly dawned on me that I was in the kind of
    mood where I was refraining from criticizing the current government,
    which obviously should be held accountable for the shortcomings of
    its human rights records, for dragging its feet and refraining from
    making further reforms for democratization and so on.

    I made a confession at the end. I said to the diplomats that I
    feel I am a hostage of the current government, which is the only
    power backing the Ergenekon case. If the opposition, whose leader
    declared himself to be the advocate of Ergenekon, comes to power,
    then the Ergenekon gang will be resurrected and start to do its job
    as usual. And their usual job is assassinations and mass provocations
    through which they manipulate society and the political agenda in
    Turkey. Not only me, but also many other intellectuals were threatened
    by Ergenekon before. Some became victims of hate-mongering campaigns
    during the trials against them. Some were targeted because of their
    stance against illegal activities within the state structure. Many
    people were condemned to live with bodyguards. We could not have had
    a "we apologize campaign" (an initiative started by intellectuals
    and followed by more than 30,000 people who signed a declaration
    apologizing to Turkish Armenians who lost their li!

    ves and were forced to leave the country during the "Great Catastrophe"
    in 1915) if the Ergenekon investigation had not been started. I can
    guarantee that a couple of intellectuals who took active roles in
    this campaign would have been killed by Ergenekon.

    They may not be declaring this, but I believe many liberal and
    democratic intellectuals share the same feelings with me, too. Can
    these intellectuals, after all, be as outspoken and critical of
    the government as they would like if they feel so threatened by
    a gang, when the only supporter of its trial would be the current
    government? This is also a question of priority. If there is such a
    gang messing around, what would be your first priority? Wouldn't you
    be less concerned about many other issues that do not have as much
    gravity as the issue concerned?

    Normally, in such a meeting I would be talking about the Halki seminary
    and the government's failure to open it for such a long time. I would
    talk about Erdoðan's double standards when it comes to dealing with
    "other's terrorist" and "ours," when he advised the Israeli government
    to sit down at the table with Hamas, whereas he refused to even shake
    hands with the leaders of the legitimately elected pro-Kurdish Party,
    the Democratic Society Party (DTP). I would be fiercely critical of
    his treatment of Mr. al-Bashir who is obviously responsible for crimes
    against humanity in Darfur. I would be very critical of Erdoðan's
    approach towards article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK). I
    would also criticize him for his inadequacy in finding a long-awaited
    solution to the head scarf problem and for many other things...

    These are the governments that should be criticized for human rights
    violations, right? But, imagine a government that is at the mercy of
    a Constitutional Court which has closed down many political parties
    before and there is a good chance that there might be a second
    closure case against it, which, this time, could actually bring an
    end to its existence after the first one in which the court decided
    to cut off the financial aid that the government was taking from the
    Treasury. Imagine a government which felt deeply threatened by a plot
    against itself prepared by some military personnel (just last week)
    in a country in which many governments were thrown out of power by
    military interventions. So we arrived at this formula: I am a hostage
    of a government that is taken hostage by the state apparatus in this
    country. As a human rights defender, I feel under tremendous pressure:
    Should I maintain my position and criticize this government as fiercely
    as I used to before and ignor!

    e their constraints, or should I focus on the "big picture" only,
    in which the future of the country would seem at stake. Which way
    should I take? Sometimes, I really do not know. I am the hostage of
    a government which is itself taken hostage by the state apparatus,
    and this situation is getting more and more complex. I really
    hope that the days when I could freely and openly criticize this
    government without feeling guilty will return soon. But for now,
    I am confused. Aren't you?

    From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Working...
X