Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Issue Of Returning Church Properties In Turkey

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

  • Issue Of Returning Church Properties In Turkey

    ISSUE OF RETURNING CHURCH PROPERTIES IN TURKEY

    http://www.noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6891
    07.02.2013

    Vahram Hovyan

    Senior Expert at the Center for Armenian Studies, "Noravank" Foundation
    Confiscation of the properties belonging to the Christian communities
    in Turkey was one of the components of persecution and suppression
    policy carried out on the state level in regard to the national and
    religious minorities. Since 1936 the state has initiated confiscation
    of the religious minorities' properties by law. The efforts taken for
    reclaiming the confiscated property have not taken an effect till
    recently thus being doomed.

    Hence, over the last period positive tendencies can be observed in the
    issue of the protection of the rights of the religious minorities in
    Turkey, including the returning of the church properties. This issue
    is in direct connection with the international pressure. It is known
    that one of the preconditions for Turkey's entry in the EU was
    improvement of the situation connected with the religious minorities,
    which includes recovery of the confiscated ecclesiastic property. The
    U.S. also, on the political ground, i.e. exerting pressure on Turkey
    on certain issues, from time to time raises the problem of the
    protection of the rights of the Christians, including returning of the
    confiscated church properties. In this aspect the Resolution 306
    passed on June 15, 2011 by the House of Representatives of the U.S.

    Congress is remarkable; it urged Turkey "to return to their rightful
    owners all Christian churches and other places of worship,
    monasteries, schools, hospitals, monuments, relics, holy sites, and
    other religious properties, including movable properties, such as
    artwork, manuscripts, vestments, vessels, and other artifacts"1.

    Yielding to international pressure in August 2011 Turkish authorities
    passed the law on returning confiscated church properties which found
    a broad response in press. It has been a long time since that law was
    passed but there has been no considerable progress in the issue of
    returning confiscated properties of the religious minorities in
    Turkey. This period is enough to analyze the problems connected with
    returning of the confiscated properties as well as further actions.

    Obstacles connected with returning of the confiscated properties

    Despite passing the law, there are some obstacles on practice, which
    essentially complicate returning of the confiscated church properties.

    These obstacles can be divided into two groups - legal and political.

    In the legal aspect there are following main obstacles to returning of
    the church properties:

    1. Time constraints. The law warrants returning of the church property
    confiscated only after 1936; meanwhile confiscations of the church
    property did not take place only after 1936. Moreover, confiscation of
    the property mostly took place in the prior period - in the years of
    pogroms and Genocide. Over that period Armenians (Apostolic, Catholic
    and Protestant), Pontic Greeks, Assyrians, etc. lost most of their
    church properties. After 1936 the state confiscated only the property
    they obtained after that date. It means that even in case if the law
    is fully enforced the religious minorities will have a possibility to
    return only a small part of the properties they lost.

    2. The issue of legal status of the churches. Today only the Armenian
    Apostolic, Greek Orthodox Churches and Jews have legal status in
    Turkey. And de-facto existing Christian communities, such as Roman
    Catholic Church, Armenian Catholic Church, Protestant churches,
    including Armenian Evangelical Church, Christian Arabs, Assyrians, are
    not officially recognized by the state. Though the latter accepts the
    fact of their existence, it refuses to give them legal status. Even
    Roman Catholic Church, despite the efforts of Vatican (the diplomatic
    relations between Vatican and Turkey were established more than half a
    century ago)2, could not acquire legal status in Turkey.

    The absence of legal registration considerably restricts capabilities
    of the unrecognized communities in this case particularly in the
    aspect of returning their confiscated properties.

    In the respect of the Armenian community it means that among the
    Armenian Apostolic, Catholic and Evangelical churches only the first
    one can put forward such a claim to the state.

    3. Time limitation. The law fixes one-year time limit for the
    religious minorities to put forward a claim for returning the
    properties they owned3.Taking into consideration the fact that
    drafting of the claim is rather complicated and long process, which is
    connected with the acquisition and clarifying of different documents,
    it is clear that the time limitation is not enough for the appropriate
    drafting of the claims and returning of the church properties.

    4. The fact that the properties were sold. The Turkish government sold
    a part of the confiscated properties to the individuals. In respect of
    the sold properties the law warrants compensation to the religious
    minorities4. However, it is yet difficult to say how adequate the
    compensation will be and whether it will allow causing the loss.

    Among the political obstacles two stand out:

    1. Bureaucratic acrimony. Often the religious minorities face serious
    bureaucratic problems5 while reclaiming their property, and this
    essentially constraints the application of the law,

    2. Political speculations. The Turkish party conditions fulfillment of
    its liabilities before the Christian minorities by the solution of the
    problems of the Muslim minorities in appropriate countries and this
    additionally complicates this rather difficult process. For example,
    the Minister for EU Affairs of Turkey E. Bagis connected reopening of
    the Greek theological school at the Heybeli Island near Istanbul with
    the efforts of the Greek government directed to the improvement of the
    conditions of the Muslim minorities in Greece6.

    The aforementioned legal and political obstacles reveal the formal
    essence of the law passed by the Turkish authorities. The latter
    rather carries out the policy of creating an image of democratic
    country for international community than reclaiming usurped rights of
    the religious minorities.

    This is the reason why the religious minorities in Turkey managed to
    acquire insignificant progress in reclaiming the church properties.

    The Turkish government returned only some property to the Armenian and
    Greek Patriarchates in Istanbul7. However this is not a solution of
    the problem because "There are thousand of confiscated churches and
    estates belonging to the community all over the territory of Turkey
    which must be returned to their rightful owners"8.

    Prospects of cooperation between the churches

    Despite some difficulties connected with the enforcement of the law,
    it, nevertheless, opens good prospects for the Armenian Apostolic,
    Catholic and Evangelical Churches in the aspect of returning their
    confiscated properties. The Catholicosate of the Great House of
    Cilicia has already started exerting efforts to return their
    confiscated properties.

    In order to obtain some success in this issue there must be
    cooperation between the churches which can proceed on two levels -
    "intra-national" and "international".

    â~@¢ Intra-national cooperation supposes inter-confessional cooperation
    between Armenian Apostolic. Catholic and Evangelical Churches and this
    necessity seems to be acknowledged by them. Due to the fact that this
    problem also has legal and political implication it seems reasonable
    to involve in this process traditional Armenian parties working in the
    Diaspora. In this context the statement of the Catholicosis of the
    Great House of Cilicia Aram I9 is remarkable: "The Catholicosate of
    the Great House of Cilicia in cooperation with the Armenian Catholic
    and Protestant churches and our parties will draft a working programme
    in the near future"10.

    â~@¢ International cooperation implies cooperation with other Christian
    churches in Turkey - Greek Orthodox Church, Christian Arabs,
    Assyrians, Roman Catholic Church, Protestant Churches.

    Intra-national and international cooperation between the churches
    directed to the returning of the church properties can manifest itself
    in the following issues:

    â~@¢ Struggle for prolonging a time limitation- Christian churches can
    jointly struggle for the extension of twelve-month deadline provided
    by the law.

    â~@¢ Drafting and submitting of the claims - Even if it is impossible to
    draft and submit claims jointly, the Christian communities can at
    least exert joint efforts by helping each other to draft claims of
    each community.

    â~@¢ Legal and information assistance - Without having a complete idea
    about the complicated legal system of Turkey, separate communities
    cannot adequately protect their rights. Besides, the issue of the
    church property is connected with large amount of information which
    probably may not be possessed by separate communities too, even in
    connection with the issues referring particularly to them.

    Correspondingly legal and information mutual help (legal
    consultations, information sharing, etc.) also plays an important role
    for protecting their rights more efficiently.

    â~@¢ Calculations - The issue of returning of the church properties is
    also connected with numerous and various (sometimes even difficult)
    calculations. In this issue some churches can also provide mutual aid.

    We believe that for exerting joint efforts directed to the reclaiming
    church property as well as making those efforts more efficient, it is
    necessary to establish joint church working group dealing with the
    aforementioned issues.

    1 H. Res. Resolution 306 Urging the Republic of Turkey to Safeguard
    its Christian Heritage and to Return Confiscated Church Properties,
    June 15, 2011. http://www.atour.com/government/pdf/20110615-USCongress-BILLS-112hres306ih.pdf

    2 The diplomatic relations between Turkey and Vatican were established
    in 1960 Õ~NÕ"Õ¬Õ°Õ¥Õ¬Õ´ Ô²Õ¡Õ¸O~BÕ´, Ô¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ¡Õ¶ O~G Õ¶O~@Õ¡ O~DO~@Õ"Õ½Õ¿Õ¸Õ¶ÕµÕ¡ O~CÕ¸O~DO~@Õ¡Õ´Õ¡Õ½Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¶Õ¥O~@Õ¨,
    Yerevan, Publishing House of the Yerevan State University, 2010., p.

    163)

    3 Ð' ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~Fии Ñ~@еаÐ"изаÑ~Fии закона о возвÑ~@аÑ~Iении немÑ~CÑ~AÑ~CÐ"Ñ~LманÑ~Aким Ñ~@еÐ"игиознÑ~Kм
    обÑ~Iинам конÑ~DиÑ~Aкованного имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва меÑ~HаÑ~NÑ~B бÑ~NÑ~@окÑ~@аÑ~BиÑ~GеÑ~Aкие пÑ~@епонÑ~K,
    http://drevo-info.ru/news/11648.html

    4 IbidO~I Ð'оÐ"гаÑ~@Ñ~Aкой Ñ~FеÑ~@ковной обÑ~Iине в СÑ~BамбÑ~CÐ"е бÑ~CдÑ~CÑ~B возвÑ~@аÑ~IенÑ~K Ñ~@анее
    конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~Kе обÑ~JекÑ~BÑ~K недвижимого имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва,
    http://drevo-info.ru/news/11553.html; ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~FиÑ~O веÑ~@неÑ~B Ñ...Ñ~@иÑ~AÑ~Bианам и
    иÑ~CдеÑ~Oм конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~CÑ~N Ñ~AобÑ~AÑ~BвенноÑ~AÑ~BÑ~L,
    http://drevo-info.ru/news/11330.html

    5 See: Ð' ТÑ~CÑ~@Ñ~Fии Ñ~@еаÐ"изаÑ~Fии закона о возвÑ~@аÑ~Iении немÑ~CÑ~AÑ~CÐ"Ñ~LманÑ~Aким
    Ñ~@еÐ"игиознÑ~Kм обÑ~Iинам конÑ~DиÑ~Aкованного имÑ~CÑ~IеÑ~AÑ~Bва меÑ~HаÑ~NÑ~B бÑ~NÑ~@окÑ~@аÑ~BиÑ~GеÑ~Aкие
    пÑ~@епонÑ~K, http://drevo-info.ru/news/11648.html

    6 Ð~^Ñ~BкÑ~@Ñ~KÑ~Bие ХаÐ"кинÑ~Aкой богоÑ~AÐ"овÑ~Aкой Ñ~HкоÐ"Ñ~K завиÑ~AиÑ~B оÑ~B вÑ~AÑ~BÑ~@еÑ~GнÑ~KÑ... Ñ~Hагов Ñ~Aо
    Ñ~AÑ~BоÑ~@онÑ~K Ð"Ñ~@еÑ~Fии, заÑ~OвиÐ" Ñ~BÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкий миниÑ~AÑ~BÑ~@,
    http://drevo-info.ru/news/12661.html

    7 See, e.g., ibidO~I ТÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкие вÐ"аÑ~AÑ~Bи наÑ~GинаÑ~NÑ~B возвÑ~@аÑ~IаÑ~BÑ~L конÑ~DиÑ~AкованнÑ~CÑ~N
    недвижимоÑ~AÑ~BÑ~L Ð~ZонÑ~AÑ~BанÑ~BинопоÐ"Ñ~LÑ~Aкого Ð~_аÑ~BÑ~@иаÑ~@Ñ...аÑ~Bа,
    http://drevo-info.ru/news/12646.html; ТÑ~CÑ~@еÑ~Fкие вÐ"аÑ~AÑ~Bи веÑ~@нÑ~CÐ"и
    Ð~ZонÑ~AÑ~BанÑ~BинопоÐ"Ñ~LÑ~Aкой Ð~_аÑ~BÑ~@иаÑ~@Ñ...ии здание Ñ~HкоÐ"Ñ~K в Ð"аÐ"аÑ~Bе,
    http://drevo-info.ru/news/12343.html

    8 Õ~@Õ¡O~@Õ¸O~BÕ© Õ~MÕ¡Õ½Õ¸O~BÕ¶ÕµÕ¡Õ¶, Ô"Õ¶Õ¹ÕºÕ¥Õ~^Õ½ ÕºÕ¥Õ¿O~D Õ§ Õ~MO~CÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¼O~DÕ¶ Õ¡O~@Õ±Õ¡Õ£Õ¡Õ¶O~DÕ" Ô¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ¡ÕµÕ"
    Õ´Õ¥O~@Õ±Õ¥O~AÕ´Õ¡Õ¶ Õ¶Õ¡Õ­Õ¡Õ±Õ¥Õ¼Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¶Õ¥O~@Õ"Õ¶,
    http://www.noravank.am/arm/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6508&sphrase_id=17981

    9 2012Õ©. O~CÕ¥Õ¿O~@Õ¾Õ¡O~@Õ" 23-26-Õ¨ Ô±Õ¶Õ©Õ"Õ¬Õ"Õ¡Õ½Õ¸O~BÕ´ Â"Õ~@Õ¡ÕµÕ¯Õ¡Õ¯Õ¡Õ¶ O~AÕ¥Õ²Õ¡Õ½ÕºÕ¡Õ¶Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¨Õ~]
    Õ³Õ¡Õ¶Õ¡Õ¹Õ¸O~BÕ´Õ"O~A Õ°Õ¡Õ¿Õ¸O~BO~AÕ¸O~BÕ´Â" Õ­Õ¸O~@Õ¡Õ£O~@Õ¸Õ¾ Õ´Õ"Õ"Õ¡Õ¦Õ£Õ¡ÕµÕ"Õ¶ Õ£Õ"Õ¿Õ¡ÕªÕ¸Õ²Õ¸Õ¾Õ" O~CÕ¡Õ¯Õ´Õ¡Õ¶ Õ­Õ¸Õ½O~DÕ¸O~BÕ´O~I
    Concluding address at the international conference on "The Armenian
    Genocide - from Recognition to Reparation" held on February 23-26,
    2012.

    10 Õ~@Õ¡Õ½Õ¯, 2012, O~CÕ¥Õ¿O~@Õ¸O~BÕ¡O~@, Õ©Õ"O~B 2, Õ§Õ" 116O~I

    "Globus" analytical journal, #1, 2013

    Another materials of author
    THE ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST[24.10.2012]
    THE ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN GREECE AT THIS STAGE[04.06.2012]
    ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN URUGUAY [06.02.2012]
    CURRENT CONDITION OF THE ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN RUSSIA[09.01.2012]
    ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN BULGARIA[07.11.2011]
    ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN EGYPT[20.01.2011]
    ARMENIAN PROTESTANT COMMUNITY IN IRAN[22.10.2010]
    ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN SYRIA[24.09.2010]
    ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN BULGARIA [26.07.2010]
    PROTESTANT ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN TURKEY[17.06.2010]

Working...
X