There has been statements that the terror description in the Anti-Terror Law will be amended and the Article 8 of the law will be abandoned in the framework of the 6th Reform Package.
The Human Rights Association demands that the Anti-Terror Law should be abandoned completely. It is not possible to describe terror in the framework of human rights law. International law scientificians on criminal law have not yet an agreement on a common description of the terror, either. The term of terror is not a term that referred by science of law and particularly criminal law. Rather, terror is the term belong to the political science and sociology.
We think, the reason of lifting the Article 8 cannot be considered as the Ministry of Justice stated. According to the Minister, lifting the Article 8 will not change the implementation due to the availability of Article 312.
This way that the issues and problems are dealt with refers to a weakness in perception of the democracy, primacy of the law and human rights. The principle that "there cannot be any unlawful penalty crime or legality of crime and penalty" is an universal law principle. Rulers and judiciary of Turkey should give up the understanding as they did after the abolishion of the Article 163 of the Turkish Penal Code by applying the Article 312 as there is no Article 163.
In the EU process, Turkey shall eliminate the "superabundances" of the same issues. However, Turkey shall make amendments on the Constitution and legislation making the regime authoritarian and totalitarian in places, to be democratic. It is what is to be done.
There is no other way to get rid of from the shame of having "thought crime". The Crime of propoganda is another type of crime of thought. Having a bad reputation of the Article 8 originates from the threat of the Article on the freedom of expression.
What is to be done is to guarantee the right to freedom of expression.
Hüsnü Öndül
General President