Distinguished members of the press,
We present today our three-monthly report covering the period between August and September 2001 following the 6 monthly report publicised in July this year. This report includes rights and freedoms violated in the mentioned period. The balance sheet of violations in various fields of human rights for 9 months is also provided. In addition, to remind and to provide an opportunity for an assesment, we also present 9 monthly balance sheets of 2000 and 1999.
Although some deficiencies, assessments in the Regular Report of the European Commission which refers to no improvement in the human rights records of Turkey do not reflect a prejudice, but an objective assessment. In the fields of prevention of torture and freedom of expression, there has been increase in violations. We underline once more the importance and specifities of these two categories of rights.
Distinguished members of the press,
The prohibition of the torture as the basic element of the right of physical and mental integrity of person, in other words the right not to be subjected to the torture is one of the rights that cannot have exceptions or cannot have limitations in its protection. Neither in extraordinary and marshall regime conditions, nor in war conditions an exception can be foreseen for the prohibition of the torture. The Article 15 of the European Convention of Human Rights clearly emphasis that contrary measures to the Article 3 of the Convention cannot be taken in the exceptional situations. Article 4 of the UN International Convention on the Civil and Political Rights also underlines that the contrary measures to the prohibition of torture (Article 7) cannot be taken. Similarly, prohibition of torture is not included in the exceptional situations and it is underlined that contrary measures cannot be taken to the Article 17 in the Article 15 of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey which foresees suspension of the basic rights and freedoms. European Court of Human Rights has also made decisions that Turkey mostly violated rights in the fields of torture and freedom of expression. Although legally binding national and international documents strictly prohibit the torture, the torture has unfortunately been prevented in Turkey.
According to the HRA data,
In the period of January-September 1999, 472 individuals,
in the same period of 2000, 508 individuals,
and in the same period of 2001, 762 individuals
have been subjected to torture and degrading behaviour.
In this three-year period, there has not been any change and development either in the data collection capacity or methodolgy; and we know that there are thousands of incidents not reached to the HRA due to lack of application of victims. However, HRA data indicates the trend. Our proposals submitted to the public and the government on the UN solidarity day with torture victims, 26 June 2001, have not been taken into consideration. In order to prevent the torture, legal, admisnistrative, judiciary and educational measures should be immediately taken.
The places where the torture takes place is a secret by neither the government, nor the public. Torturers are acting maliciously to our people and to Turkey. The torture is not an assertation made up by the ones who harm to Turkey, but it is a phenomena existed through the explicit or implicit countenance of some public officials by their superiors and protection of those in legal and judicial process.For these reasons the torture is systematic. The torture is not an action realised by a few impertinent or by nature torture inclined public officials. It is not easy to consider 762 torture cases in 9 months as individual incidents. These cases have been occured in several cities of Turkey by applying similar technics. This is why that the highest level determination has to be shown in prevention of torture. The government should first of all take the life security under guarantee, show the sincere intention for that and be able to explain why not taking our practical proposals for the prevention of torture before blaming the ones who struggling for the prevention of torture as being working against Turkey.
The second item underlined in our report is related to the freedom of expression. In this freedom area, while the Public Prosecutors are expected to take the decisions and case-laws of the European Court of Human Rights into consideration, it has been observed that they show a contrary action. Increasingly more people due to their expressions of opinion, proposals or information they give are referred to the courts by the Public Prosecutors.
According to the data obtained by the human Rights Association,
In the period between January and September of 1999, 103 people have been referred to courts and a total of 428 years prisonment were demanded,
In the same period of 2000, 254 people were referred to the courts with the demand of 1098 years imprisonment,
and in the same period of 2001, 1921 people were refered to the courts with the demand of 3758 years imprisonment.
People experience their right for freedom of expression either by themselves or together with others. People express their opinions by writing, drawing, creating musicial or cinema works, etc. Moreover, people also express their opinions through political parties, associations, trade unions, foundations. This means that the the right for freedom of expression covers all dimensions of the life.
Laws containing criminal provisions should be narrowly interpreted as a rule. Comparison is forbidden in the criminal law. Any action which has not been defined in the laws cannot be punished. The numerical increase in indictments indicates how widely Public Prosecutors interpret laws. It is clear that determining factor in extending criminal provisions to issues not foressen previously is political-ideological rather than legal standards.
Distinguished members of the press,
The first 9 months of 2001 should be examined and evaluated in various aspects. The most longest death fasts in the world history was experienced in this period. In 9 months of death fasts 35 people were died. Our call for dialogue has not been replied. Prisoners and convicts have been kept in isolation conditions in F type prisons. We should remind in this point that it is not only the Human Rights Association but also the European intergovernmental organisations warned Turkey on several occasions that isolation practices are regarded in the context of prohibition of torture.
Turkey has been experiencing the heaviest economic and financial crisis in its history. In this crisis, several adjustments have been made leading to restructure of the economy which will negatively affect millions of people especially rural population. In coming 10 years, rural population shall continue to fleed urban areas. Poverty is increasing. The welfare state concept has been deferred and its results will be shown soon. There is hungerness in Turkey where also the luxury consumption is too high. This is a man-made catastrophy created by governments.
In our report, we would like to express our views on two significant development happened during the reporting period; constitutional amendments and the 11 September attack and aftermath developments.
The HRA's original demand was towards the change of constitution in once and totally. However, in the case that it was not possible, we referred to a 75-article change in the constitution as it was prescribed in the book on Copenhagen Criteri and Turkey. It is nevertheless a positive development to change 34 articles in the Constitution. We want the work to be sustained in that direction. However, it does not point to a development in the field of freedom of expression the amendement made in Article 14 by the replacement of action with activity. Therefore it is not possible to talk about the compliance with the Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Keeping the National Security Council as an constitutional body reduces the importance of the change on the number of civilian members. Regarding the death penalty, although it is a positive development to abolish the death penalty for ordinary crimes, it is not possible to talk about compliance to the Protocol 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights due to adding new exceptions i.e. terrorist crimes, to the ones prescribed in the Prtocol 6.
We have condemned the 11 September attack without any hesitation. It is obvious that with no reason this sort of criminal action commited towards humanity can be justified. Following the 11 September attack, we do not accept the limitations of human rights and freedoms brought by the USA and some other governments in the world with security reasons. Rights and freedoms of individuals cannot be limited in the name of "protection of freedoms". Having the authority of political assasination, listening to telephone calls and other communicication tools, extending detention periods and limitation of right to defend and the adoption of new laws on fight against terrorism are implementations which cannot be accepted. 11 September provided an opportunity and reason for governments who wanted to limit rights and freedoms.
Our world is less free than it was before the 11 September. Policies developed after the 11 September caused a significant depreciation in the international law, undertakings for human rights and UN mechanisms.
It was the beginning only: A war has been initiated towards Afganistan. UN buldings, Red Cross and Red Crescent aid warehouses were destroyed by bombs. Several innocent people were killed and being killed. As the HRA, we stood up against the war and we keep our position. This war shall not bring anthing else than tear, blood and agony.
We are against that our country takes part in the war. We are against of sending soldiers to Afganistan. The government follows a wrong policy in this issue. We think that policies of the USA and the UK governments are based on revenge and are contradictory to the international and humanitarian laws. We invite all parties to defend principles of justice. We invite the United Nations to take initiatives to realise a just, equal and free world by securing the peace.
Distinguished members of the press,
Finally, we would like to express our views on the Regular Report of the European Commission for 2001. The progress Report of the EC objectively reflects the developments in Turkey in 2001.
As to repeat the HRA views on this issue, we want to have rights and freedoms immediately. We criticise governments on the basis of ethical principles for their 38 years manipulation policies since the Ankara Agreement of 1963. This criticism is not only in the context of the EU-Turkey relations. Governments of Turkey have not provided rights and freedoms which have been introduced by the European Convention of Human Rights for 47 years since being part of the Convention in 1954. There is nothing to be surprised of attitudes of the ones in intergovernmental relations as they did not keep their words given to their society.
12 candidate countries to the EU has accomplished the political criteria wholly within one and half and two years time. Governors of Turkey have not still made their minds to democratise the country, leave aside the accomplishment of the criteria for EU membership. For this reason, within the two years time since the 1999 Helsinki Council where Turkey's candidacy was formally adopted, the only progress been able to make was the constitutional amendments for 34 articles.
The National Programme prepared by the Turkish Government was not including the cultural rights. It was neither bringing a clarification to the death penalty nor providing any guarantee sufficiently for the prevention of torture and the freedom of expression. There was not any provision suggested for not having civilians been tried in the military courts. It did not contain any timetable and undertakings for the work to be done. It was imperative to revise it.
The HRA has directed its criticism to the National programme. The Regular Report of the European Commission verifies the opinion of the HRA put forward in its reports. In the field of human rights, there has not been any progress and improvement especially in the fields of prevention of torture and the freedom of expression. For this reason, reactions to the Regular Report by some members of the government are superfluous.
We as the HRA believe that citizens of Turkey shall reach to the standards of human rights and democratisation. Organisations in Turkey like the HRA develop practical proposals for solution of problems by working in difficult conditions. We think that Turkey shall be subject to a change towards democratisation as long as these activities and and demands of the society are to continue.
Hüsnü Öndül
President of the HRA