The Text Called “Our Pledge” that Children Are Made to Recite
Significant steps toward democratization and the elimination of assimilation practices had been taken with the peace and resolution process in Turkey in 2013. One of these involved the text called “Our Pledge,” or the Student Oath, that was mandatory for primary school children to recite every morning at schools in Turkey.
What is “Our Pledge”? When was it instated?
“Our Pledge” reads: “I am a Turk, honest and hardworking. My principle is to protect the younger to respect the elder, to love my homeland and my nation more than myself. My ideal is to rise, to progress.
O Great Atatürk! On the path that you have paved, I swear to walk incessantly toward the aims that you have set.
My existence shall be dedicated to Turkish existence. How happy is the one who says ‘I am a Turk!'”
The Minister of Education Dr. Reşit Galip had issued a circular letter back in 1933 stating that this text called “Our Pledge” should be recited by primary school children. In other words, this was an administrative decision.
Reşit Galip was a Unionist and served as a member of the Independence Court that sentenced Sheikh Said to death in 1925. Reşit Galip was a Turkish nationalist. After he was appointed as the Minister of National Education, he initiated the recital of “Our Pledge” in order to maintain assimilation practices in the strictest manner possible.
When one looks at the text called “Our Pledge” it is quite readily understood that this document is a racist and militarist one. It is also comprehensible that circles adopting racism and militarism have taken a stand in favor of this text, while those who oppose these have challenged it on various different grounds. It is, however, quite problematic politically for anyone being inspired by the political climate of the 1930s and by Reşit Galip.
Yet IHD has to question the degree to which this text is fitting with regards to human rights law.
Article 90 of the Constitution prescribes that international agreements on fundamental rights and freedoms that Turkey ratified have the force of law and should be complied with.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child ratified by Turkey prohibits discrimination and provides for the best interests of the child. All children, including those who belong to a minority group or who are indigenous, have the right to freedom of thought, religion and conscience along with the right to access education and other rights. Those who do not know about the Convention on the Rights of the Child can easily find and read it. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has put forward many resolutions on the rights of the child. Moreover, the Convention on the Rights of the Child prescribes that States Parties should take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child’s parents, legal guardians, or family members. The provisions of the Convention proscribe all forms of discrimination against children and attempts to make children adopt militarism. This prohibition is found in all conventions on fundamental human rights that Turkey ratified.
Consequently, there are millions of children who are not Turkish but belong to other ethnic groups in Turkey. Making them adopt and sanctify “Turkish” ethnicity everyday is pedagogically problematic. Moreover, the fact that children would dedicate their own existence to “Turkish existence” not only does sanctify militarism but also infringes upon the right to freedom of belief. Thus, the political power needs to take all necessary measures to stop the reinstatement of this text that can in no way be accepted with regards to human rights.
The only thing that one can say about the ruling of the Council of State is that the judiciary in Turkey does not rule in compliance with human rights law, but in accordance with various ideologies or other different motives. That the Council of State, which maintained its silence before the blatantly unconstitutional practices that victimized hundreds of thousands of people and affected millions of others during the SoE in rulings legitimizing the government’s practices, has ruled in such a matter overstepping expediency is quite telling.
“Our Pledge” should not be reinstated.
HUMAN RIGHTS ASSOCIATION