Country of origin information report Turkey March 2007

Return to contents

Go to list of sources
14.16 As noted in the International Helsinki Federation (IHF) report of June 2006:
“According to the Law on Assemblies Meetings and Demonstrations, which was amended in August 2003, governors were no longer allowed to ban demonstrations. In addition, the previous authority of governors or the Interior Ministry to postpone demonstrations and meetings for 30 days was reduced to ten days. Further, the maximum period for the postponement or ban of a meeting was brought down from three months to one month. While organizers were still required to ‘notify’ the security authorities before demonstrations or meetings, the police often mistook ‘notifying’ as an ‘authorisation’ process. According to HRA, 34 meetings and demonstrations were prohibited by the authorities during the year. Police continued to intervene in demonstrations and open-air meetings organized by Kurdish activists, students, trade unionists, human rights groups or left-wing groups. Excessive security measures and the negative attitudes of the police toward demonstrators led to tensions. According to HRA, security forces used excessive force in 101 demonstrations and meetings compared to 124 in 2004. Seven persons were killed during demonstrations while more than 330 demonstrators, including political and minority activists, human rights activists, students and journalists, were wounded during intervention in these actions.” [10a] (p438)
14.17 The Human Rights Watch (HRW) World Report 2007, published in January 2007, noted that there was a sharp increase in indiscriminate and disproportionate use of lethal force by security forces in dealing with protestors, as well as during normal policing. In March youths attending the funerals of PKK militants clashed with police, throwing stones and petrol bombs. During the ensuing street battles in Diyarbakır and other cities police fired bullets, gas grenades, and stones at rioters, killing eight people, including innocent bystanders and four children under 10 years of age. In other incidents during 2006, police shot and killed 13 persons either in error or because they were deemed not to have heeded orders to stop. [9b]
14.18 The IHD (Human Rights Association) 2005 Balance Sheet on Human Rights Violations in Turkey recorded that 34 meetings and demonstrations were suspended; 24 subjected to legal action; 101 subjected to the intervention of the security forces and nine subjected to physical attacks. [73a] (Violations of right to meet and demonstrate)
14.19 On 17 February 2006 the Turkish Daily News reported that:
“Police with batons held back hundreds of Kurdish demonstrators on Thursday who were throwing bricks and stones at police from atop [sic] a pro-Kurdish political party building in the southern Turkish city of Adana. The demonstration was a continuation of protests a day earlier to mark the seventh anniversary of terrorist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) leader Abdullah Ocalan’s capture. Some 200 demonstrators were detained after dozens of them threw bricks and stones at police, reports said. Police, wielding truncheons, confronted dozens of protesters at the gates of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) building under a shower of stones, CNN-Turk showed. At least two police officials were injured in the clash, the Anatolia news agency said. Elsewhere on Thursday, hundreds of Kurds clashed with police and staged sit-ins in the largely Kurdish Southeast.” [23u]
14.20 The EC 2006 report noted that:
“As regards freedom of assembly, public demonstrations are subject to fewer restrictions than in the past. However, in some cases security forces used excessive force, especially when the demonstrations were carried out without permission. The administrative investigations have been finalised into the incidents during a demonstration promoting women's rights in March 2005. Three members of the Istanbul Directorate of Security have been punished with a reprimand due to ‘Failure in undertaking the duty of training and supervising members under their command.’ A further six staff members have been punished with a salary deduction due to ‘disproportionate use of force when dispersing the demonstrators and speaking to or treating the public in a degrading manner’. The investigation launched by the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of Istanbul against seven police officers is currently ongoing.” [71a] (p15)
15 Freedom of speech and media

15.01 As outlined in the Human Rights Watch (HRW) World Report 2007, published in January 2007:

“More than 50 individuals were indicted for statements or speeches that questioned state policy on controversial topics such as religion, ethnicity, and the role of the army. The government failed to abolish laws that restrict speech.

In April an Adana court sentenced broadcaster Sabri Ejder Öziç to six months of imprisonment under article 301 of the Turkish Criminal Code for ‘insulting parliament’ by describing a decision to allow foreign troops on Turkish territory as a ‘terrorist act’. Öziç is at liberty pending appeal. In July the Supreme Court upheld a six-month prison sentence against Hrant Dink, editor of the newspaper Agos (Furrow), under article 301 for ‘insulting Turkishness’ in an editorial concerning the 1915 massacres of Armenians in Anatolia. The sentence was suspended, but other speech-related charges against Dink are pending. In September British artist Michael Dickinson was imprisoned for two weeks and subsequently deported for publishing a collage showing Prime Minister Erdoğan as US President Bush’s poodle.” [9b]
15.02 The EC 2006 report noted that:
“… the prosecutions and convictions for the expression of non-violent opinion under certain provisions of the new Penal Code are a cause for serious concern and may contribute to create a climate of self-censorship in the country. This is particularly the case for Article 301 which penalises insulting Turkishness, the Republic as well as the organs and institutions of the state. Although this article includes a provision that expression of thought intended to criticise should not constitute a crime, it has repeatedly been used to prosecute non violent opinions expressed by journalists, writers, publishers, academics and human rights activists. In July, the General Assemblies of the Civil and Penal Chambers of the Court of Cassation established restrictive jurisprudence on Article 301. The Court confirmed a six-month suspended prison sentence for journalist Hrant Dink. This was on the basis of Article 301 of the new Penal Code for insulting ‘Turkishness’ in a series of articles he wrote on Armenian identity. Against this background, Article 301 needs to be brought into line with the relevant European standards. The same applies to other provisions of the Penal code which have been used to prosecute the non-violent expression of opinions and may limit freedom of expression.” [71a] (p14-15)
15.03 The EC 2006 report further noted that “Overall, open debate has increased in recent years in Turkish society on a wide range of issues. Notwithstanding this trend, freedom of expression in line with European standards is not yet guaranteed by the present legal framework.” [71a] (p15)
15.04 The EC 2006 report also added that:
“With regard to freedom of expression (including the media), the Ministry of Justice issued a circular in January 2006, regarding cases of freedom of expression in written and visual media. It instructed prosecutors to take into consideration both Turkish legislation and the ECHR. The circular also established a monthly monitoring mechanism of criminal investigations and court cases against the press and media. Some progress can be reported in the area of broadcasts in languages other than Turkish at local and regional level However, the prosecutions and convictions for the expression of non-violent opinion under certain provisions of the new Penal Code are a cause for serious concern and may contribute to create a climate of self-censorship in the country.” [71a] (p14)