Country of origin information report Turkey March 2007

Return to contents

Go to list of sources

Human Rights Presidency and Human Rights Boards/Councils
16.15 Information obtained from correspondence on 5 February 2007 from the Foreign and Commonwealth Offices in Ankara stated that:
“Membership: The Presidency is a civil service department.

Role: The Presidency reports directly to the deputy permanent undersecretary equivalent at the Prime Ministry, but is indirectly under the authority of the Minister for Human Rights. It is established by law (no. 4643) and has a number of responsibilities:

• 
  To co-ordinate the work of public bodies on human rights issues
  
• 
  To follow and assess developments in human rights, ensuring that Turkey is in line with international standards
  
• 
  To co-ordinate and assess pre-service internments on human rights issues and in-service human rights training for govt departments
  
• 
  To investigate human rights abuses (it has a standard application form for investigation), assess and advise on preventative measures
  
• 
  To act as the secretariat within the prime ministry for other groups/councils working on similar issues (e.g. the advisory board).” [4c]
  

16.16 The European Commission 2006 report noted that:

“With regard to the promotion and enforcement of human rights, the Human Rights Presidency and the 931 District Human Right Boards continued to provide training on human rights and process applications on alleged human right violations. Between January and June 2006, 778 applications were received. The vast majority of applications related to health and patients' rights, non-discrimination, right to property, and social security rights.” [71a] (p13)
16.17 The EC 2006 report also noted:
“However, the Human Rights Presidency lacks independence from the government, is understaffed and has a limited budget. Furthermore, a new president has not been appointed since the resignation of the previous one in September 2005. The Human Rights Advisory Board under the Office of the Prime Minister has not been operating since the publication of a report on minority rights in Turkey in October 2004. This is a body composed of NGOs, experts and representatives from ministries.” [71a] (p12) Furthermore, “The Human Rights Boards have yet to assume a more prominent role in the on-site monitoring of law enforcement establishments. Since October 2005, the Boards carried out 992 visits to police stations and detention centres.” [71a] (p13)
16.18 As noted in the summary of the HRW report ‘Turkey - First Steps Toward Independent Monitoring of Police Stations and Gendarmeries’, published on 6 March 2006:
“Provincial governors’ close identification with the boards may help to establish the boards in the early stages of their monitoring activities, but already there have been instances where it has undermined the perceived or actual independence of a visiting delegation. In the longer term, the independence of monitoring activities should be enhanced, and the involvement of Turkey’s most respected nationwide human rights nongovernmental organizatons (NGOs), even in a consultative capacity, may significantly promote credibility and trust. Reporting of the boards’ visiting activities is as yet limited, but the Human Rights Presidency has committed itself to detailed reporting in the near future. Rolling out an interim independent monitoring system based on the human rights boards could ensure that the high standards observed in some police units are applied consistently throughout the country.” [9c]
16.19 As noted in the correspondence from the British Embassy in Ankara dated 5 February 2007 the Human Rights Boards / Councils membership consist of the 850 county level boards reporting to 81 provincial boards. They are responsible in turn to the Presidency. Each has at least 16 members, including at least 3 associations or foundations, representatives of local government, local press, trade unions, chambers of commerce, doctors, bar association, universities, political parties (only those represented in Parliament), provincial general assembly. Their role is to provide an organised structure of semi-independent bodies to research, document and champion human rights abuses at a local level. The boards feed into the human rights presidency and use the same application form. [4c]
16.20 The USSD 2005 report also noted that:
“There were government-sponsored human rights councils in all 81 provinces and 850 subprovinces to serve as a forum for human rights consultations among NGOs, professional organizations, and the government. The councils investigated complaints and, when deemed appropriate, referred them to the prosecutor’s office. However, many councils failed to hold regular meetings or effectively fulfill their duties. Human rights NGOs generally refused to participate on the councils, maintaining that the councils lacked authority and were not independent, in part because unelected governors and subgovernors served as chairmen.” [5b] (Section 4)
16.21 In the European Commission 2005 report it was noted that:
“A number of provincial Human Rights Boards have begun to carry out unannounced visits to places of detention in a number of provinces. Although a positive development, NGOs have raised doubts about the independence of such monitoring and of the Human Rights Boards in general. Nevertheless, it is to be hoped that this monitoring will represent a first step towards establishing fully independent monitoring as recommended by the CPT and the UN. Turkey signed the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture (OPCAT) in September 2005. This protocol provides for a system of regular visits to places of detention by complementary international and national independent expert bodies.” [71d] (p24)

Return to contents