|
PAYING THE PRICE:
Freedom of Expression in Turkey
Introduction
"Turkey is a country of paradoxes," Dogu Perincek, the editor of the weekly journal, 2000’e Dogru (Towards 2000), told us in Istanbul. "Magazines like ours are now freer to break taboos than at any time since the restoration of civilian government in 1983. You have the freedom to write, but only if you’re willing to pay the price for it."
Many editors, writers and journalists are indeed paying the price for what they have written-in harassment, criminal charges, detention, torture, trials and sometimes imprisonment. On our trip to Turkey in October 1988 we talked with many brave Turks who, every day, put themselves at risk for speaking their minds.
This report is the seventh report on human rights in Turkey issued by Helsinki Watch since 1982. It does not cover all aspects of human rights in Turkey, but rather concentrates on freedom of expression—in the press, radio and television, publishing, film, music and in freedom of association. It is based largely on a fact-finding mission to Turkey undertaken in October 1988 by Helsinki Watch and the International Freedom to Publish Committee of the Association of American Publishers.
Turkey has changed enormously since the first Helsinki Watch trip in mid-1983. At that time the country was still under martial law, and had been so since the military coup of 1980. The military had not yet turned the government back to civilians — no elections had been held since the coup. Independent organizations had either been banned or taken over by the military. The press operated under military control, printing only those stories approved by the military. Public criticism of the military coup and of the military government was almost non-existent; anyone brave enough to attempt such criticism ran a heavy risk of arrest, torture and a long prison sentence. Many thousands of Turks were in prison for political statements or actions.
The Turkey of today is a different country — it is a parliamentary democracy with a multi-party system, although not all political parties are permitted to take part. National elections have been held twice. Martial law has ended, and a state of emergency exists only in southeastern Turkey, where Kurdish separatists continue to wage guerrilla warfare. There is no day-to-day censorship of the press, and government policies and actions are openly criticized.
But within this structure of democracy, terrible problems still exist. Although the Turkish government in 1988 signed and ratified both the United Nations and European conventions to prevent torture, Turkish citizens continue to be tortured in the same police stations as before, using the same kinds of implements and methods of torture. If the number of people being tortured has declined, that is because fewer people are being detained on political charges, not because the rate of torture has decreased. According to reliable reports, at least seventeen people died during torture in 1987 at the hands of police or the military, and at least five more died under torture in the first half of 1988. Lawyers representing defendants in political cases told us that well over 90 percent of political defendants are tortured today.
And many thousands of political prisoners remain in prison- some convicted of political crimes, and some in detention, still awaiting the conclusions of their trials. Conditions in Turkish prisons are so degrading that more than 2,000 prisoners took part in hunger strikes in 1988.
As for freedom of expression, the positive side can be seen in the proliferation of journals that openly criticize the government and try to expand the areas in which free speech is permitted. The negative side is the confiscation of many issues of these journals and the many charges brought against their editors and authors — some of which end in torture and imprisonment. At least 41 Turkish journalists and editors are now in prison, serving time for what they have written or published. Some have received absurdly long sentences—in one case, 1,086 years, later reduced to about 700 years on appeal. (None, however, will serve more than 36 years, the maximum time permitted by Turkish law.) According to an April 20,1988 article in Cumhuriyet, an influential Turkish daily newspaper, in the five years since the end of military rule in 1983, 2,127 journalists have been tried in 1,426 cases.
In the two years since the weekly journal, 2000’e Dogru (Towards2000), began publishing, 28 cases have been brought against it for such crimes as "insulting the president," "weakening national feelings," "making anti-Turkish propaganda," insulting religion, the military, or the memory of Kemal Ataturk, founder of the Republic. So far, nine of the 28 cases have been brought to trial. In three, a "not guilty" verdict was returned. In the six others, the journal, an editor and sometimes the writer of an article have been found guilty. In one case, a prison sentence was converted to a monetary fine. But in five cases, Fatma Yazici, the magazine’s "responsible editor" (the person who, according to the Turkish Press Law, bears legal responsibility for the contents of the publication), has been sentenced to prison terms ranging from 12 months to six years and three months. The appeal process has been completed in three cases. In two of these, sentences totaling 28 months were upheld. One of these cases involved "insulting the president" by printing an article about two apartments bought by Turkey’s President Kenan Evren for two daughters at unusually low prices; the magazine printed copies of the deeds of sale. The other involved "being disrespectful of religion and the Prophet Mohammed."
The longest sentence that Ms. Yazici and 2000’e Dogru have received to date—six years and three months—was for publishing, without editorial comment, a summary of the March 1988 Helsinki Watch Report, Destroying Ethnic Identity: the Kurds of Turkey. That decision was upheld by an appeals court in March 1989. Needless to say, it is of special concern to us. Ms. Yazici is scheduled to start serving all three sentences in March 1989. The sentences total eight years and seven months.
Another journal is also in trouble for printing a summary of a Helsinki Watch report-Toplumsal Dirilis (Social Resurrection), a small socialist monthly. Its editor has been charged with "weakening national sentiments" and "making communist propaganda" for printing the section on Turkish Kurds that appeared in the December 1987 Helsinki Watch report, State of Flux-Human Rights in Turkey. The journal has published four issues; three of them have been confiscated from newsstands, and charges have been brought against the editors for all four issues.
Many other small socialist journals have been harassed by the police, their editors charged with violations of the Press Law and the Penal Code for what they have published. Some staff members have been interrogated, tortured and imprisoned.
The mainstream press also suffers from government pressure. During our October visit, members of the press and others concerned with free expression in Turkey were upset by two recent incidents of government interference with two large daily newspapers. The first was the confiscation of an issue of Milliyet, a moderate mainstream daily with a circulation of 300,000. Before the paper reached the newsstands, police raided the printing plant and seized the June 17,1988, issue which contained the first in what was to be a series of interviews with the head of a Kurdish separatist group that is carrying on guerrilla warfare in southeastern Turkey. The newspaper was forbidden to print further installments of the interview. The writer who had conducted the interview, prominent journalist Mehmet Ali Birand, and the paper’s responsible editor, Eren Guvener, were charged with "propaganda detrimental to feelings of patriotism in Turkey." Each faces a possible 15-year prison sentence; the trial is continuing at a state security court.
The second incident, which also took place in June 1988, involved a police raid on the Ankara bureau of Cumhuriyet, a respected center left daily with a circulation of 150,000, and the four-day detention of Erbil Tusalp, one of the paper’s leading journalists. The government’s action was based on a story by Tusalp about the interrogation of the man who had shot and tried to kill Prime Minister Turgut Ozal in June. Mr. Tusalp has been charged with violations of the Press Law and with publishing information banned by the authorities; he faces possible prison sentences totaling fourteen years.
Book publishing is also a hazardous occupation in Turkey. In general, writers have not been sent to prison for their writings, but many have seen then-books confiscated and destroyed. Others have been tried for publishing works thought to be "harmful to minors." The government has officially banned from Turkey some 2,000 books and journals, including works by Moliere, Voltaire, Camus and Albert Einstein.
Cases against writers and publishers fall into two categories: political cases and obscenity, or "harmful to minors," cases. In a recent political case, Muzaffer Ilhan Erdost, a writer and publisher, was tried for re-publishing in 1987 a book he had originally issued in 1966, called Semdinli Report. The book consisted of a series of interviews Mr. Erdost did in 1965 with Kurds who lived in a village in southeastern Turkey. Although the book had been published without incident in 1966, the 1987 re-issue was considered "dangerous" by the government. A trial was held in September 1988, and all copies of the book were ordered destroyed.
A number of authors have been interrogated, charged and tried in connection with books believed by authorities to be "harmful to minors." One author, Pinar Kur, has seen two of her books, A Woman to be Hanged and Unending Love, banned as "harmful." In both cases the books were eventually acquitted, but in the meantime their sales fell off precipitately.
Turkish writers openly admit censoring themselves for fear of ban-nings, confiscations and court charges.
Radio and television are owned and run by the Turkish government. By all accounts, television is the most influential medium in Turkey today, reaching about 96 percent of the country. In contrast, total newspaper circulation is about three million (out of a total population of about 55 million), and book sales of 5,000 are considered very good.
Turkish television is sharply criticized by human rights activists and others for its news coverage, which is said to favor the party in power. It is said that many writers, filmmakers, musicians and others are blacklisted from Turkish television; the government acknowledges that a blacklist system existed, but asserts that it was ended early in 1988.
Prior censorship is a fact of life for filmmakers and musicians in Turkey today. All films and cassettes must be submitted to a film or music censorship board which is made up largely of representatives of government agencies. These boards can ban films or music, approve them, or order cuts or changes.
Since 1986 another form of censorship has plagued filmmakers and musicians: censorship after a film or cassette has been released. Any of the governors of the 67 provinces in Turkey can legally order the banning of films, videos and music, even if the work in question has been approved by the national film or music censorship board. Under the law permitting such actions, a work can be banned or prosecuted if a local administrator believes that it "violates the inseparable unity of the state, including the territory and the nation, or contravenes national sovereignty, national security, the public order, general law and order, the public interest, the general morals and health, or customs and traditions." This language is so broad that any provincial governor can ban any film, music or video for virtually any reason at any time. Many Turkish and foreign films have been banned as a result.
Filmmakers and musicians also run the risk of prosecution under the same articles in the Penal Code that are used against journalists and writers. They can run afoul of the "Law to Protect Minors from Harmful Publications" as well.
"Turkey is a country that erodes any motivation to creativity," one filmmaker told us, after recounting her difficulties with provincial governors’ bans of her film, Su da Yartar (Water Also Bums). The film, ironically, is about a film director who is not allowed to make a film he wants to make. Approved by the Film Censorship Board, the film was later banned by the governor of Gaziantep in southeastern Turkey on the grounds that it violated national security, public order, law and order, and customs and traditions. Nineteen other provincial governors have since followed suit, with the result that the film can be shown in some provinces but not others.
Musicians suffer similar bans, particularly singers of protest and folk songs. One popular singer, Selda Bagcan, told us that she had been investigated nine times since 1977 because of her songs. Although subsequently acquitted in all nine cases, she spent a total of four months in prison during the interrogations and trials. Some provincial governors have forbidden her concerts in their provinces, and she is banned from performing on radio or television. "I’m tired of going to prison for my songs," she told us. "People censor themselves--who wants to go to prison? But I love my country, and I believe that these antidemocratic laws will be changed in the future." Another popular singer, Bilgesu Erenus, was detained for ten days in June 1988 after performing at a political rally.
In the years immediately following the military coup of September 1980, few associations were permitted to exist in Turkey. In the last two years or so the government has eased its restrictions somewhat, and a growing number of associations now operate within the rigid requirements of the Associations Law of 1983. Associations must submit their charters and by-laws to government officials for approval. Even if an association is approved, it cannot legally pursue political aims, engage in political activities, support political parties, or take joint action with other groups, such as unions, professional organizations or foundations. If an association violates legal requirements, it can be dissolved in a court proceeding. The activities, membership and procedures of associations are prescribed and closely regulated by law.
One association now operating legally in Turkey is the Human Rights Association (HRA), which received permission to exist in December 1986. The HRA now has branches in twenty-two cities throughout Turkey and 5,000 members who support the organization with dues. The aim of the HRA is to defend human rights in Turkey; it produces reports and holds press conferences and panel discussions on such subjects as political prisoners, prison conditions and deaths under torture. The group has started campaigns for a general amnesty and to end the death penalty (which is still in force but has not been carried out since 1984).
The Human Rights Association has been harassed by interrogations, charges and trials. In one case, the Ankara branch paid a fine for issuing a press release without prior permission. Police have disrupted some public meetings of the association; in other instances, police have surrounded meetings but have not actively interfered.
Another association operating with the approval of the government is the Association of Families of Convicts and Detainees (TAYAD). This group holds meetings, gives press conferences and organizes demonstrations to protest torture and ill-treatment of prisoners. The group has been indicted ten times, charged with violations of the Associations Law, another ten investigations are under way and may result in additional charges. TAYAD leaders have been detained in connection with some of the cases. In one case thirteen TAYAD members were detained for seven months; all were later acquitted.
Other associations operating with government approval include the Turkish Writers’ Union, Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the Turkish-Greek Friendship Association, and the Women’s Organization for Democracy.
…..
|
