Women in Turkey
Tourist in Turkey with beer and water whistle woman his "its" in Turkey should be connected according to rumors with trouble. Here we will get an insight about self-experienced, with prejudices clear up and describe the role "roll" of the woman "wife" in Turkey. A very awkward subject, as one can infer from many media reports.
05th November, 2005
Investigation to girl's marriage
in the east of Turkey:
36.9% of the girls at the age of 15 years are already married. Besides, 24.3% with a cousin of 1st degree "level" are married and 15.4% with a cousin of 2nd degree "level". Strongly this bad habit of the cousin's marriage is spread in Urfa with 51%, followed "tracked" by Mardin with 46%. Annotation: the marriage with relatives was absolutely normal till some years, nevertheless, the property should remain in the family. Many handicapped children were born by the marriage with the next members. Many of these children live at homes.
Read in addition the detailed "verbose" report of Heidi Wedel: women "wives" in Turkey
We want you!
We search women "wives" who would like to report about her "their" Turkey experiences. Write "compose" to us your experiences, so that we can publish them "her" here under experience reports (Turkey).
Headscarf ban in Turkey
For some it shall be read interesting that at the Turkish schools and colleges "universities" absolute headscarf ban rules. This concerns the pupils / students as well as the teachers. Offense against this ban is put through in case of need also with police power.
Women "Wives" in Turkey
In spite of reforms a need to catch up exists "consists" with the human rights
Human rights and rights of minorities in Turkey on the way in the EU
from Heidi Wedel
Progress report of the EU states reforms
In the end of 2004 Turkey to a long preserved wish had come "got" much closer than to her with the summit of the European Union (EU) the admission "intake" was promised by negotiations of accession in October, 2005. For it "in return" she "it" must fulfil the so-called " political Copenhagen criteria ", 1 they were decided in 1993: institutional stability as a guarantee "warranty" for democracy, rule of law, guarantee and esteem of the human rights as well as the recognition and the protection of minorities.
Five years after Turkey in 1999 in Helsinki accession nominee had been designated "marked", the European commission pointed out in her "their" progress report in 2004 to the fact that Turkey has achieved "reached" substantial progress with the political reforms in particular by a row of constitutional-juridical and general-juridical changes "amendments" according to the priorities of the accession partnership. However, the legal regulations and the conversion of the regulations "stipulations" would still have to be consolidated and be expanded. This counts "applies" in particular to the "zero tolerance policy" compared with torture and maltreatments as well as to the conversion of the regulations "stipulations" about the freedom of speech, the freedom of worship as well as the rights "laws" of the women "wives" and the minorities. In consideration of the comprehensive progress in the area of the reforms and provisory the conversion of the still receivable legal regulations by Turkey was the commission of the view that Turkey has fulfilled the political criteria in sufficient "enough" masses and, therefore, recommended the opening of the negotiations of accession.
Accession as a historical chance for the human rights
The EU accession of Turkey remains controversial in spite of the named decisions within the EU. For it "in return" there are many, in particular also the economic "economic policy" reasons "grounds" which are discussed in other articles of this notebook. Besides, the accession opponents gladly appeal, even if to be enough "satisfy" often superficially, on the fact that Turkey would be removed "unloaded" concerning the human rights far from it, for European standards. The fact that since decades basic human rights are injured "violated" in Turkey, is indisputable meanwhile. It are debatable the gravity of these injuries of human rights as well as the question whether the human rights must be realized in Turkey before an EU integration, can be transported "promoted" by the accession process best of all or be improved, however, only by a steady integration of Turkey in the EU.
The author of this article assumes from the fact that the accession process forms "establishes" a historical chance for the human rights in Turkey. If the process is strictly used, openly, seriously and cleverly for the purposes of the human rights, he can motivate to reforms. To indicate the achievements, problems and potentials of this process, the accession process with his "its" most important steps is checked at first in view of the human rights outlined and in the main part the success report of the EU commission in the progress report in 2004 critically. With the help of the single fields of human rights it is analyzed in detail, to what extent up to now within the accession process reforms of human rights were concerned what was reached "arrived", besides, specifically and what still remains to act. 2
EU-accession process and
Standards of human rights
Turkey has undertaken quite early of international, standard of human rights European in particular. In 1950 she "it" ratified the European convention of human rights (EMRK), in 1987 it granted to her "their" citizens and female citizens the right "law" on individual complaint at the European court of law for human rights (EGMR). In 1988 she "it" ratified the UN convention against torture and the European convention to the prevention of the torture and granted with it "thus" to the European commission to the prevention of the torture (European Committee for the Prevention of to ordeal / CPT) the right "law" to attend undeclared Turkish like institutions. Although with it "thus" Turkey mechanisms of human rights has joined which belong to the most actual "effectual" ones up to now worldwide, the actual progress was marked with the conversion only very slowly and from violent repercussions "setbacks". Reform steps were initiated in particular by Rechtssprechungen of the European court of law for the human rights which have sensitive financial sequences for Turkey as well as the recommendations "references" of the CPT.
EU missed "fitted" chances by the protection of the human rights
Since Turkey has closed down "has concluded" in 1963 an Assozierungsabkommen with the European community "society" (EC), has missed "fitted" the latter repeatedly important opportunities "occasions" to use the integration of Turkey for the protection of the human rights. After the Turkish military putsch of 1980 the EC reacted only hesitantly, late and appeasing "calming;assuaging". When the commission refused in 1989 the Turkish application "motion" for full membership, the human rights played only one subordinated role "roll": indeed, they were mentioned under the reasons "grounds" for the rejection, nevertheless, the detailed grounds "establishment" referred completely predominantly to economic and social problems. Also by the conclusion "transaction" of the customs union in 1995 the chance was wasted to exert itself for an actual "effectual" improvement of the human rights. Indeed, protection of human rights had been explained "declared" before to a precondition, nevertheless, the contract was closed down "concluded" in December, 1995, although injuries of human rights like "Verschwindenlassen" and extra-legal executions reached "arrived" a sad climax "highlight" in this time.
As a reason "ground" for the approval it was stated that in view of the strategical, safety-political "more security-political" role "roll" of Turkey an estrangement of Turkey of Europe and a reinforced Hinwendung should be prevented "hindered" to the Islamic world. Thus the EU credibility and actual "effectual" leverage lost in the policy of human rights. Turkey had to win the impression that the EU is content with cosmetic reforms if it corresponds "fulfils" - like the customs union - to her "their" interests, and uses human rights as a pure "clean" pretext if the EU wants to prevent "hinder" detailed "thorough" integration.
Stagnation and revival of the political dialog
When the EU summit excluded "expelled" Turkey from the circle "ring" of the nominees "candidates" for the EU accession in Luxembourg in December, 1997, Ankara announced "prefigured" to suspend the political dialog and to want to discuss no more human rights. The impression, the EU gets on as a "Christian's club", pushed just the potential partners of Europe in Turkey before the head, above all, the state and social forces which identify with the modernization, Säkularisierung and Verwestlichung. He took away from a policy of human rights which promises a narrower binding in Europe, every basis for concrete improvement. Why Turkey should do "make" the "homework" demanded by EU politicians if from the start was decided that it should never reach "arrive" the first-class destination?
However, in the first half in 1999 the political dialog of the EU with Turkey which had come "got" after the EU summit in Luxembourg (December, 1997) for succumbing was revived. Changes of government in some important EU states as well as the changed security policy after the Kosovo war brought the EU commission to recommend the opening of negotiations of accession with the remaining nominees "candidates" and to suggest the rental of the nominee's state to Turkey, although the commission had ascertained little improvement relating to of the situation of human rights and minority situation. 3 So was decided at the summit "peak" in Helsinki (December, 1999) to accept Turkey as a nominee "candidate" for the EU accession. Turkey thereby received the long longed view of the EU membership and undertook to the adaptation to the Acquis Communautaire, the common possession stand of the EU which encloses all valid contracts and legal file. In particular she "it" had to take care for the beginning of negotiations of accession of the fulfilment of the political Copenhagen criteria.
Women "Wives" in Turkey
from Heidi Wedel
Freedom of speech
In the accession partnership Turkey had been asked to strengthen at short notice the lawful and constitutional guarantees for the right "law" on freedom of speech in the light of article 10 of the European convention of human rights and to concern the situation "position" of the prisoners who are arrested on account of peaceful political expressions of opinion.
Since then the law articles which are used often for the restriction by freedom of speech were changed "amended" several times "repeatedly" and are acquitted on account of these changes "amendments" till April, 2004 according to official "formal" specifications 2204 persons (already this number the magnitude "dimensions" of the problems indicates "suggests"). As in the following is shown, nevertheless, the reforms were insufficient.
With the article 159 of the old Criminal Code (TStGB) about insults offenses only the penal maximum limit meaningless in the practise was lowered in February, 2002, only in August, 2002 the article was limited as regards content, however, led furthermore to the criminal proceedings of expressions of opinion. This offense also appears in the new penal law (TStG) in the articles 299 (insults of the president), 300 (lowering of the Turkish flag and national anthem) and 301 (lowering of Türkentum, republic, state institutions and state organs) 7 again. Here there is even "still" a penal rise if an action was committed according to the article 299 publicly or about the press "squeezer" or if an action is committed according to the article 301 by a Turkish citizen abroad. The former also displays "shows" a danger of the freedom of the press. 8
The infamous article 8 of the "anti-terror law" (ATG) of " separatistischer propaganda " was extended in 2002 around " visual propaganda " and the prison sentences was raised "increased" in case of the " Aufhetzens to terrorist methods ". Finally, only with the 6th harmonization package in 2003 article 8 ATG was abolished "canceled". According to the Turkish press reports the military refused this reform. However, Turkish government circles allowed to announce that by an abolition of article 8 ATG articles 311 (request "prompt" on a criminal offense) and 312 TStGB (people's indoctrination) filled the gap. Indeed, have been led during the last years processes on the basis of expressions of opinion to the Kurd's question rather according to the article 312 than according to the article 8.
Indeed, named article 312 for the people's indoctrination had been changed "amended" in 2002 in this respect sensibly "meaningfully" when the danger of the public order was done "made" the condition. However, he was used furthermore to trace peaceful statements to the rights "laws" of minorities, and now it was transferred "taken" in article 216 of the new penal law.
With article 7 ATG about " propaganda for unlawful organizations " arousing "rousing" was done "made" in 2002 " terrorist methods " of the condition. In the practise there are furthermore the political prisoners free of power who are arrested after these paragraphs. Besides, it is human-juridical doubtful that during the last years article 169 TStGB about the support of unlawful organizations comes "gets" piled up to the application, under it "among them" also in the cases in which no use of force or power support is evident "apparent", as for example "such as" with the pupils who applied for Kurdish exchange rates. 9
New penal law brings
The new penal law of 2005 brought relating to to the freedom of speech no improvement, in case of from article 305 " to actions against the basic national interest " even new restrictions. as " National interests " the independence, territorial unit, national security and the basic properties of the republic are defined what points to the fact that this article is applied "exercised" in particular in view of the Kurd's question that, however, also Laizismuskritik could fall under it "among them". The fact that the article can considerably limit the freedom of speech, became clear in the grounds "establishment" which were presented to the parliament. Here 305 propaganda was stated "led" as examples of criminal offenses according to the article for the deduction "discount" of the Turkish soldiers from Cyprus, approval with a solution of the Cyprus question which is harmful to the interests of Turkey or the assertion "statement" of a Genozids in the Armenians in the First World War.
Although certain progress was achieved "reached", a comprehensive reform of legal texts and, above all, her "their" application is still pending for the purposes of the freedom of speech. Sometimes the law changes were insufficient themselves, sometimes the interpretation of the laws "code" stood in the contradiction to the human rights, so that furthermore numerous persons, authors "writers", journalists and activists of human rights are put "arranged" for peaceful statements in court. Even if the procedures often do not lead to convictions "condemnations", is of this one attrition and implied censorship which stands in the way of the mind "ghost" of democracy and human rights. The basic understanding on account of whose laws "code" are applied "exercised" in Turkey has not changed obviously "clearly".
Women "Wives" in Turkey
from Heidi Wedel
Union freedom, organizations of human rights
The EU sent a reminder in the accession partnership to lawful and constitutional guarantees for the rights "laws" on freedom of assembly and union freedom. Nevertheless, the constitutional reform held not only old restrictions straight, but introduced "imported" even new ones. Indeed, the law from August, 2002 contained some changes which should make easier the activities of non-Regierungs organizations (NGOs). Nevertheless, many restrictive regulations "controls" in the association law were not touched and permit so lawful action of impediments up to close-downs "closing" of associations and processes against her "their" sales representatives and female sales representatives.
In July, 2004 a new association law by which some restrictions were lifted "canceled" for associations oriented to identity was dismissed "seen off". However, the president inserted "fed" at first a veto against the law, so that it could come into force only after the second round "Runde" at the end of November, 2004. In the practise the printing on organizations of human rights as well as on associations increased, above all, in the Kurdish region. The latest "youngest" example of the persistent repression was the judicial "forensic" disposal in May, 2005 to close "conclude" the teacher trade union Egitim sen because she "it" had recorded the defense of the right "law" on education "formation" in the mother tongue in her "their" statutes. Printing on activist of human rights like the renewed murder threats against the lawyer Eren Keskin or occupational bans on lawyers and lawyers are especially harmful for the human rights because they also meet those beside the directly(immediately) affected "touched" persons for whose rights "laws" they exert themselves, and create an atmosphere "ambience" of the fear.
Torture and police like
International Amnesty published in October, 2001 a report in which the system of the torture was demonstrated in Turkey by the moment "instant" of the arrest up to extensive impunity of the torturers. To break open this system, numerous measures were recommended. 10 organizations of human rights assume from the fact that, on the other hand, important steps would be the entire abolition of the Incommunicadohaft (custody without every contact with the outside world) and the automatic and universal presence of lawyers and lawyers during the police like on the one hand and measures to the ending of the impunity for torturers. They asked the EU repeatedly to attach the adequate weight to the torture as a serious injury of human rights. The progress report in 2002 indicated "suggested" that these with detailed "verbose" documentations unterfed recommendations "references" of the EU to the knowledge were taken. In the same "identical" year the new Turkish government also announced her "their" " zero tolerance compared with torture ".
The conversion of the EU demand for lawful and other necessary measures to the fight "battle" against the torture followed only in small "little" steps. In 2001/2002 the legally "by law" allowed Höchstdauer was delimited for police and gendarmerie like to two to four (or in the state of emergency area seven) Meeting and the Incommunicadohaft for the arrested who are suspected for criminal offenses in the competence area of the state security courts for 48 hours "lessons". However, the prisoners who had been transferred, actually, in the prison "jail" were brought during the state of emergency over and over again back in police or gendarmerie like. 11 these possibilities escaped "was cancelled" with the abolition "raising" of the state of emergency in November, 2002. With the new criminal trial order which came into force on the 1st June, 2005 the Höchstdauer was shortened further on one to three Meeting. In July, 2003 the right "law" on immediate lawyer's access was introduced "imported", in the end, also for the arrested in the competence area of the state security courts, thus for certain political prisoners. Finally, thus demanded abolition of the Incommunicadohaft had been anchored by organizations of human rights since decades legally "by law". This is an important step which must be ordered, nevertheless, still fast in the practise. Since the right "law" on immediate lawyer's assistance is not moved furthermore often what is also put away "also admitted" in the EU-progress report in 2004. 12
Does the " zero tolerance reach against torture "?
In the course of the policy "politics" declared by the government of the " zero tolerance against torture " the numerous farther "further" measures which also corresponded "fulfilled" to the long-standing recommendations "references" of organizations of human rights for example circular in view of the medical investigation by arrested or relating to of widespread maltreatment methods like sleeping denial and food denial were seized in 2004. Whether the moved measures have led now to a decline of the cases of torture and maltreatment, is controversial. The progress report in 2004 quotes 692 of the Turkish organization of human rights IHD (I nsan Haklari Derneg? i) registered "recorded" torture reproaches in the first half-year "semester" in 2004 as a " decline about 29 percent " and also this number is very high. Nevertheless, with figures comparisons is to be thought that it itself always only around the number of the torture reproaches registered "recorded" by a certain organization acts can which reproduces only one small "little" fraction of the reality because many torture cases because of fear, unawareness or a huge number of other reasons "grounds" are not announced, in particular when the victims are children or criminals. In this connection is especially doubtful that a commission of the lawyer's chamber was closed down "concluded" in Izmir which had documented urgent torture in criminals and also children otherwise barely in the light of the general public "the publicity" in December, 2004. An example of it, as the documentation is complicated by torture.
Organizations of human rights state that certain torture methods have gone back like hanging up on the poor people "the arms", the Bastonade or giving of electroshock therapies where torture can be rather documented, are still found "seem", however, in country and areas "fields" Kurdish above all. In addition "moreover", one reports furthermore that methods, the barely visible tracks leave, under it "among them" also different forms of sexual infringements, still widespread are carried out "applied".
A little helpfully for the improvement of the human rights was the argumentation of the EU commission that torture is systematic in Turkey no more. Besides, the commission used a very much narrow concept of system (namely "since" as from the government arranged "ordered" or tolerated), while the UN mechanisms designate "mark" torture systematic when it is "pervasive technique of law enforcement agencies for the purpose of investigation, securing confessions and intimidation, regardless of approval or disapproval at the higher levels of the public service or by the Government's political leadership" 13. It is irritating that in the opinion of the EU the still considerable magnitude "dimensions" is not in way in torture of the admission "intake" of negotiations of accession. At the same time it is stated in the progress report that it comes "gets" still very often to torture and maltreatment and farther "further" measure against it "however" must be seized.
An important measure against the torture would be the logical "consistent" criminal Belangung of the responsible for it "in return". Organizations of human rights point out for many years to the fact that impunity complicates the fight "battle" for serious injuries of human rights like torture, "Verschwindenlassen" and extra-legal executions against it "however" considerably. Some of the numerous recommendations "references" to the ending of this impunity were taken up in January, 2003 with a reform of the law of the criminal proceedings by employees "officials" and public office workers by which with torture reproaches no more permission of the supervisors must be caught up for the criminal proceedings any more (with "Verschwindenlassen" and extra-legal executions this remains necessary) and the before often carried out "applied" conversion of custody, however, in fines was excluded "expelled". With the new penal law torture was defined more clearly, and the punishments "penalties" planned for it "in return" were raised "increased". It is problematic that also the new penal law intends one more period of limitation with torture procedure. Indeed, it "she" was raised "increased" from 7,5 to ten years. Because, however, such torture procedure are often delaid and were stopped already some important procedures on account of the period of limitation, 14 recommend to organizations of human rights to abolish "cancel" completely jährungsfrist with the criminal proceedings of serious injuries of human rights.
Reparation for injuries of human rights
The EU had asked Turkey to strengthen the possibilities of lawful reparation for injuries of human rights. The law from August, 2002 allowed the resumption of processes in the light of judgments of the European court of law of human rights, however, with restrictions. After a renewed change "amendment" by the 5th harmonization package the icon-laden procedure was again recorded in April, 2003 against four former Kurdish representatives of the DEP (Demokrasi Partisi/democracy party) who were arrested since 1994. However, the court "dish" decided on the 21st April, 2004 once more the conviction "condemnation" of the politicians. However, this judgment was lifted "canceled" in July, 2004 by the Court of Appeal with the grounds "establishment" that the rules of a fair process have been injured "violated" again. After ten years of custody the politicians were dismissed from the custody, the process against them "her" is unrolled once more. It remains to wait "watch for" for how the new hearing will end. Furthermore those remain whose procedures were not closed "not rounded off" before the European of court of law of human rights on the 4th February, 2003 from the possibility of a resumption of her "their" procedure in Turkey impossible.
The most unequivocal success could be achieved "reached" up to now relating to of the capital punishment. However, it "she" had been executed since 1984 anyhow no more, however, had won in view of the death sentence for the PKK chairperson Abdullah Öcalan again in meaning. With the constitutional amendment in 2001 the capital punishment was abolished "canceled" for criminal criminal offenses. Organizations of human rights pointed out to the fact that with it "thus" only one fraction of the covered "imposed" judgments was converted. In August, 2002 Turkey created the capital punishment in peacetime from 15 and corresponded "fulfilled" therefore the protocol "minutes" 6 to the European convention of human rights which she "it" ratified in December, 2003. In January, 2004 protocol "minutes" No. 13 was also ratified for the entire abolition of the capital punishment of Turkey.
Power "Violence" against women "wives"
Positively are also the law reforms which should dam power "violence" against women "wives". Moreover Turkish women's organizations had run a given a concert lobby job and had presented an alternative design "draft" to the penal law. Also amnesty internationally supported "backed up" the concerns "requests" of the women "wives". 16 the campaign entailed that most demands were moved in the new penal law. Thus rape of international standard was defined rather accordingly. Sexual infringements stand no more in the category " offense against the morality ", but are caught as an " offense against individuals ". Now rape and other sexual infringements in the marriage are defined as a criminal offense. Besides, importantly is exposed, that punishments "penalties" reduce no more, or can be lifted "canceled" if the rapist marries the victim. Women "Wives" are recognized "seen" as an individual as injured persons and her "their" interests are subordinated no more by law of the so-called family honour. This is also strengthened by the fact that tradition looks now as a motive for murder penal-aggravating what should also count "apply" to so-called "Ehrmorde". Also in the Rechtssprechung there were since 2003 the first examples of appropriately hard punishments "penalties" in case of from "Ehrmorden", while early "prior" culprit had often got away with low "small" punishments "penalties".
Urgently urgently for the protection from women "wives" against power "violence" it are beside the pursuit of the culprits also the equipment of protection spaces like women's houses. Also in addition there was in July, 2004 a lawful regulation "control". Nevertheless, in the practise there are till this day "so far" barely women's houses in Turkey.
Women "Wives" in Turkey
from Heidi Wedel
Rights of minorities
Rights of minorities are an important criterion of four political Copenhagen criteria. Officially Turkey recognizes "accepts" only non-Muslim minorities, namely "since" Jews, Greeks and Armenians as minorities, not, nevertheless, the Alewiten which put "arrange" 20 to 25 percent of the population, or ethnic teams from which the Kurds with 15 to 25 millions biggest teams form "establish" which existence "life" was denied, however till the nineties. 17 backgrounds is the Turkish modernization ideology of the "Kemalismus", with after the First World War the construction "structure" of a new "national state" aims became and another disintegration of the state area should be prevented "hindered". Because the nationalism should replace Islam as an integrating ideology, the Turkish nation was defined as a totality of all citizens within whose different interests and identities were not recognized "accepted". Already the mention more differently of ethnic teams within the republic of Turkey was understood than menace of the unit by state area and state people and was traced. Thus this definition of nation led to a forcible "violent" policy "politics" of the assimilation, the denial of the existence "life" of the Kurdish people "nation", the justification of the restriction of political participation possibilities and the injury "violation" of human rights. Target of these restrictions were and are in particular the Kurds. Indeed, 18 the strengthening of the Kurdish movement in the nineties helped "assisted" to overcome the policy "politics" of the denial. But in the course of the armed conflict around the Kurd's question which cost the life about 30,000 people and came "got" only with the arrest of the PKK chairperson Öcalan in the beginning of 1999 at a temporary end the injuries of human rights also intensified.
Kurd's question was not picked out as a central theme explicitly
This background explains "declares", why Turkey with basic reforms of human rights, but in particular with the rights of minorities acts so heavily itself. The EU showed consideration for Turkish sensitivities in this respect when the Kurd's question is picked out as a central theme in the accession partnership not as those, but is treated implicitly under rights of minorities. Under the short-term priorities this is concretized above all as follows:
the abolition "raising" of all lawful bans of mother-linguistic radio transmissions and telecasts;
the improvement of the economic, social and cultural possibilities of all citizens and female citizens as well as the abolition "raising" of regional dissimilarities, above all, in the southeast;
and under the medium-term priorities as:
the abolition "raising" of the state of emergency;
the guarantee of cultural variety and the protection of the cultural rights "laws" of all citizens and female citizens independent of her "their" origin as well as the abolition "raising" of all lawful impediments of these rights "laws" including in the educational area;
the Anti-discrimination bid;
the ratification of two pacts of human rights.
State of emergency
The Kurdish provinces of Turkey had stood from 1978 to 1987 under law of war. This was converted successive and in 1987 also in the last provinces into a state of emergency which was extended over and over again, even if in less and less provinces. In the end, on the 31st July, 2002 the exception stand ran out in the provinces Tunceli and Hakkari and on the 30th November, 2002 also in the last two remaining provinces Diyarbakir and Sirnak. With the abolition of the state of emergency the numerous regulations "stipulations" which limited the human rights in the region, in addition escaped "were cancelled".
The right "law" on mother-linguistic publications
the " Abolition "Raising" of the ban of mother-linguistic consignments " 19 was the only short-term priority in the accession partnership for which there was not the promise of a concession in the " national program " yet. in the " National program " only the current practise was extrapolated: " The Turkish is the official "formal" language and the teaching language of the republic of Turkey. However, that does not prevent "hinder" that citizens and female citizens use different languages, dialects and dialects in the everyday life freely. This freedom "liberty" may not be used for separatistischen purposes "targets". " The Kurdish language was not mentioned and the use of the mother tongue was permitted itself at most for the everyday use what was theoretical as well as was not forbidden. With the constitutional reform from October, 2001 the formulation "wording" became in article 26 "the "freedom of speech" in sales 3 " with the expression of opinion no language may be used which is forbidden by law " and in article 28 "to the "freedom of the press" in sales 2 the formulation "wording" " publications may not follow into language which is forbidden by law " stroked "painted". However, sales 2 were complemented in article 26 by the restrictions of the freedom of speech " the protection of the national security, the public order and security, the basic principles of the republic and the indivisible unit by state area and state people ", thus the typical formulation "wording" which was used for the restriction of the rights "laws" by Kurds and Kurds and becomes. This reform was displayed "shown" as an " abolition "raising" of the ban of the Kurdish language ", although the language ban law remitted by the military in 1983 had been cancelled already in 1991 and had given it in this respect theoretically "in theory" since then in Turkey no more " language prohibited by law " any more. However, in the practise neither Kurdish consignments nor Kurdish lessons were possible.
The 3th harmonization package with the Ermöglichung of " Kurdish consignments should reply "respond" to the short-term accession priority " mother-linguistic consignments " on television ". With this reform package article 4 of law became a No. 3984 on the high broadcasting company and
Television council (Radyo ve Televizyon Üst Kurulu/RTÜK) as follows complements: " In addition "moreover", consignments can follow into different languages and dialects which are used by Turkish citizens in the everyday life traditionally. These consignments may not stand in the contradiction to the basic principles agreed in the constitution "state" and the indivisible unit of state area and state people. The principles and procedures for the production and control of these consignments are regulated in an order of the high council "councillor". " The suitable RTÜK order came into force in December, 2002 and contained numerous restrictions. According to the article 5 mother-linguistic consignments may be produced only by the state radio company and television company TRT (Türkiye Radyo Televizyon) and " be sent only in the areas of Messages, music and culture for adults and do not serve the purpose "target" of the Unterrichtens from other languages and dialects. The transmitting time may not cross on the radio 45 minutes per tag and in the week a total of 4 hours "lessons" and on television 30 minutes per tag and in the week a total of 2 hours "lessons". On television these consignments must in hundred percent correspondence in Turkish be subtitled; on the radio the translation must follow after the program in the Turkish. "
Nevertheless, another one and a half years should pass, until the state radio company and television company TRT produced the first consignment in Kurdish in June, 2004, because she "it" applied, instead, first of all "once" for the annulment of the order. 20 another orders allowed in January, 2004 that also private radioinstitutions and television companies send into Kurdish language. However, all the other restrictions remain exist "consist". The limited "restricted" transmitting time must divide "split" the Kurdish with other languages. At the same time the high broadcasting company council and television council (RTÜK) covers "imposes" furthermore numerous fines and close-down punishments on private radio stations and television broadcasting stations which had played Kurdish music.
Surely on education "formation" into Kurdish language
Under the medium-term priorities the accession partnership intends the abolition "raising" of all lawful impediments in connection with cultural rights "laws" including in the educational area. Nevertheless, mother-linguistic lessons at Turkish schools are excluded "expelled" furthermore according to the article 42 of the constitution "state". There one says: " except the Turkish no language may be taught in reformatories and teaching institutions to the Turkish citizens "nationals" as a mother tongue and be informed "taught". The foreign languages learned in the reformatories as well as the principles to which those schools are subjected which give education "bringing up" and lessons into foreign languages are regulated by law. The regulations "stipulations" of international contracts are left. " In article 2c of the law No. 2932 to education "bringing up" and lessons into foreign languages of 1983 it is regulated that " the council of ministers taking into account the opinion of the national security council fixes "determines" the foreign languages which are informed "taught" in Turkey. " Thereby it is unlikely in the practise that Kurdish is even informed "taught" as a foreign language.
Campaign for cultural rights "laws"
In November, 2001 began, nevertheless, thousands of pupils who understood the reform of article 26 and 28 of the constitution "state" relating to of the freedom of speech and freedom of the press as a positive character, a campaign with which they demanded Kurdish as an electoral professional at universities. Parents began to demand Kurdish mother-linguistic lessons. The authorities reacted with mass arrests in which it should have come "got" according to reports also to tortures and maltreatments. Against hunderte from pupils and parents who took part in this campaign determinations were recorded, and they were arrested under the reproach of the " support of an unlawful organization " (article 169 TStGB) and were put "arranged" in court. Numerous pupils became the punishment "penalty" exmatrikuliert. 21
As a result of the criticism "review" and as a response "reply" to the medium-term priority of the realization of cultural rights "laws" also in the educational area the law mentioned on top was renamed, in the end, in August, 2002 with article 11A of the " 3th harmonization package " (law No. 4771) as " law about foreign language lessons and foreign language education and learning from different languages and dialects of the Turkish citizens " and with article 11B of the package in article 2.1. (a) of the law the following supplement "complement" introduced "imported": " so that the Turkish citizens can learn the different languages and dialects which they use in the everyday life traditionally, private exchange rates "market prices" can be opened within the scope of the law No. 625 by the 6/8/1965 about private teaching institutions. These exchange rates "market prices" may not stand in the contradiction to the basic principles agreed in the constitution "state" of the republic and the indivisible unit of state area and state people. The principles and procedures while opening and control of these exchange rates "market prices" are regulated in an order of the national education ministry. "
The suitable order came into force on the 20th September, 2002. She "it" should allow private Kurdish exchange rates, nevertheless, the opening of Kurdish exchange rates made under avoidance of the word Kurdish by complicated regulations "stipulations" very difficult. Only after another order from December, 2003 the first Kurdish exchange rates were offered in April, 2004 in private institutes. Furthermore count "apply" numerous restrictions which lead, among the rest, to the fact that no children may be informed "taught" up to 15 years.
An expression "printout" for how sensitive "vulnerable" the subject Mother-linguistic lessons in Turkey remains, is that the holding on led in the right "law" on mother-linguistic lessons to the fact that the uppermost instance of the Court of Appeal ordered in May, 2005 that the teacher trade union Egitim sen is to be forbidden.
Political rights "laws"
In the Turkish judicial system there has been by the bans relating to of the right "law" of Kurds and Kurds to carry out her "their" political rights "laws" with her "their" own identity, no juridical or actual changes. Numerous and supported parties founded by Kurds were forbidden on account of her "their" posture and activities to the Kurd's question with reference to article 68 and 69 of the constitution "state". 22 the political activities of such parties are hindered constantly, her "their" members are arrested often and are arrested.
With the change of article 69/6 and 149 with the constitutional reform from October, 2001 should be complicated vorgeblich the close-down "closing" by parties. According to the new article 69/6 only such parties which are nachgewiesenermaßen a "center" of constitutional-hostile activities are closed down "concluded". 23 according to the article 149 the judicial "forensic" decision must be met for close-down "closing" a party now at least with three fifth majority. These reforms should counteract, above all, against the danger "threat" of the close-down "closing" of Islamic oriented parties by the constitutional court. For Kurdish oriented parties they brought no improvement because the decisions were met for close-down "closing" such parties anyhow mostly unanimously. In the end, a prokurdish party - the HADEP (Halkin Demokrasi Partisi/democracy party of the people "nation") - was also closed down "also concluded" after the reform.
The EU commission criticizes that the 10-percent hurdle makes it for minorities very heavy "difficult" in the Turkish electoral law to be represented "substituted" in the parliament, and that there are furthermore restrictions for the use of other languages than the Turkish. Thus, for example, organizations of human rights refer "link" to the fact that against politicians penal procedure were opened because they spoke in the local election fight in 2004 Kurdish. In the end, a change "an amendment" of the Turkish Criminal Code could have the disastrous consequences for those which are considered from now on of the injury "violation" in the party law and in the electoral law of anchored linguistic ban guilty. According to the article 15/1 of the present "previous" penal law the Höchststrafe amounted to to five years of custody for the offenses whose ceiling is not fixed "determined" in the law. Article 48 of the new penal law means against the fact that the maximum limit amounts to 20 years. Because in the party law for the use other than the Turkish language only the lower limit of six months of custody, but not the ceiling is fixed "determined", this signifies that can be covered "imposed" from now on for the use of the Kurdish, to Arabian, Lasischen or other languages for the electoral propaganda up to 20 years of prison "jail". 24
Rights of minorities in international agreements "deals"
Positively is to be noted that the Turkish parliament dismissed "saw off" the Anna hme of two UN-pacts of human rights in June, 2003, the international pact about middle-class "civil" and political rights "laws" and the international pact about economic, social and cultural rights "laws", and therefore one of the medium-term priorities moved. Turkey had signed these pacts, indeed, already in 2000, but had not ratified, above all, because of the intended in it and in Turkey to controversial rights "laws" on self-determination and mother tongue. Like with other international contracts the Turkish government with the pacts attached a clause with which she "it" reserves herself to move the pacts only within the scope of the constitutional articles 3 (integrity of the state, officialese, flag "banner", national anthem and capital), 14 (ban of the abuse of the fundamental rights and basic freedoms) and the already "quite" of mentioned article 42 (education "bringing up" and education) and to award minority state only to the non-Muslim people "nations" approved in the Lausanner agreement "deal". These reservation clauses prevent "hinder" that Kurds and Kurds can enjoy the political and cultural rights "laws" planned in both pacts.
The EU commission regrets the Turkish reservations against both pacts of human rights and that Turkey has not signed the border convention of the Council of Europe for the protection of national minorities and the European charter for regional and minority languages. She "it" holds the restrictions of the cultural rights "laws" of the Kurds for alarming and asks Turkey to create " the conditions "terms" on the fact that the Kurds can fully take up her "their" rights "laws" ". This does not concretize 25 you, however, further and neglects it to request Turkey directly "immediately" to the ratification.
Women "Wives" in Turkey
from Heidi Wedel
Since October, 2001 Turkey has numerous ones
Law reforms dismisses "sees off", with those
she "it" has approached to international standard of human rights. Indeed, in this respect the EU-accession process has not planned like "at short notice" has released (i.e. in one year), however, in the medium term a big "great" dynamism. As here was shown, however, the reform process was slow and the result "outcome" laborious Aushandlungen. Without steady "constant" lobby job of the organizations of human rights which pointed out to the Turkish government and to the EU over and over again to existing mismanagement and remaining reform demand it would probably have remained with inadequate reforms.
In the meantime, the laws "code" were aimed concerning the capital punishment and the torture to a great extent in international standards. However, in the practise torture remains still a radical problem of human rights in Turkey in spite of certain improvement. Also concerning power "violence" against women "wives" important law reforms were dismissed "seen off". Relating to of the freedom of speech, freedom of the press and union freedom the reforms also reach at the lawful level still too briefly. In total remains the impression that the reforms are carried, above all, by the wish for an EU accession and of less of a new consciousness of human rights. Since statements of various state sales representatives make clear over and over again that they mean "think" furthermore, restrictions of the human rights are necessary to the preservation of the state in his "its" existing structure.
This counts "applies" the more to the rights of minorities to which Turkey still closes mind to a great extent. The appropriate international rights of minorities agreements were not signed, with the pacts of human rights Turkey attached reservations to the articles which contain rights of minorities. Thus the reforms up to now relating to of the cultural rights "laws" of the big "great" team of the Kurds have had only very much limited "restricted" effects. With few reforms which there were with respect to that actual progress was complicated by complicated conditions "terms" and cross-references on different laws "code" and orders very much. Besides, a public recognition of the Kurd's question is refused and is avoided by complicated formulations "wordings" every direct "straight" relation "connection" to the Kurd's question.
The Kemalismus prevents "hinders" reforms
A basic problem of the political and juridical practise in Turkey is that the reforms can be dismissed "be seen off" only in the border and be moved which the military permits. This is justified often with the protection of the " basic principles of the republic " with which in particular the kemalistischen principles Laizismus and nationalism are meant "thought". The Kemalismus is ideologically as well as in view of the role "roll" diminished in the meantime of the military in the policy "politics" - if not the central - factor "administrator", the reforms comprehensive today prevents "hinders". As long as this kemalistische understanding the political system dominates, the law changes which show effect also in the practise are unlikely. Thus the Kurd's question is also removed "unloaded" today far from a solution what displays "shows" a basic obstacle for a comprehensive democratization of Turkey again "on the other hand". This problem affects not only on the domestic policy, but also on the foreign affairs "policy" of Turkey, namely not only on the relations with the geographic neighbors. In the end "finally", the EU accession of Turkey could fail from this reason "ground" also because of the shortage "defect" of readiness to carry out the necessary reforms.
Reforms must go
The fact that the EU transfers "takes" the accession process of Turkey in new phases, before Turkey has fully reached "arrived" the criteria, wakes the impression that the Festigung of the relations with Turkey was more important than the entire fulfilment of the criteria to the EU during the last years. A final rejection of a Turkish membership (which has become conceivable in view of the present political processes in the EU again) would be very harmful absolutely for the reform process in Turkey, could even bring to a standstill him. But also to quick concessions according to Turkey could throttle the pressure after reforms. The best results "outcomes" for the human rights and minority policy in Turkey are probably achieved "reached" if the achievements are recognized "accepted", but are also refered "linked" very critically and certainly to the remaining reform demand in law and practise and speeding up the reforms are called specifically.
Nevertheless, this is not recognizable with the rights of minorities yet. With respect to that it has avoided the EU up to now to concern the basic problems of Turkey openly. Even with the short-term and medium-term priorities the Kurd's question was not demanded - as opposed to Cyprus question - explicitly, but was subsumed under democratization, rights of minorities and cultural variety. The EU overlooks (or avoids at least suitable statements "predicates") that the undemocratic holding on in the Kemalismus and with it "thus" prevents "hinders" comprehensive democratization and realization of human rights and rights of minorities in a nationalism understanding which denies the existence "life" of the Kurds. Democratization and human rights are only possible in Turkey, even if with the Kurd's question a readiness exists to the radical change in thinking and the Kurds with her "their" rights "laws" are recognized "accepted" and are included in a Lösungsfindung actively. If Turkey is recorded in the EU because it has fulfilled apparently the criteria which was solved Kurd's question, however, not basically, then the Kurd's question becomes an EU internal problem. At the latest then the EU itself will have to develop solution attempts.
The Original Version you will find here
More Information on Turkey
Meet us at our Ecovillage Forum
there is a english (international) section.
Get our Newsletter or
Contact Anna or Anton
Information on Ecovillages
This page has been translated by software :-( Only the part VISION has been translated proper, yet. Take a look.
If you have spare time, you are welcome to correct it. Just copy the Text, make the correction and send it to Anna (Button above)
The Original Version of Hermes Project Open Souce Village and Community