Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2001 (Turkey)
Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
March 4, 2002

The report entitled "Country Reports on Human Rights Practices" is submitted to the Congress by the Department of State in compliance with sections 116(d) and 502(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA), as amended, and section 504 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. The law provides that the Secretary of State shall transmit to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, by February 25 "a full and complete report regarding the status of internationally recognized human rights, within the meaning of subsection (A) in countries that receive assistance under this part, and (B) in all other foreign countries which are members of the United Nations and which are not otherwise the subject of a human rights report under this Act." We have also included reports on several countries that do not fall into the categories established by these statutes and that thus are not covered by the congressional requirement.

Freedom of Religion

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respected this right in practice; however, it imposed some restrictions on religious minorities and on religious expression in government offices and state-run institutions, including universities. The Constitution establishes the country as a secular state.

The Government oversees Muslim religious facilities and education through its Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet). The Diyanet, which some groups claim reflects the beliefs of the Sunni Islamist mainstream to the exclusion of Alevi adherents, regulates the operation of the country's more than 70,000 mosques. Local and provincial imams, who are civil servants, are employed by the Diyanet. The Government states that the Diyanet treats equally all who request services.

A separate government agency, the Office of Foundations (Vakiflar Genel Mudurlugu), regulates some activities of religious minorities, including those established under the Lausanne Treaty in 1923 (Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, and Jewish), and their affiliated churches, monasteries, and religious schools. The Vakiflar, which dates back to the Ottoman Empire, must approve the operation of churches, monasteries, synagogues, schools, and charitable religious foundations, such as hospitals and orphanages. The Vakiflar oversees 160 minority religious foundations, including Greek Orthodox (approximately 70 sites); Armenian Orthodox (approximately 50); and Jewish (20); as well as Syrian Christian, Chaldonean, Bulgarian Orthodox, Georgian, and Maroni foundations.

The military and judiciary, with support from other members of the country's secular elite, continued to wage a private and public campaign against Islamic fundamentalism, which they view as a threat to the secular republic. The armed forces regularly dismiss individuals whose official files reflect participation in Islamist fundamentalist activities. Participation in certain mystical Sunni Islamic, quasi-religious, social orders (Tarikats) was banned in the 1920's but is largely tolerated. The NSC has called for stricter enforcement of the ban against Tarikats as part of its campaign against Islamic fundamentalism; however, prominent political and social leaders remain associated with Tarikats or other Islamic communities. The trial of Fetullah Gulen, the leader of a moderate Islamic religious community who was charged with plotting to overthrow the State by force, continued at year's end. Gulen, who lives abroad, was still being tried in absentia.

Alevis (an offshoot of Shi'a Islam) are a minority within the predominant Sunni Muslim faith. Many Alevis alleged discrimination in the State's failure to include any of their doctrines or beliefs in religious instruction classes. Alevis also charge that there is a Sunni bias in the Diyanet since the Directorate tends to view the Alevis as a cultural rather than a religious group and does not fund its activities. Some Sunni Islamic political activists charge that the secular State favors and is under the influence of the Alevis.

There is no law that explicitly prohibits proselytizing or religious conversions; however, religious groups that proselytize occasionally are subject to government restrictions or harassment. Many prosecutors regard proselytizing and religious activism on the part of evangelical Christians, and particularly Islamists, with suspicion, particularly when such activities are deemed to have political overtones. Police sometimes arrest proselytizers for disturbing the peace, "insulting Islam," conducting unauthorized educational courses, or distributing literature that has criminal or separatist elements; courts usually dismiss such charges. If the proselytizers are foreigners, they may be deported, but they usually are able to reenter the country.

In January two men were detained for alleged Baha'i proselytizing in Sivas and were released immediately pending an investigation that was ongoing at year's end. At year's end, two university professors at Sivas' Cumhuriyet University faced expulsion for allegedly ignoring official duties due to Baha'i related activities.

On December 6, the State Security Court acquitted Aydogan Fuat, a Sufi Muslim preacher and a foreigner, of the charge of inciting others to racial or religious enmity. In October police officers at the felony court trial hearing recanted sworn statements that they had made against Fuat, stating that they had been told what to say by another officer. Fuat still faces charges of engaging in illegal activities and dressing in violation of public order; his trial in the Izmir felony court is scheduled for March 2002. In August the trial in Ankara of a group of Islamist politicians and business figures of the "National View Organization" ended, when the court decided to apply the December 2000 Conditional Suspension of Sentences Law and dismissed the trial.

By law religious services may take place only in designated places of worship, although non-Muslim religious services often take place in nondesignated places of worship. However, police occasionally bar Christians from holding services in private apartments and from proselytizing by handing out literature. These activities also occasionally lead to police detention and trials. A Christian congregation in Gaziantep encountered difficulty in obtaining permission to hold services. One member of the group was briefly detained for allegedly bribing persons to convert to Christianity. Several Christians in Istanbul continued to stand trial on charges of opening a Christian training institute without legal permission and violating Law 2911, which "prohibits unauthorized meetings and demonstrations," for holding church and bible study meetings in an apartment. In January the trial began of Turkish Christian Kemal Timur who was charged with insulting Islam. Timur, who was arrested and detained for a day in May 2000, alleges that he was beaten on the soles of his feet while in detention. His trial continued at year's end. In August the Interior Ministry issued a circular warning governors of the laws restricting unauthorized religious gatherings, particularly by Protestant Christians.

The Government continued to enforce a more than 50-year-old ban on the wearing of religious head coverings at universities or by civil servants in public buildings, claiming that such coverings were inconsistent with the secular principles of the state and could constitute a form of pressure on other women. Dozens of women who wear head coverings, and both men and women who actively have shown support for those who defy the ban, have lost their jobs in the public sector as nurses and teachers; some others were not allowed to register, as university students. According to Mazlum-DER, during the year 44 teachers lost their jobs for wearing head coverings and there were small-scale protests against the headscarf ban. In March the Turkish Higher Education Council (YOK) ruled that Fatih University could not register new students for the upcoming academic year, and might be subject to further sanctions, because the university allegedly has close ties to Fetullah Gulen and had violated the dress code by allowing students to wear headscarves. However, a higher administrative court reversed the YOK decision in May. In October three lawyers and a student were detained while documenting the ban against headscarved students entering the Marmara University Theological Faculty.

In June the Constitutional Court ruled to close the Islamist Fazilet Party and expel two party members from Parliament. The Court found Fazilet guilty of being a center of activities "contrary to the principle of the secular Republic." The Court cited in part the "statements and actions" of Merve Kavakci and others who had advocated an end to the headscarf ban (see Section 3). Kavakci, who was elected to Parliament as a Fazilet Party Member of Parliament in April 1999, had unsuccessfully sought to take her Parliamentary oath while wearing a headscarf. In July the ECHR upheld the Government's 1998 closure of Fazilet's predecessor party, Refah, on the grounds that the closure did not violate the European Human Rights Convention.

In May an Islamic leader began serving a 2-year prison sentence for "inciting religious hatred." Mehmet Kutlular, leader of the Nur Cemaati religious community and owner of the newspaper, Yeni Asya, had published a statement in October 1999 that the earthquake (that killed over 17,000 persons) was "divine retribution" for laws banning headscarves in state buildings and universities (see Section 2.a.). In September a trial began against senior columnist for the Islamist newspaper Yeni Safak, Fehmi Koru, on charges of "inciting religious enmity" for a television broadcast in October 1999 upholding Kutlular's right to make such a claim.

In November an Istanbul NGO hosted an Iftaar dinner attended by the head of the Diyanet, the Armenian and Greek Orthodox Patriarchs, the Chief Rabbi, and the heads of the Syrian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Bulgarian, Anglican and other Protestant churches, with the theme of brotherhood and tolerance.

There are legal restrictions against insulting any religion recognized by the State, interfering with that religion's services, or debasing its property. Religious affiliation is listed on national identity cards. Some members of religious minorities claim that they have limited career prospects in government or military service as a result of their religious affiliation.

Minority foundations, including those of religions recognized under the Lausanne Treaty, may not acquire property for any purpose, although they can lose it. If a community does not use its property because of a decline in the size of its congregation over 10 years, the Vakiflar takes over direct administration and ownership; however, according to Vakiflar no properties were taken over by the Government during the year. If such minorities can demonstrate a renewed community need, they may apply legally to recover their properties. According to the Armenian community, the case of an Armenian church in Kirikhan which may be taken over by the Vakiflar remained pending at year's end. Bureaucratic procedures and considerations relating to historic preservation at times have impeded repairs to existing religious facilities. Restoration or construction may be carried out in buildings and monuments considered "ancient" only with authorization of the regional board on the protection of cultural and national wealth.

Syriac Christians have been allowed to renovate their historic buildings in Mardin, although their efforts remain closely monitored by the authorities. Syriac Christian churches in Nusabayin and Gercus were re-opened in the past 2 years. In November there were press reports that a Syriac Christian church in Harput, Elazig province, was reopened after 51 years; it is the second oldest church in the country.

In February the Baha'i community lost a legal appeal against government expropriation of a sacred site near Edirne and brought the case for a final appeal to the High Administrative Court. The Ministry of Culture had granted cultural heritage status to the site in 1993, but in January 2000, the Baha'i community was notified by the Ministry of Education that the property had been expropriated for future use by the adjacent primary school.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul consistently has expressed interest in reopening its seminary on the island of Halki in the Sea of Marmara. The seminary has been closed since 1971 when the State nationalized most private institutions of higher learning. Under existing restrictions, including a citizenship requirement, religious communities remain unable to train new clergy. Coreligionists from outside the country have been permitted to assume leadership positions.

State-sponsored Islamic religious and moral instruction in all public primary and secondary schools is compulsory. Upon written verification of their non-Muslim background, minorities recognized by the Government under the 1923 Lausanne Treaty (Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, and Jewish) are exempted by law from Muslim religious instruction. Other minorities, such as Catholics, Protestants, and Syriac Christians, are not exempted. Students who complete the 8-year primary school may study the Koran in government-sponsored schools. The Government does not permit private Koran courses.

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 9.10.2002 SEC(2002) 1412

2002 REGULAR REPORT ON TURKEY’S: PROGRESS TOWARDS ACCESSION

" In February the Cultural Association of the Union of Alevi and Bektaşi Formations was dissolved on the grounds that, according to Articles 14 and 24 of the Constitution, and Article 5 of the Law on Associations, it was not possible to found an association by the name of Alevi or Bektaşi, which refer to Moslem religious communities. Following an appeal by the association, the case is pending before the Supreme Court."

Civil and political rights

Following the August 2002 reforms, capital punishment in peacetime has been abolished. The abolition of capital punishment had been widely debated in the coalition Government, and central to this debate was Öcalan.s case, which is pending before the ECtHR. The death penalty in time of peace has been converted into life imprisonment. Prisoners convicted of terrorist crimes must serve their full sentence.

The process of converting existing death sentences into life imprisonment began in September 2002. The moratorium on executions, in force since 1984, has been maintained although death sentences continued to be imposed by Courts until August 2002, on the basis of the Anti-Terror Law.

With regard to the prevention of torture and mistreatment, pre-trial detention periods in police custody have been reduced to a maximum of four days, with a possible extension of three days in the provinces still under emergency rule. In these provinces Decree 430, which allows detainees to be returned to custody for periods of up to ten days, continues to apply. In such cases, the detainee is deprived of access to a lawyer and of contacts with relatives. In September the Minister of Justice issued a circular urging the judicial authorities to avoid any misuse of the provisions of Decree 430.

The amendments to Articles 107 and 128 of the Code of Penal Procedure, introduced in February 2002, require that relatives of the detainee be informed of the arrest or custody extension .without delay. and .by decision of the prosecutor..

Following the amendments to Article 16 of the Law on the Establishment and Prosecution Methods of the State Security Courts, detainees who fall under the scope of these Courts have the right of access to a lawyer after 48 hours in detention. Meanwhile the detainees remain .incommunicado. and this is when, reportedly, torture is most likely to occur. Detainees can waive the right to a lawyer, which leaves the possibility for detainees to be subject to pressure to do so.

According to the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT).s recommendations, legal counsel should be provided to all detainees as from the outset of deprivation of liberty. During a recent mission to Turkey, the CPT found that the practice of delaying access to a lawyer until a formal statement has been taken persists in many police stations. The majority of investigations by police and prosecutors are still geared towards obtaining a confession from the suspect, often without the presence of a lawyer, and confessions are still accepted in courts without further supporting evidence.

The Turkish authorities continued to agree to the publication of the reports of the CPT.s visits to Turkey. In response to some of the criticisms made in the April 2002 CPT report, the Director General for Security issued a circular on 28 June 2002, in which he called for all officials to be vigilant against mistreatment. The circular states that interrogation rooms may no longer be painted black, and forbids the projection of light onto the face of the accused during the interrogation. Although the CPT reported a gradual improvement in detention conditions in the Istanbul area, it also confirmed that allegations of torture and ill treatment in police custody are still frequent. Allegations of torture and of extra-judicial killings are especially prevalent in the South-East. No disappearances have been reported in 2002, but the HADEP officials Mr Serdar Tanis and Mr Ebubekir Deniz, who disappeared in January 2001, are still missing.

Sentences passed on those found guilty of torture or ill-treatment are often light, and frequently converted into fines or suspended. Administrative authorisation is required to prosecute public officials. For example, it has been widely reported that police officers in Diyarbakir were not prosecuted for having allegedly tortured Mr Hasan Irmak, despite forensic reports showing evidence of torture.

Court cases are often prolonged, with many ending unresolved as they exceed the statute of limitations. This can also result from a failure to carry out sentences within a certain period of time, or excessively lengthy court cases. An example can be seen in the case against ten police officers accused of torturing 16 young people in Manisa (Western Anatolia). The case has been open since 1996, but due to the non-appearance of defendants at the trials, and because the lawyers of some of the defendants withdrew from the trial, no progress has been made to date. The statute of limitations will apply to this case in June 2003.

A case concerning the alleged torture of Ms Gülderen Baran, which had started in 1996 against five police officers accused of torture, ended without a judgement. As referred to above, in July the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted an Interim Resolution regarding Turkey.s compliance with some 40 judgements of the ECtHR delivered between 1996 and 2002. These judgements relate to violations of the ECHR committed by the Turkish security forces. The Committee recalled that the fight against terrorism should be conducted in full respect of human rights. Whilst welcoming Turkey.s recent efforts in adopting reforms, it expressed concern at the continued allegations of torture and ill-treatment and stressed the need for further measures to be taken to prevent abuses. The Committee called on Turkey to further improve police and gendarmerie education and training, and to establish effective deterrent sanctions against abuses.

An amendment brought by the second .reform package. to Article 13 of the Civil Servants Law makes civil servants, found guilty of torture or ill-treatment, liable to pay the compensation stipulated by the ECtHR themselves. The deterrent effect of this measure remains to be confirmed.

As part of the campaign to increase awareness of human rights issues amongst the security forces, the rulings of the ECtHR are translated and published in the Police Academy magazine. Training at the Police Higher Vocational Education Schools has been extended from nine months to two years, and courses on human rights have been included in the curriculum.

The third .reform package. of August 2002 amended the Law on the Duties and Competencies of the Police. It provided for some safeguards against possible abuses by the police by limiting their discretionary authority. This was confirmed in September through an amendment to the 1998 Regulation on Apprehension, Police Custody and Interrogation. However, a decision of the Public Prosecutor is still required before relatives of an apprehended person can be informed of an apprehension. Detainees falling under the scope of the State Security Courts are still denied the right to benefit from free legal assistance and to have a lawyer present during statement taking procedures. The possibility remains for performing medical examinations to detainees in the presence of the police.

The amendment to the Law on the Duties and Competencies of the Police also permitted the police to close down public Internet cafés and other places where Internet can be accessed.

The reform of the prison system has continued and the government started to implement the changes introduced last year. The Law on the Establishment of Prison Staff Training Centres was adopted in July 2002, thus providing a legal basis for the Prison Staff Training School in Ankara. The law lays down the principles and procedures regulating Prison Staff Training Centres and foresees the establishment of four additional centres with a staff of 61 people. Since July 2001, 1123 prison personnel have been recruited.

The CPT and civil society representatives continued to voice concerns regarding conditions of isolation in F-type prisons. In January the Minister of Justice rejected the compromise formula of .Three Doors, Three Locks. on the grounds that it contravened Article 16 of the Anti-Terror Law. The proposal, put forward by four Turkish bar associations, was intended to alleviate isolation conditions in the new F-type high security prisons by allowing for the locks to three cells to be opened, so that groups of nine inmates (three from each cell) could meet in the corridors.

A circular issued by the Ministry of Justice on 10 January indicated that prisons could allow groups of up to ten prisoners to meet for five hours each week. Certain conditions were attached, namely, participation in communal activities such as education, sport or other socio-cultural activities. The CPT recommended that the conditions concerning the communal activities should be dropped. The Minister of Justice has announced his intention to hold a symposium on such matters once the hunger strike protesting against the F-type prisons has ended.

According to the Ministry of Justice, by May 2002, 232 of the 1233 inmates in F-type prisons were participating in the rehabilitation programmes and social activities on offer. However, there is self-imposed isolation amongst prisoners convicted of terrorism.

In a circular of August 2002, the Minister of Justice urged prosecutors to ensure proper treatment and security of prisoners and to provide for sanctions for prison staff contravening these instructions.

Access to telephones (ten-minute phone calls every week) and the right to open visits are gradually improving, but lawyers still experience difficulty in visiting their clients in prison. The registration of prisoners is, however, well implemented. The hunger strikes protesting against the F-type prisons continued, and in the reporting period more than ten prisoners died, raising total deaths to 57. In the meantime, many prisoners were conditionally released on health grounds by the courts. The .solidarity. strike was called off in May, and the relatives of the prisoners on strike said they would continue their protest by political means. . Official sources stated that there were 20 prisoners on death fast and 13 under medical treatment, although unofficial sources

suggest higher figures.

In November 2001 police raided flats housing .solidarity. hunger strikers in the Küçükarmutlu district of Istanbul. Police used teargas, four people died and 20 people were arrested in the operation. The authorities claimed the deaths were due to self-immolation, and forensic reports showed that the victims had no bullet wounds. Whenquestioned, the Turkish authorities said that an investigation had been conducted, that an information note on the .security operation. was available, and that no further

investigation was necessary.

One thousand six hundred gendarmerie officers, who were involved in the intervention against the hunger strikers in the Bayrampaºa prison on 19 December 2000 are currently under investigation for .ill-treatment. and .miscarriage of justice..

In December 2001, nine members of the Turkish Medical Doctors Union, who had been on trial on charges of encouraging hunger strikers to commit suicide, were acquitted. Also in December 2001, the Ankara State Security Court acquitted 29 defendants on charges of .supporting an armed gang. brought in relation to statements on F-type prisons. The trial of 161 security personnel for the killings of 10 inmates at Ulucanlar Closed Prison in September 1999 continues.

With regard to the external supervision of prisons, the number of Monitoring Boards established reached the target of 129. Their task is, inter alia, to carry out inspections and produce quarterly reports for the Ministry of Justice and other relevant bodies on living and health conditions, transfers and disciplinary measures in penal institutions. The Boards include lawyers, doctors, pharmacists, psychologists, and members of other professions. The Monitoring Boards submitted 3963 suggestions for improvements in 460 reports to the Ministry of Justice in the period January-July 2002. The suggestions related mainly to tasks of the Chief Public Prosecutor.s office, physical infrastructure and construction, budget and payments, education and rehabilitation, and personnel shortages.

Furthermore, Monitoring Boards made a number of formal applications to the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor for improvements in the prison system. These relate to living conditions in prisons and the treatment of visitors. According to official reports, the Boards did not come across any allegations of torture during their visits. All 527 prisons were visited and the total number of visits was of 998.

In total, 140 enforcement judges were appointed: by July 2002 they had received 4527 applications regarding various issues, mainly concerned with enforcement of sentences, disciplinary punishments and conditions in prisons. Of the applications, 1308 were admitted, 140 partially admitted and 3079 rejected by the enforcement judges.

Civil society representatives have reservations regarding the composition of the Monitoring Boards, and are thus reluctant to become involved in their work. The actual impact of the Monitoring Boards and of the institution of enforcement judges on detention conditions in prisons needs monitoring.

Concerning the rehabilitation of inmates, IªKUR (the Turkish Labour Institute), part of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, launched a scheme to facilitate the integration of former inmates into the employment market. The scheme, carried out in co-operation with the Ministry of Justice and NGOs, is designed to train inmates and guarantees employment after release from prison.

In connection with reducing overcrowding in prisons, reference should be made to Law No 4758 on Conditional Release and Postponement of Punishments (the so-called .Amnesty Law.). As reported in last year's Regular Report, the previous .Amnesty Law. adopted in December 2000 was vetoed by the President and annulled by the Constitutional Court in July 2001. It was resubmitted, unchanged, to Parliament, and entered into force in May 2002. By September 2002, 43576 prisoners had benefited from this law. . Intellectuals and journalists in prison for .crimes. relating to freedom of expression and .social conscience. did not, however, benefit from the Amnesty Law. In August 2002, President Sezer granted amnesty to two prisoners on hunger strike on the grounds of their deteriorating health condition.

President Sezer again referred the Amnesty Law to the Constitutional Court, applying for its annulment on the grounds that it was discriminatory. The Constitutional Court decided to revoke Article 1 of the Law, which shortens jail terms for a number of crimes by ten years. It is, however, unclear how the annulment of Article 1 will affect the current enforcement of the law, and the Court rejected the President.s request to suspend the law entirely.

According to official sources, in May 2002 there were 60327 persons in prison: 29514 convicted prisoners and 30813detainees. The issue of persons in prison for expressing non-violent opinions has not been addressed.

With regard to legislative changes pertaining to freedom of expression, the first .reform package., adopted in February 2002, brought amendments to Articles 159 and 312 of the Turkish Penal Code, as well as to Articles 7 and 8 of the Anti-Terror Law. The third .reform package. of August 2002 introduced an additional amendment to Article 159 of the Penal Code.

The first amendment to Article 159 (.insult to the State and to State institutions and threats to the indivisible unity of the Turkish Republic.) reduced prison sentences (the maximum penalty was reduced from six to three years imprisonment, for example), and abolished the fines imposed for criticising Turkish laws. However, the actual definition of the offence remained the same. In the second amendment to Article 159, of August 2002, the scope of the provision was amended in the following way: expressions of criticism of the institutions are no longer subject to penalties unless they are intended to "insult" or "deride" those institutions. The notion of .intention. is open to interpretation and only practice will allow the assessment of the full impact of this amendment.

The description of the offence under Article 312 (.incitement to hatred on the basis of differences of social class, race, religion, sect or region.) was amended. The notion of incitement . .in a way that may be dangerous for public order. was added as an element of the offence. According to the authorities, this amendment narrows the scope of Article 312. An additional paragraph in the amended Article introduced a new type of criminal offence, namely insulting .part of the people degradingly and in a way that hurts human dignity., which is punishable by six months to two years imprisonment.

Changes to Articles 7 and 8 of the Anti-Terror Law introduced the notion of .propaganda in connection with the (terrorist) organisation in a way that encourages the use of terrorist methods.. Sentences for such offences were increased. Prison sentences for other offences were maintained or reduced, and the bans on television and radio broadcasting were shortened, but fines were increased, and the notion of .visual. propaganda was introduced. Thus, the overall impact of changes to these articles remains to be seen.

Since the entry into force of the first legislative amendments in February, several cases have been brought on the basis of the revised legislation. Case law shows that there has been little consistency in the implementation of the legislative changes. A number of cases have resulted in acquittal, while other, similar cases have resulted in heavy sentences. This has detrimental effect on legal certainty (see also above - the judicial system).

While there appear to be fewer cases brought under Articles 159 and 312, there is a shift towards bringing cases on other grounds. Article 169 of the Turkish Penal Code (.support for illegal organisations.), for example, has been widely used in recent months for cases regarding freedom of expression. According to the judicial authorities the

amendments to the Penal Code have led to the overruling by the Supreme Court of 50 judgements made under Article 159 and 24 judgements under Article 312. However, court cases relating to freedom of expression are still being brought against journalists, writers and publishers and some sources indicate that there are currently some 100 pending cases.

A report published by the Association of Turkish Editors on 25 May indicates that 40 books by 39 writers were banned or subject to investigation between January and May 2002 alone. In reply to a parliamentary question the Ministry of the Interior announced that in 2001 the number of books and periodicals confiscated was 1309.

In March, the National Film Censors banned the film .Big Man, Small Love., following complaints by police officers, who were offended by the depiction of police brutality. The interpretation of legislation is crucial to ensuring actual freedom of expression. There are as yet no signs that the interpretation of the law by judges consistently takes into account the rights of the defendant under the ECHR.

As regards freedom of the press, the first .reform package. amended Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law. Fines for publishers found guilty of offences of "terrorist propaganda" were increased from a minimum TL 100 million to a minimum TL three billion. The second .reform package., which contained modifications to the Press Law, did little to ease restrictions on the freedom of the press. It introduced the possibility to confiscate the printing equipment of publications found to be acting against the basic principles of the "integrity of the nation, republican order, or the country.s national security". The maximum suspension for a publishing company found guilty of such offences has been shortened, as has the maximum length of imprisonment for those who continue to publish suspended periodicals.

The third .reform package. further modified the Press Law by replacing prison sentences for crimes related to the press with heavy fines. The high level of the newly introduced fines (which range from TL one billion to a TL 100 billion) prompted President Sezer to ask the Constitutional Court, on 14 August 2002, to abrogate these amendments. The amount of the fines was described as disproportionate and in contradiction with the constitutional principles of freedom of the press and dissemination of thought.

The grounds for imposing penalties were not modified and the Press Law continues to maintain restrictions on the freedom of the press. Members of the press corps are subject to pressure and censorship, and many face prosecutions. Journalists have been prosecuted on the grounds of Articles 7 and 8 of the Anti-Terror Law as well as Articles 159 and 169 of the Turkish Penal Code.

In provinces under the state of emergency the authorities made use of the right to forbid distribution and printing of newspapers and other publications. The independence of the press is weakened by the absence of an organised press union. In July 2002 the ban introduced in December 2000 on broadcast and media publications concerning the F-type prisons and the hunger strikes was lifted.

In the field of broadcasting, the first .reform package. brought changes to Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law. The maximum closure period for radio or TV channels for propaganda against the unity of the State was reduced from fifteen to seven days.

In the third .reform package., the High Audio-Visual Board (RTÜK) Law was amended to allow for .broadcasts in the different languages and dialects used traditionally by Turkish citizens in their daily lives.. . Its implementation is subject to the adoption of a regulation by RTÜK.s Supreme Board by November 2002. The amendment confirms, however, restrictions to broadcasts which .contradict the fundamental principles of the Turkish Republic and the indivisible integrity of the State..

The scope for bans on broadcasts was narrowed with the deletion of references to broadcasts promoting .pessimism. and .desperation., which had been introduced in May 2002.

Re-transmission of foreign broadcasting became legal. The implementation of this provision is, however, subject to the adoption of a regulation no later than by August 2003. In practice, as from May 2002 the ban on the re-broadcasting of the BBC World Service and Deutsche Welle programmes, imposed in August 2001, had been lifted. These amendments follow the adoption of the RTÜK Law in May 2002 when Parliament re-adopted unchanged the RTÜK Law.. This law imposed tighter restrictions on freedom of expression. It prohibited broadcasts which .violate the existence and independence of the Turkish Republic, the territorial and national integrity of the State, the reforms and principles of Atatürk., or .instigate the community to violence, terror, or ethnic discrimination. and introduced very high penalties.

The RTÜK Law also introduced strict censorship of Internet content, as web pages have to be submitted to the authorities for approval before being published. The RTÜK Law penalises private radio and television stations for the use of "offensive language, libel, obscenity, incitement to separatism, or for the broadcasting of programmes in Kurdish". In March 2002, RTÜK imposed a record number of bans on radio and television stations, and on 17 April 2002 CNN-Türk was closed down for a day. In February, Mr Nevzat Bingöl, owner of the local TV station "Gün TV" in Diyarbakir, was indicted for having broadcast a Kurdish song, and charged under Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law (.disseminating separatist propaganda.). On 12 February, without waiting for the outcome of the trial, RTÜK imposed a yearlong broadcasting ban on the TV station. The ban was lifted in March 2002, and the final court decision is pending.

Following a request by President Sezer for the law to be annulled, the Constitutional Court issued in June 2002 a suspension order on two Articles. These relate to the composition of the RTÜK Board and the ownership of shares. However, the main provisions of the law remain in force pending further deliberations by the Constitutional Court.

With regard to freedom of association and peaceful assembly, following the amendment of Article 33 of the Constitution in October 2001 (which modified the general rules and restrictions on the right to form an association), the second .reform package. introduced changes to the Law on the Establishment of Associations. Articles 7, 11 and 12, which regulate relations with international organisations, were removed from the amended Law thus lifting restrictions on contacts with foreign counterparts. The amended law elaborated on the freedom to establish associations and to join associations.

The grounds for banning an association were restricted, and the previous justification of there being a .probability. of it committing a crime was removed. All references to .languages banned by the law. were deleted. The minimum age for an organiser of an association or gathering was lowered from 21 to 18 years.

While Articles 7, 11 and 12 of the Law on Associations were removed from the amended law, restrictions of similar nature had been introduced into the Civil Code of January 2002, thus maintaining the possibility for the authorities of exerting control over relations with international organisations.

The exercise of freedom of association is still subject to restrictions. Under the amended law, associations formed by university students may deal with educational matters only. Those sentenced under Article 312 of the Penal Code are barred from founding an association for five years (this prohibition was permanent in the previous legislation). Under the new legislation, the restrictions imposed in Article 5 of the Law on Associations (.it is forbidden to found an association for the purpose of engaging in any activity on the grounds of or in the name of any region, race, social class, religion or sect.) remain in place. Furthermore, associations cannot use languages other than Turkish in their official contacts, and the minimum number of federations required to create a confederation was increased from three to five, thus making it more difficult to form a confederation.

The third .reform package. further revised the Law on Associations. A number of restrictions on the scope of associations' activities have been removed. These relate mainly to limitations imposed on civil servants on their right to establish associations and to the ban on associations. activities for civil defence purposes.

The amendment to the Law on Associations further provided for the establishment of a new body in charge of associations within the Ministry of the Interior, as opposed to the current Directorate General for Security. The changes also introduced new control procedures on the associations. activities and accounts, which are to be regulated by the Ministries of the Interior and of Finance no later than by August 2003. Significant discretionary powers for inspecting and auditing the facilities, books, accounts and transactions of the associations continue to be given to the authorities.

The general restrictive character of the Law on Associations has been maintained, including a cumbersome prior authorisation system. Activities of foreign associations in general are limited to a restricted number of areas and safeguards against breaches of the right to privacy in relation to documents held by associations are not provided for. The various legal grounds for banning associations, namely in connection with the wording of their names and the definition of their objectives, have remained unchanged.

Amnesty International was given permission to open a branch in Turkey in March. Civil society organisations became more active during the reporting period. The Izmir Bar Association, for example, took an important initiative with regard to the fight against torture, and four bar associations joined forces to propose the .Three Doors, Three Locks. compromise, as a solution to the deadlock on F-type prisons. Furthermore, the Turkish Businessmen.s and Industrialists. Association (TÜSIAD) published several papers on political reforms in Turkey, and in June, the Civil Society Platform, which is made up of 175 civil society organisations, issued a notice urging politicians to commit themselves and .take brave steps. on the way to EU membership.

NGOs, however, encounter difficulties in establishing dialogue with the authorities and seek to participate more actively in the reform process. At the initiative of the Council of Europe.s Commissioner for Human Rights Mr Gil-Robles, a seminar on civil society was held in Ankara in May, attended by representatives from NGOs and from the Turkish authorities. Those present concluded that there should be closer co-operation between civil society and the authorities, and that NGOs should be involved in the drafting of a new law on associations.

The pressure on NGOs in relation to their support for F-type prison protests subsided and several court cases against NGOs, journalists and doctors ended in acquittal. In March the case against the Human Rights Foundation (HRF), which faced charges of opening a rehabilitation centre for victims of torture in Diyarbakir without authorisation from the Ministry of Health, ended in acquittal. However, there is still a court case against the HRF on the grounds of possession of illegal publications. The activities of some human rights organisations continue to be restricted. A case has been brought against the Ankara branch of the Human Rights Association (HRA), under Article 169 of the Turkish Penal Code for supporting the protest against F-type prisons.

Several civil society organisations, which focus on human rights questions, are subject to close monitoring and some face prosecutions, confiscation of equipment, and censorship of their press releases and communiqués.

The Mesopotamia Culture Centre, the HRA Bingöl branch, and HRA headquarters have been subject to investigations. The Chairperson of Diyarbakõr HRA branch, as well as the HRA branches in Ýstanbul, Ýzmir and Elazig face investigations and prosecutions on numerous charges.

The pressure on NGOs was extended to German foundations, following the publication of a book that alleged that German foundations had supported protests against gold mining in Bergama. The Konrad Adenauer, Friedrich Ebert, Heinrich Böll, and Friedrich Naumann Foundations, and the Orient Institute are under investigation by the State Security Court Prosecutor for allegations of "involvement in activities against the national unity and secular structure of the country."

In February the Cultural Association of the Union of Alevi and Bektaºi Formations was dissolved on the grounds that, according to Articles 14 and 24 of the Constitution, and Article 5 of the Law on Associations, it was not possible to found an association by the name of Alevi or Bektaºi, which refer to Moslem religious communities. Following an appeal by the association, the case is pending before the Supreme Court. The second .reform package. introduced amendments to the Law on Public Meetings and Demonstration Marches, notably deleting Article 21, thereby extending to public organisations the right to hold meetings and demonstrations. The third .reform package. introduced further changes. The procedures regulating active participation by foreigners in gatherings were somewhat eased, as the requirement for .authorisation. has been replaced by an advance 48 hours .notification.. Similarly, the general notification period for meetings to be held has been reduced to 48 hours, as from 72 hours.

However, the law retains its restrictive character including the requirement of the signing of the .notification. by every member of the organising committee, accompanied by the .identities, occupations, permanent address and, where applicable, workplaces of the members and chairperson of the organising committee.. The committee also has to comprise a minimum of seven members.

Despite the changes, the authorities still have considerable discretionary powers in authorising meetings and demonstrations. In practice significant obstacles to the holding of marches and demonstrations remain.

Restrictions on the showing of films, the holding of concerts and the staging of theatre plays in public places were eased in August 2002. The requirement for prior authorisation for performances was replaced with a notification obligation, 48 hours in advance.

However, performances can be subject to sanctions if they are considered to be against the indivisible integrity of the State. As for foundations, the third .reform package. provided for the possibility of establishing international co-operation both for Turkish foundations and for foundations established abroad. This co-operation is, however, subject to a number of conditions such as being considered .useful., being authorised by the Council of Ministers and, in the case of foreign foundations, being reciprocal.

With regard to the law on political parties, Article 101 of the Political Parties Law was amended, with the second .reform package., in line with the amendment made to Article 68 of the Constitution. Under the new law, the Constitutional Court may decide to deprive a political party of financial assistance, rather than dissolving it. While leaving the grounds for sanctioning political parties unchanged, it makes it more difficult to close down a political party.

In the case of Sadak and others v. Turkey,9 in which the applicants complained that, with the dissolution of their party (DEP), they had been deprived of their parliamentary mandates, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in June 2002 that there had been a violation of Article 3 of Protocol No 1 (.right to free elections.) of the ECHR.

Following the ECtHR judgement of 31 July 200110 that the closure of the Welfare Party (Refah Partisi) was not in violation of the ECHR, the Party requested that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR under Article 43 of the ECHR. The hearing took place on 19 June 2002, and judgement is pending.

A closure proceeding against the People.s Democracy Party (HADEP), initiated in 1999, is pending before the Constitutional Court. The Rights and Freedoms Party (HAK-PAR), which was founded in February 2002, is also facing a closure case on charges that its statute and programme contain elements contrary to the .indivisible unity of the State and the nation..

Freedom of religion is guaranteed but non-Moslem religious communities face legal obstacles. As indicated below, some of these obstacles have been addressed in the August 2002 .reform package..

Non-Moslem religious communities, whether recognised by the 1923 Lausanne Peace Treaty (Greeks, Armenians and Jews) or not have encountered problems with regard to their lack of legal personality and property rights, and a ban on the training of clergy in Turkey.

Cadastral registration of properties is in the name of individuals or foundations. In the case of non-Moslem religious communities, only properties declared under Law No 2762 of 1936 are legally recognised, and all properties not listed in 1936 have been taken over by the Turkish State or may be confiscated.. Armenian, Greek and Catholic properties have been confiscated, or are at risk. There have been two cases of confiscation of Armenian property in recent months. The Protestant community faces significant administrative problems regarding the rental of places of worship and the construction of new churches. However, the authorities have granted permission in July 2002 for the resumption of the construction of a new Protestant Church in Diyarbakir.

Restrictions on restoration of churches and school buildings have been eased. In an effort to remedy some problems related to property rights, the third .reform package. introduced an amendment to the Law on Foundations. .Community foundations. are allowed, as of August 2002, to acquire and dispose of property, .regardless of whether or not they have the statute of foundations.. Furthermore, these communities are entitled to register the property they actually use as long as they can prove ownership. The implementation of this amendment is subject to a number of conditions. Permission must be obtained from the Council of Ministers for the purpose of acquisition and disposal of new property but there is no appeal procedure foreseen. A deadline of six months has been fixed for filing applications to register property in use although it is not clear to which administrative bodies these applications should be addressed. The short time limit constitutes a hindrance in practice which could jeopardise the objective of the reform package in this area, since the six-month term started on 9 August 2002, and the applicable procedures remain to be specified. Although the scope of these new provisions is as yet unclear, it would appear that they apply only to non-Moslem foundations. This would exclude all religious communities that do not have the status of foundations, including the non-Turkish Catholic and Protestant communities.

The Law on Foundations continues to prohibit the renting or lending of property not covered by the August 2002 reform. The discretionary power of the Directorate General of Foundations over religious foundations, including the possibility of dismissing their trustees, remains unchanged. The recent amendment does not provide for the return of confiscated property.

The ban remains on the training of clergy for religious minorities. Non-Turkish clergy often have difficulties with visa and residence permits. The Armenian Patriarch asked that a special university department, specialising in the teaching of Christianity, be set up in Istanbul. The authorities agreed, but insisted that Moslems be in charge of the teaching. This was rejected by the Patriarch. The Greek Orthodox community has repeatedly requested the re-opening of the Halki seminary, which has been closed since 1971. The Protestant and Catholic communities consider that they would benefit from the freedom to train clergy in Turkey.

Religious communities may have their own schools, but the Deputy Head of such schools must be a (Moslem) representative of the Ministry of National Education, who has greater authority than the Head (of the religious community concerned). The Syriac community does not have its own schools and ,consequently, finds it difficult to teach ist liturgical language to its youth.

Compulsory religious courses cover descriptions of different religions, but are considered by many religious minorities to be subjective and inaccurate. In a recent initiative, the Ministry of National Education suggested that Christian communities could draft new entries for the textbooks. This initiative still needs to be followed up.

There are reports of harassment of clergy by the authorities. Charitable associations such as Caritas face problems because of the lack of legal status. Despite these difficulties, there are signs of increasing de facto recognition of non-Moslem communities. The Turkish State is becoming more involved in the inter-religious dialogue at international level, and is adopting a more inclusive approach in religious education. In October 2001 the Ministry of Interior invited the leaders of the different religious communities to voice their concerns and requests. As yet, however, there has been no adequate follow-up to this initiative: requests have either remained unanswered, or have been rejected. The Directorate for Religious Affairs (Diyanet) asked Jewish and Christian representatives to join in the common declaration on peace in the Middle East at the beginning of 2002.

There has been no improvement in the status of the Alevis.

The question of asylum seekers and trafficking in human beings is taken up in Chapter 24 – Co-operation in the field of justice and home affairs.

9 Case of Selim Sadak and others v. Turkey (Applications nos. 25144/94, 26149/95 to 26154/95, 27100/95 and 27101/95).

10 Case of Refah Partisi (the Welfare Party) and others v. Turkey (Applications nos. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98 and 41344/98).

(pp.28-39)