• LEYLA ZANA  RETRIAL VERDICT DUE 12 APRIL: OPEN LETTER DECLARES RETRIAL “PRETEXT".  The Turkish Court has postponed its verdict on the trial of Leyla Zana and three of her colleagues, Hatip Dicle, Orhan Dogan and Selim Sadak, originally sentenced to 15 years jail in 1994.  The new trial, called for by the European Human Rights Court that considered that the original trial had been “inequitable”, ended on 2 April after the 13th hearing before the Ankara State Security Court.

The Court heard the last pleas in the new trial of the former Members of Parliament, and the defence expects a confirmation of the sentences passed ten years earlier. The ex-M.P.s, who had been refused bail during the re-trial, again boycotted the hearing. Several observers, including representatives of the European Parliament, were present.

The defence lawyer, Yusuf Alatas, stated that he expected the Court to confirm the sentences originally passed on Mrs. Zana, Hatip Dicle, Orhan Dogan and Selim Sadak. “I think that the Court will confirm the 1994 sentences. We will appeal, if necessary going to the European Human Rights Court” he stated. “We cannot say that this trial has been decent and equitable” added the lawyer in his address to the Court. The three judges, in his view, had proved their bias by regularly favouring the prosecution and conducting the trial in the same manner as in 1994.  Mr. Alatas denounced, in particular, the difficulties encountered in getting witnesses for the defence heard, and the fact that no justification was given for its refusal to release the former M.P.s on bail.
The lawyers defending the former M.P.s of the Party for Democracy (DEP — banned in 1994) have repeatedly criticised the conduct of the retrial, considering that it was not equitable. “We really had hoped, at first, that the trial would be equitable. But by the eighth hearing, none of our expectations had been realised”. Mr. Alatas recently stated before the Foreign Affairs Commission of the European Parliament. “We are not at all optimistic. This is a purely formal trial — Turkey is just going through the motions of carrying out the decisions of the European Court for Human Rights” in the lawyers opinion.

The retrial is being closely watched abroad, in particular by the European Parliament, which has made it a touchstone of the determination to democratic reform of a Turkey that wishes to join the European Union. In an open letter to the 2003 Nobel Prizewinner, the Iranian Shirin Ebadi, and to Danielle Mitterrand, President of France-Libertés and of CILDEKT, Mrs. Zana has expressed profound pessimism regarding the outcome of the trial. “The original verdict may already have been confirmed by the time you receive this letter. We know this and are expecting such a result” stated Mrs. Zana in this letter from prison, dated 30 March. “On the pretext of a retrial, it is the original one that is being repeated” in the view of Mrs. Zana, for whom ”the government only wanted this trial as a smoke-screen to help its foreign policy”.

Questioned about the trial on the morning of 2 April, the Minister of Justice Cemil Cicek considered that the courts were independent and could not “judge in accordance with political expectations”.

The sentencing of the four ex-M.P.s in 1994 had been sharply condemned in Europe, and Leyla Zana, now 43, had become a cause célèbre, the European Parliament awarding her the Sakharov Human Rights Prize for “freedom of spirit” in 1995.  In 2001 the European Human rights Court had ruled that the first trial had taken place in an “inequitable” manner and had called upon Turkey for a retrial. The Strasbourg court had particularly criticised the fact that the accused had not been able to call all their defence witnesses and that the prosecution had been late in notifying them of additional charges. The Turkish Parliament, in the context of the measures aimed at favouring its application for membership of the European Union, had passed a law in 2002 allowing a retrial for those whose sentences had been found wanting by the European Human Rights Court. At the end of February 2003, the Sate Security Court had authorised the organisation of a retrial for the ex-M.P.s.
 

• MUNICIPAL  ELECTIONS:  SUCCESS OF RULING AK PARTY; PRO-KURDISH PARTY LOSES  GROUND.  The municipal elections organised in Turkey on 28 March have strengthened the political base of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), which should allow it to pursue its economic reforms and political changes needed to favour the country’s admission to the European Union. The party, created less than three years ago, had already won an overwhelming victory in the parliamentary general elections in 2002.

The still semi-official results give the AKP 42% of the votes. The People’s Republican Party (CHP) only won 18%.  The AKP, which claims to be a “Moslem-Democratic ” party won 58 of the 81 provinces involved, including the capital, Ankara, the country’s largest city, Istanbul. The AKP’s heartland lies in the provinces, where religious feelings are more deeply rooted but, in Ankara as in Istanbul, the party largely outdistanced its rivals. In Ankara it won more than half the votes cast, scoring 55%, and in Istanbul it won 45.28%.  “Turkey has once more voted for stability and development. Our party has broadened its base,” declared Mr. Erdogan to the Press, considering that this victory showed his government was “stable” and “powerful”. Nevertheless, he added, to reassure those who feared religious influence on government policies “this will not turn our heads (…).  Our prime objective is to serve our country”. The CHP won 8 provinces with 18% of the national vote, the Social-democratic People’s Party (SAP), a coalition of six parties including the pro-Kurdish DEHAP, with 5.07% of the national vote won 5 provinces. The neo-fascist National Action Party (MHP) won 4 provinces with 3% of the vote and former Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit’s “Denocratic Left” Party (DSP) won 3 provinces with 2% of the national votes (thus doubling its General Election score). Former Prime Minister Tansu Ciller’s True Path Party, with 10.2% and the Islamist former Prime Minister, Necmettin Erbakan’s Happiness Party with 3.9% each won a single province. The Happiness party even lost its former bastion, the province of Konya, to the AKP, which scored 63% there.

Sporadic violence marked the election in certain Kurdish districts and the NTV television chain reported that four men had been killed in distinct incidents of political rivalry. Over 100 people were injured in fights.

Moreover, nine journalists covering the repression of a demonstration to denounce electoral frauds were beaten by the police in Diyarbekir. Three of them had to be taken to hospital. Reporters sans Frontières protested at the violence perpetrated against the journalists, who were only doing their jobs. At around 11 p.m., after the closing of the polls, activists of the People’s Democratic Party (DEHAP) had assembled outside the Diyarbekir Court House, accusing the police off having faked the local results that had just taken place. In several districts SHP ballot papers had been found in the dustbins. The police began violently to disperse the crowd, then set upon the journalists who were covering the incident. Hakim Cetiner, cameraman for the national networks SKY Turk, Show TV and Saban TV, Saban Boz, a journalist with Show TV, and Besir Ariz, Faysal Karadeniz, Ahmet Bulut and Bayram Bulut, of the local daily Soz and the local Soz TV station, Mehmet Sirin Hatman, cameraman for the pro-Kurdish press agency Dicle Haber Ajansi (DIHA) and Bahire Karatas, reporter for DIHA as well as Firat Suzgun, of the local Gun TV were beaten with batons and chains. Mehmet Sirin Hatman, Saban Boz and Bahire Karatas had to be kept in hospital, Mehmet Sirin Hatman and Bayram Bulut suffering from broken arms. The police also damaged the journalists’ cameras and confiscated their films.

Suleyman Anik, a newly elected Kurdish mayor in Dargecit, was arrested on the evening of 30 March “after the discovery of documents of the former PKK (renamed Kongra-Gel) that showed links with the banned separatist organisation” according to the office of the Mardin province Governor. Mr. Anik, who had been Mayor of the town in the early 90s, had sought refuge in Sweden in 1992, when the authorities first accused him of links with the PKK.  Stripped of his nationality in 2001, he had regained it the following year and returned to the country.

The AKP, which already has an overwhelming majority in Parliament and dominates the Turkish political scene, should now be encouraged to pursue its reform path by, for example, abolishing the State Security Courts and dismissing the Army representatives on the Higher Educational Council. It should also help in the discussions on the unification of Cyprus, where the Army fears lest Ankara “sell out Turkish interests”.  The Turkish Prime Minister must, however, take into account the very influential Army, which distrusts his party because of its Islamic roots. The leaders of the European Union must decide, in December, if Turkey has made enough progress in the area of Human Rights and political freedom to begin negotiations for membership. The AKP government can boast of significant economic growth and the lowest rate of inflation for quarter of a century, which has earned Turkey the backing of its principal creditors, the International Monetary Fund and the European Union.

Moreover General Hilmi Ozkok, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces which consider themselves the owners of the State and Guardians of its official ideology, “the immortal principles of Ataturk”, has clearly indicated that the Army remains vigilant in the face of any threat to the secular republic. “We have in the past and will continue to be the guarantors (for Turkey)” declared General Ozkok on the CNN Turk television channel.

Below are the results secured in the Kurdish provinces and major cities of Turkey. The pro-Kurdish DEHAP party, which took part in the election under the banner of an alliance — the Union of Democratic Forces — of six parties under the label of SHP, suffered a set-back, losing the Kurdish provinces of Agri, Bingol, Siirt, and Van to the AKP. Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan had not failed to hammer home the message that those municipalities won by his party would enjoy preferential benefits of State subsidies. Many Kurds had also not appreciated the alliance with the Social Democratic People’s Party (SHP) whose Ataturkist leaders had abandoned the former Kurdish M.P.s of the Party for Democracy (DEP — banned) and acted as a “democratic” smoke screen for a coalition government that, under Tansu Ciller, had waged a ferocious war in Kurdistan. The alliance of democratic forces had, moreover, won 30 districts and 31 cantons and enabled the election of the only woman at the head of a major municipality, Songül Erol Abdil, at Tunceli (Dersim).
 
Provinces        Winning                                 2nd                                        3rd
                         party        Votes        %      party          Votes        %        party          Votes        %

Diyarbakir         SHP         88 850     58,35    AKP         53 377     35,05     DYP             2 346      1,5
Tunceli               SHP           3 812    35,78    Inde            2 171     20,38     DSP                934      8,7
Batman              SHP          47 640    73,64    SP              11 776    18,20     BBP              1 852      2,8
Sirnak                SHP            5 614    40,86   AKP            4 100    29,84     Inde             1 699      12,3
Hakkari             SHP          11 043     62,52   AKP           5 619     31,81     GP                  297      1,68

Adiyaman         AKP           27 187     45,39  SP             15 192    25,36     CHP             6 899      11,5
Agri                  AKP           10 124     48,96  SHP            6 000    29,02     SP                 1 952      9,44
Ardahan         Indep             1 838     25,46    CHP           1 798     24,91     DYP             1 479      20,4
Bingol                AKP             8 960    39,89  SHP             6 388    28,44     SP                 4 081     18,1
Bitlis                   AKP             3 728    28,94  SHP             3 503    27,19     SP                1 485      11,5
Erzurum             AKP           66 912    61,15  MHP          32 307   29,53      SP                3 922      3,58
Erzincan             AKP           16 265     51,44  MHP          9 079     28,71     CHP             5 029     15,9
Antep                 AKP         175 450     57,30  CHP         103 085   33,67     SP                 10 877    3,55
Igdir                  MHP             9 753     42,19  SHP             7 719   33,39     AKP             4 783      20,6
Maras                AKP             67 635    65,50  DYP            14 816   14,35     MHP              9 501      9,20
Malatya             AKP             54 363     50,75  MHP          35 636   33,27     CHP               11 705    10,9
Mardin                 SP              12288     52,74  SHP              6 282    26,96     DYP               3 417      14,6
Mus                 AKP                 6 807     35,66  SHP             4 792     25,10     DYP             4 656        24,3
Siirt                    AKP             18 110     53,53  SHP             14 490   42,83     DYP                 290      0,86
Urfa                 AKP                58 392     60,98  SHP             22 794     23,81     SP               8 896      9,29
Van                     AKP             41 998     54,02  SHP             31 703     40,78     SP                1 047      1,35
 
Istanbul             AKP           1 914 348     45,28 CHP         1 222 579     28,92     SP             230 881      3,64
Ankara             AKP               901 116     55,02 SHP             340 629     20,80     CHP         207 033      12,6
Izmir                 CHP               562 561     47,17 AKP             388 336     32,56     GP             71 671      6,01
Adana                AKP             183 360      39,75 CHP              83 110     18,01     DYP           58 885      12,7
Mersin               CHP               78 792       34,06 SHP               52 138     22,54     AKP           46 174      19,9
 

 * SHP: Social-Democratic People’s Party, including the pro-Kurdish DEHAP party.
AKP: Justice and Development (in office).
CHP: Republican People’s Party, the only opposition party in parliament
DYP: Former Prime Minister Tansu Çiller’s True Path Party
SP:  Happiness Party, led by former Prime Minister N. Erbakan
MHP: National Action Party
GP: Youth Party
Ind: Independent

• REPORT OF EU PARLIAMENT CALLS ON TURKEY TO DRAW UP A NEW CONSTITUTION.   The 2003 periodic report on Turkey by the Foreign Affairs, Human Rights and Joint Security and Defence Commissions of the European Parliament on Turkey’s progress towards readiness for membership, drawn up and presented on 19 March by the Member of the European Parliament Arie M. Oostlander, was adopted in plenary session of the European Parliament by 212 votes, with 84 against, on 1 April.  The report considered that ”whereas, in the face of strong resistance, courageous steps have been taken since the adoption of the last resolution, but whereas further reforms still need to be undertaken, and rigorously implemented, in many areas”

The European Parliament considers that: “ whereas in spite of the determination of the government, Turkey does not yet meet the Copenhagen political criteria and whereas a clear framework for guaranteeing political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights is not yet established… ”The report notice that “ Turkey has retained a Constitution adopted in 1982 during the military regime, reflecting a largely authoritarian philosophy” and considers that “ a number of countries which will accede to the European Union in May 2004, including Poland, have adopted new constitutions, taking the view that this development is a point of departure for the process of reform and modernisation of their society and state”.

“Aware that meeting the political criteria of Copenhagen is a precondition for opening accession negotiations”, The European Parliament “Welcomes the strong motivation and the political will demonstrated by the AKP Government and by the great majority of the people's elected representatives with regard to making reforms that are revolutionary for Turkey” and “points out that such reforms can only be judged on the basis of their actual implementation in terms of day-to-day practice at all levels of the judicial and security system and of both the civilian and military administration…” The report “regards the restriction of the power enjoyed by the army at a political level and in society as a difficult, but unavoidable, process; considers that Turkey's current position in relation to the Cyprus conflict also reflects the political power of the army…Welcomes the fact that the Government is in the process of bringing defence expenditure under parliamentary control; points, however, with concern, to the influential (formal and informal) army network comprising inter alia think tanks, businesses (OYAK) and funds, which could prove to be an obstacle to the reform of the state…”

“ Urges the Government to transform the existing boards for higher education (YÖK) and audiovisual media (RTÜK), in their capacity as watchdog bodies, into new, completely civilian councils which are not subject to any control by the military, in the same fashion and to the same standard as in the EU countries…”

The European Parliament “stresses the need both to fully respect international law and to accept the primacy of EU law over national law (ambiguity of Article 90 of the Constitution)”. European MPs “requests Turkey again to implement without delay outstanding decisions of the European Court of Human Rights; points out that there is no room for a position of non-commitment and own interpretation”

The report “regrets the progress of the trial reopened against Sakharov Prize winner Leyla Zana and three other former Democracy Party (DEP) MPs; stresses that this case is symbolic of the gulf which exists between the Turkish judicial system and that of the EU; reiterates its call for amnesty for prisoners of conscience (a.o. Leyla Zana and the three other former MPs of Kurdish origin)”, “deplores the political persecution, that in some cases goes as far as prohibition of political parties such as HADEP and DEHAP, constituting an attack on freedom of expression, organisation and assembly”

“ Calls for the electoral system to enable the entire population to be fully democratically represented, with particular reference to the Kurdish people and other minorities”

“Notes that torture practices and mistreatment still continue; points to the Government's zero tolerance policy regarding torture; regrets the fact that little progress has been made in bringing torturers to justice; insists on the need for educational efforts to change the outlook of the police force in order to ensure that the law is strictly respected; Condemns the intimidation and continuing harassment of human rights defenders and of human rights organisations by some authorities”

“Awaits with interest the promised implementation of the right to broadcast in languages other than Turkish; calls on the Audiovisual Council (RTÜK) to take a non-rigid approach to requests to broadcast in the different languages and dialects and not to create additional obstacles or restrictions”

“Calls on the Turkish authorities to put more effort into the quick and thorough implementation of the legislative changes concerning the cultural rights that allow the education in and the use of (traditional) languages other than Turkish in the media, points at the significance of these reforms for the Kurdish population (the largest minority), expects the authorities to provide the necessary means to stimulate the socio-economic development of the Kurdish regions, particularly in South-East Turkey, in order to create the circumstances that enable the Kurdish population to build a peaceful and prosperous future”

“ Expresses the fear that Turkey's reservation in respect of Article 27 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights significantly restricts the scope of the right of ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities to pursue their culture, practise their own religion or use their own language; refers, in this connection, to the remaining restrictions on the right of association; Stresses that the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne concerning the position of minorities must not be interpreted in a minimalist way, as such an interpretation is not in accordance with the fundamental rights applying in the EU”

“ Awaits a constructive position of the Turkish authorities concerning the restructuring of the state of Iraq where all ethnic and religious groups can find adequate respect for their political, economic, social and cultural interest”
 

• CYPRUS: TURKISH CYPRIOT LEADER  REJECTS FEDERATION, CALLS EU OFFICIAL “NAZI KAPO”.  The UN plan for the reunification of Cyprus, after tough negotiations in Switzerland, has failed to reach any agreement between Turkish and Greek Cypriots and representatives of the Turkish and Greek governments. This plan is supposed to be submitted to a referendum in Northern (Turkish) and Southern (Greek) Cyprus on 24 April.  The plan was rejected by Athens, one of the guarantor powers, while the Greek Cypriots considered it too favourable to the Turkish Cypriots. For its part, the international community, including the European Union and the United States, have been increasing their pressure to get the two Cypriot parties to accept the latest UNO proposals. On 1 April, the Greek Cypriot President, Tassos Papadopoulos, blamed Turkey for the failure to reach agreement on the UNO plan for reunification, the latest form of which had been rejected by Rauf Denktash, the Turkish Cypriot leader after nine days discussions in Switzerland.  Rauf Denktash had earlier announced that he rejected the UNO peace plan. “In its present form, I see nothing to which I can say Yes” stated Mr. Denktash, who, with Turkish support, finds the federal status proposed by the plan to be insufficient.

UNO hopes to be able to reunify the island before 1 May, the date on which the Republic of Cyprus joins the European Union. In the event of rejection of the UNO plan, only Republic of Cyprus, which is internationally recognised, but whose authority only covers the South of the island, will enter the European Union. The European Commissioner for enlargement, Gunther Verheugen, specified that the UNO plan gave Greek Cypriots the right to buy land in Turkish territory 15 years after the agreement had come into effect.  Rauf Denktash described Günther Verheugen a “Nazi kapo” — and insult that was taken up by the Turkish press.
The 800,000 Greek Cypriots enjoy a much higher standard of living than the 160,000 Turkish Cypriots who occupy the Northern third of the island, 60,000 of whom in fact come from the Turkish mainland.