Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-27-Speech-3-129"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020227.8.3-129"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Turkey has for several years made clear its interest in establishing closer relations with the European Union. From the signing of the Association Agreement, in 1963, and its formal request for accession in 1987 and the Customs Union signed in 1996, relations have had a long journey, which has not always been easy, characterised by mutual interest, rapprochement and, at the same time, by the clear European requirement for certain indispensable conditions that apply to every candidate for accession to the Union to be met.
Another important factor that should be taken into account is the practical implementation of the reforms. It is not sufficient for the laws simply to be approved; their provisions must also be put into practice. Turkey could be said to have the basic characteristics of a democratic system, but the implementation of the reforms necessary to guarantee democracy and the Rule of Law is taking place extremely slowly. Essential reforms in the State Security Courts have still not been carried out, the situation of torture and abuse has scarcely improved, especially in the southeast, due largely to difficulties in prosecuting the members of the security forces who are responsible for these acts. There are limitations on the practical independence of the judiciary, due amongst other reasons, to the fact that the Supreme Council of judges and prosecutors is headed by the Minister of Justice, which prevents any practical separation of the competences of the executive and the judicial powers. The Law of Criminal Prosecution still prevents judgments that have been challenged from being reviewed or any measure to compensate for violations of the European Convention of Human Rights from being adopted. The action plan for the southeast has still not been made public and Turkey has yet to sign up to the Council of Europe’s framework convention on the protection of national minorities. All of this remains problematic, not to mention the major limitations inherent in the judicial system itself.
Despite the legislative reforms, any real improvement in this field will depend on the correct implementation and interpretation of development legislation. In practice, it has already become clear that actions that no longer constitute an offence, in light of the recent reform of the Penal Code, could still be considered to be an offence under some other Article of criminal legislation and punished, in some cases, even more harshly.
An essential element of the Turkish process of democratisation is what is known as the National Programme for the Incorporation of the Acquis, presented by the Turkish government shortly after the Council of the European Union approved the Association Agreement for accession in March 2001. This represents a major step forwards in the right direction but it is inadequate because it contains various shortcomings that could endanger the objective of fully meeting the priorities and objectives required by the Union.
In some aspects, this National Programme for the Incorporation of the Acquis is imprecisely worded, which will lead to problems of interpretation before it can move ahead. Specifically, it should mention the abolition of the death penalty, the subordination of the armed forces to civilian authority, the eradication of corruption, the socio-economic situation of the southeast of the country, which has a majority Kurdish population and the lifting of the state of emergency in the southeast. Furthermore, this plan gives no commitment to eliminate legal barriers to the transmission of radio and television programmes in mother tongues other than Turkish or to safeguard the cultural rights of Turkish minorities.
In this process of reform and progress, in the recognition of the cultural rights of minorities, Turkey is still falling short. The recent reform of the Constitution has led to the amendment of Articles 26 and 28 and to the corresponding removal of the ban on the use of other languages. Nevertheless, the recent demonstrations by university students and parents of schoolchildren demanding the inclusion of Kurdish language courses in the academic curriculum have been harshly dealt with by the security forces, who state that the Kurdish language as such does not exist, that the only national language of the Republic is Turkish and that individuals who were arrested and who remain in prison are being detained because of their suspected support for the terrorist organisation, the Kurdistan Workers Party, otherwise known as the PKK. This message was repeated by the National Security Council when it stated that the campaigns requesting Kurdish language education have been orchestrated by the PKK with clearly separatist intentions, adding that this party, the PKK, is attempting to take another step in its strategy of politicisation and of creating a Kurdish nation.
Another problem that cannot be sidestepped in the legislative process of Turkey’s democratisation is the problem of the recognition of the right of association, to be specific, the criminalisation and shutting down of political parties. In 1994 and as a replacement for the banned Democratic Party (DEP), accused of maintaining links with the terrorist organisation of the Kurdistan Workers Party, the People’s Democratic Party (HADEP) was created; the former members of the DEP who wished to become members of HADEP had to request the express permission of the government, which only allowed those who had no criminal record or against whom there had been no complaint to join. Since its creation, HADEP has been the dominant political force in the southeast of the country and controls the majority of the councils in the cities in this region; but also, since its inception, HADEP has had the threat of being closed down hanging over its head. The Constitutional Court’s decision of June 2001 to close down the Islamicist Fazilet Party highlighted the problems existing in the field of freedom of expression and association. The Constitutional Court is now trying the HADEP case. The public prosecutor has requested its ban on the grounds of its suspected links with the terrorist and leader of the Kurdistan Workers Party, Abdullah Ocalan. It is being accused of using party meetings to spread propaganda for Ocalan and to incite hatred against the constitutional order and the indissoluble unity of the Turkish Republic. There have been thousands of cases of people from the HADEP party being arrested, and although the majority have been released following a short period of detention, these individuals were arrested for being suspected members of the PKK terrorist organisation and were accused of being involved in terrorist activities. No one was arrested and tried simply for being a party member.
It can nevertheless be stated that in Turkey any mention of Kurdistan, its flag, or the call for education in the Kurdish language, is considered to be collaboration with or support for terrorist activity. It is also true, however, that, until it is banned, HADEP is a legally recognised party in Turkey and no one can be arrested simply for being a member of this party. Making it illegal would signify a step backwards in Turkey’s progress towards accession and would require the European Union to adopt a common position expressing its concern at the negative impact of such a move on freedom of expression and of association and on political pluralism, on the understanding that respect for the cultural rights of the Turkish people of Kurdish origin is one of the objectives set out in the Association Agreement for accession.
Mr President, it cannot be denied that Turkey has made progress in fulfilling the political criteria for accession; consequently, the prospect of opening negotiations has come even closer. Nevertheless, this progress is still not sufficient to begin talks on accession. One of the main obstacles is the protection of the cultural rights of all Turks, regardless of their ethnic origin. Recently, the Secretary General for European Union Affairs, Volkan Vural, announced that a second package of legislative reforms is being prepared. This gives us hope today that we will see a new step in Turkey’s process of democratisation, which will open the way to a more fluid relationship and to negotiations, perhaps in the future, on its future incorporation into the Union.
(
)
The Copenhagen European Council laid down the political criteria that the candidate countries must fulfil, which are; achieving institutional stability that guarantees democracy, the Rule of Law, the defence of human rights and respect for minorities and their protection. Furthermore, the Helsinki European Council formally acknowledged Turkey’s application to join the Union, by concluding with the words that Turkey is a candidate country destined to join the Union on the basis of fulfilling the new criteria that also apply to the other candidate countries. From now on, Turkey should benefit from the same association strategy for accession as the other candidate countries, which should act as a stimulus and a support for its reforms.
The conclusions of the Laeken European Council indicate that Turkey has made progress on fulfilling the political criteria set for accession, in particular by means of the recent amendment of its constitution. The prospect of opening up accession negotiations with Turkey has thereby come a step closer. The European Council urged Turkey to continue making progress on fulfilling the Copenhagen criteria, both the economic and the political criteria, especially with regard to respecting human rights, and acknowledged that Turkey is participating on an equal footing with the other candidates in a matter as vitally important as the Convention on the future of Europe, which will be inaugurated tomorrow in this Parliament.
The Progress 2000 report stated that Turkey had initiated a very positive debate on the political reforms necessary for its accession, one of the most important of which is the fact that it has signed up to various international instruments in the field of human rights. Two-thousand-and-one saw one of the most important changes in Turkey’s process of democratisation: the adoption of a package of 34 amendments to the constitution, which is the most profound change that this fundamental legislation has undergone since its entry into force in 1982. Amongst the more innovative aspects are the recognition of the freedom of thought and expression, measures to prevent torture and the strengthening of civil authority as opposed to military authority and major prison reforms. These reforms have undoubtedly benefited from the fact that Turkey’s candidature has been acknowledged and from the prospect of its joining the Union in the future.
Similarly, at the end of January 2002, another major step forwards was taken when the Turkish government decided to remove its opposition to Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, concerning the right to freedom and security in relation to the maximum periods of detention an individual can be subjected to before being put on trial. The Secretary General of the Council of Europe expressed his satisfaction at this decision, and stated that this marks a step forwards in the field of the protection of prisoners’ rights.
I would also mention the decision to create a commission, comprising of Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs and Human Rights, to supervise the situation at field level of the protection of human rights and adopt the necessary measures. The same applies to the entry into force in Turkey of the new Civil Code, which signifies considerable progress in the recognition of non-discrimination on the grounds of gender, in family law and also in the law of succession. We should also mention the amendment of the law on the National Security Council, which is about to be approved in the Turkish Parliament, in order to adapt it to the new wording of Article 118 of the Constitution and which increases the number of civilian members of the National Security Council, thereby more clearly demonstrating its consultative nature.
It is also to be welcomed that the Council of Ministers has approved the decree that will allow Amnesty International to legally open an office in Turkey.
Although these constitutional amendments represent enormous hope for the process of democratisation – despite some important omissions, such as not having fully abolished the death penalty, which will still apply in the event of war or to punish particularly serious offences, such as terrorism – the legislative development of these constitutional rules has, however, been clearly inadequate. Although the legislative minipackage for developing the constitutional reforms adopts a more restrictive definition of the offence of promoting terrorism and provides greater guarantees for prisoners awaiting trial, at the same time extremely vague concepts have been introduced and even, in some cases, the range of punishable actions has been increased, as well as the fact that limits are continuing to be set on the right of association and the right to demonstrate, which is totally incompatible with current practices in the European Union.
The same could be said of the reform of the Civil Code. The amendment of the status of legal persons does not solve the problem of the legal obstacles to the right of association or to the law on foundations, recently ratified by the Supreme Court, prohibiting the acquisition of property by foundations run by non-Muslim religious minorities in Turkey. It is worth pointing out, on this matter, that one of the priorities of the Association Agreement for accession is non-discrimination on the grounds of religion."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples