Turkey in hot water with Council of Europe over Article 301

The report said “the Assembly welcomes amendments made to Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code [TCK] but deplores the fact that Turkey has not abolished Article 301. Criminal charges have been brought against many journalists under the slightly revised Article 301, which still violates Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.”

Turkish deputies, addressing the floor, objected to McIntosh’s proposition and claimed that the European court has not made a ruling and that the report erroneously states that the amended article still violates Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Ertuğrul Kumcuoğlu from the opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) even tabled an amendment to delete the proposition from the report. Other deputies endorsed the change. When the amendment was opened to debate, Kumcuoğlu had a change of heart and declined to move the amendment.

PACE argued that the changes in Article 301 have not substantially reduced the number of court cases in which writers or journalists have been prosecuted for their published opinions. There are different numbers floating around for cases brought against reporters. According to the Turkish monitoring organization Bianet, 125 people, 57 of them journalists, were on trial for their opinions between April and June 2009. International Pen reports, however, in September 2009 there were more than 70 current outstanding cases of journalists and writers facing criminal investigation or trial in Turkey for their opinions. Of those, 27 individuals face possible criminal prosecution under Article 301. International Pen says at least seven applications for criminal investigation under the amended Article 301 are currently under consideration by the Ministry of Justice.

Orhan Pamuk mentioned as an example

McIntosh said he is also worried about the self-censorship applied by Turkish reporters and editors because they fear they might be subject to prosecution. “Self-censorship is of enormous importance. We have the power of publicity. Unfortunately we do not have the power to change the laws directly,” he remarked.

During a debate in the assembly session, Denis MacShane, a British MP, raised Orhan Pamuk as an example of how bad the situation in Turkey is. “How can we explain to our Turkish friends from both main parties that Article 301, which makes it a crime to attack the Turkish nation in the media, is a fundamental assault on freedom of expression? When will Orhan Pamuk, the Nobel prize winner, be able to live absolutely freely and openly in Turkey, and walk and go to restaurants and have a drink -- or go for a smoke, or whatever he wants to do -- in İstanbul, instead of being so frightened because of death threats that he has to spend much of his time outside Turkey?”

Turkish deputies pitted against each other

While many speakers were lashing out at Turkey for having restrictions on media freedom, Turkish deputies from the government and the opposition were busy picking fights with each other. Kumcuoğlu from the MHP said, “I feel disturbed when our prime minister misuses government funds to support one of the media conglomerates to favor his position in the government, or he asks my people not to read some newspapers that falsely report the difficulties in our country and falsely concentrate on one point.”

Kumcuoğlu was referring to the feud between Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and media conglomerate head Aydın Doğan. Tekelioğlu from the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) did not mince words in responding to Kumcuoğlu’s allegations. “Media owners who also have other businesses in the private and public sectors may become too dependent on advertisers to support their public businesses or too dependent on politicians to support their public businesses. As potential power centers, some owners can deviate from plain journalism by manipulating news to form public opinion at the expense of creating a misinformed, confused public. Their dependence may become apparent as pressure on their own journalists,” he stressed.

The report also criticized the fine against Doğan by the Turkish Finance Ministry -- a crushing 1.74 billion euros for alleged tax irregularities in his business. The fine had been increased further by some 30 percent to take into account interest and penalty charges. The International Press Institute (IPI) National Committee in Turkey said the size of the combined fines demanded by the government exceeded the total value of the media group itself, and therefore amounted to a direct seizure and liquidation of a media organization. The European Commission has condemned the fine as excessive and a danger to media pluralism and to freedom of speech.