Do the people of the Middle East not deserve it?
by Cüneyd Er*

In brief, in that article, I proposed that the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) take an active part in the normalization process in the Middle East. Bearing in mind its ongoing projects with several international organizations, I expressed that it can run joint projects with the Council of Europe (CoE) as it has been implementing with member states such as Turkey, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania and Azerbaijan to facilitate and support reforms.

Some readers -- most probably from the West -- were arguing that the laws and rules of the OIC and the CoE are not compatible. For that reason, I should not (or could not) have proposed that joint programs of the CoE and the OIC be implemented for the sake of the people of the Middle East. With all due respect to the freedom of expression of my readers, I have to note that such an opinion is the reflection of an elitist mind, which also reveals the opinion that the people of the Middle East do not deserve such standards. I am aware that it is not possible to disseminate all standards, rules and treaties of the CoE like a copy and paste application to the countries of the Middle East. For that reason, the standards could be customized according to the needs and conditions of Middle Eastern societies, but again, according to the minimum standards of Europe. I should urge a very important point: Both in the previous op-ed article and in this one, I do not mean disseminating European standards “on merit” in Middle Eastern countries, but at least reaching and setting minimum common standards. For example, I do not have a background or any expertise on Islamic theology. However, as a Muslim person, I know that torture is prohibited in Islam. It is a shame that in Middle Eastern Muslim states many people who participated in the 2011 uprisings complained about severe torture and inhumane treatment in police custody. Besides that, there are many other minimum requirements in Europe that can be applied to Middle Eastern countries, which would also meet the needs of the people: for example, standards on freedom of assembly and freedom to demonstrate. The administrations of Middle Eastern states should be aware that freedom to demonstrate would help release their people’s possible anger.

Positive impacts in the estimation of the public

In this context, I do not claim that these standards are being applied perfectly in Turkey. However, projects that include in-service training have had some successful outcomes. Comparing them to the previous years, I can say that conditions are pretty developed. As a recent example, I should note that during the rally for May 1, Labor Day, this year, the İstanbul police did not take anybody into custody. That was a great success for both workers, who have learned to carry on peaceful demonstrations, and police, who have learned to control and monitor them, especially during the May 1 rally in İstanbul’s Taksim Square, which was closed to that event until 2010 due to the bloody events of May 1, 1977, which resulted in the deaths of 34, injuring 136 more.

Similarly, standards on detention and prison conditions in the Middle East can be improved according to European standards, while police stations can be renovated to serve the people in better conditions. That includes the size of the cells and rooms of both prisons and places of detention and the rights and conditions of the detainees and prisoners. I highlight again that European standards can be adopted by Middle Eastern countries without any contradiction of their own norms. They would certainly bring very positive impacts in the estimation of the public.

When we scan and skim the ongoing and completed joint programs of the CoE and the European Union, we see that many of them can be customized and implemented again by the CoE, this time in cooperation with the OIC. For example, I again urge that programs such as Assistance to the preparation of comprehensive constitutional reform; Police, Professionalism and the Public; The Project on Ethics for the Prevention of Corruption; Support to Court Management Systems; Judicial Modernization and Penal Reform; the program against corruption, money laundering and terrorist financing in Moldova; and many others can be implemented according to the needs, expectations and conditions of the beneficiaries. It is a real fact that such a program would not be easy; it would take years, maybe decades. However, that depends on the will of the people. We know the fundamental principle: “If there is a will, there is a way.” The people of the Middle East have clearly showed their will and I am sure they will continue to support progressive projects implemented by international organizations in cooperation with their democratically elected administrations. At this point, you may wonder why I proposed the probable projects be financed by the OIC and implemented by the CoE for the Middle East.

Why I proposed CoE and OIC joint projects?

First of all, as I have highlighted above, some member states of the CoE with high Muslim populations (Albania is 70 percent Muslim, Azerbaijan 99 percent, Bosnia and Herzegovina 48 percent, Kosovo 90 percent and Turkey 99 percent) are already beneficiaries of the CoE projects. They are already benefitting from the above-mentioned projects and many others. This means that relevant staff members and experts who may deliver training would be aware of the sensitivities of a Muslim society. Hopefully, Middle Eastern states, which will have “post-Arab Spring administrations” as potential beneficiaries, will choose to participate in such programs since their people are going to benefit from the projects in the long term. Secondly, we should remember that the law systems of these countries are not absolutely Islamic law only. Throughout their evolutions and with the effect of the colonial period, contrary to general conjecture, many of them, such as Syria, Qatar, Morocco, Jordan, Algeria and Egypt, are already applying laws mainly based on French, Spanish and even Dutch civil law systems, but of course based on Islamic law in particular for matters regarding family. Due to this feature of the legal system of Middle Eastern countries, some may have different prejudices regarding the probable application of minimum European standards in these countries.

Thirdly, CoE member states are not logistically far from potential beneficiary states. Consequently, it would not be hard for the CoE’s short-term experts to travel to relevant venues to deliver seminars. In my opinion, Turks who have been trained under different “training of trainers” programs would be ready-to-work trainers cut out for the needs of the relevant countries. Here I want to add something and quote from Dr. Burhanettin Duran of İstanbul Şehir University and Mr. Nuh Yılmaz, director of SETA Washington: “It is ironic that in 2010 the debate revolved around concepts such as a ‘shift of axis’ … but now Turkey has transformed from a ‘lost’ ally to a ‘model’ country.” (Foreign Policy -- The Middle East Channel, Feb. 8, 2011.) Accordingly, Turkey should take a role in this transitional period, not as an imposing party, but as a cooperating friendly nation that will improve on its current expertise on these topics, while delivering training on them. I can state that this would be a different approach to the win-win policy in line with the current Turkish foreign policy standards.

Last but not least is the current membership of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia, as well as Palestine (with a special status), in the Venice Commission of the CoE. I underlined this fact in my previous article, too. This common experience and acquis should not be ignored.

I am proposing the probable OIC and CoE partnership for common projects due to the above listed reasons. The OIC also recognizes the importance of international cooperation and highly values its already existing partnerships (some minor, some major) with UN agencies, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the EU, the CoE, the League of Arab States and others, as well as with the individual countries, through bilateral agreements to implement programs for the benefit of the people of its member states, in particular those recently having experienced unrest. We have to be aware of a fundamental reality: The opinions, expectations, targets, imaginations and dreams of the young people of North Africa about multiparty democracy, the rule of law and respect for human dignity are not actually different than the people who are already given those opportunities by their systems of administration.

*Cüneyd Er, LL.M. is a Turkish lawyer and a PhD candidate at Leiden University’s faculty of law (the Netherlands). He can be reached at

cuneyder@gmail.com