Guilty until proven innocent

In recent months, we have seen a stream of research papers highlighting the shortcomings of Turkey’s justice system. This particular document focuses on the harassment and pressure experienced by human rights defenders who work on issues deemed controversial. Once again, it makes uncomfortable reading.

What does the report say? In short, that in spite of a very vibrant civil society, “those who speak out on ‘sensitive’ human rights issues, in particular members of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), but also lawyers, trade unionists, journalists, intellectuals and academics, writers and family members of victims of serious violations, have been subjected to severe repression.”

The Kurdish question ranks first and foremost among issues deemed “sensitive.” Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and the opposition leader recently met to try and forge a common path toward a negotiated solution. But meanwhile, arrests in the framework of the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK) investigations continue apace: The report points out that thanks to catch-all definitions in the anti-terrorism legislation, some 8,000 people have been detained for alleged links to the KCK, among them academics like Büşra Ersanlı as well as members of the Human Rights Association and lawyers.

Associations promoting the rights of religious minorities, LGBT rights, trade unionists, intellectuals, writers and academics, lawyers and defenders of conscientious objection and gender rights also frequently come under judicial pressure. Several NGOs have faced the threat of closure. Even if attempts to ban them were eventually dropped, their members had to spend time and energy fighting legal battles.

According to the report, at the beginning of 2012, “105 journalists, 44 lawyers, at least 17 members of human rights organizations and 41 trade unionists were jailed,” while dozens of others faced court cases.

Beyond the lengthy pre-trial detentions and procedural shortcomings, this report, like many others, highlights the need for a radical change of mentality.

It boils down to interpretation: The observatory defines a human rights defender as “anyone who, in conformity with the international instrument of protection of human rights, acts for the promotion or protection of others’ universally recognized human rights and fundamental freedoms, whether individually or in association with others…”

As things stand in Turkey, too many activities that fall within international definitions of freedom of expression or freedom of association are categorized as criminal or terrorist acts. As the report points out, freedom of expression is limited by “legal provisions that are either overly broad or interpreted in an excessively restricted manner by prosecutors and judges.”

The report suggests that in 2011 “312 peaceful demonstrations, public meetings, marches, press conferences were dispersed by force, leading to 1,425 wounded.” A total of 491 people were sentenced to 1,561 years in 87 cases for exercising their right to freedom of assembly and peaceful demonstration.

In the past decade the “physical safety of human rights defenders” has steadily improved, the observatory acknowledges. But “law-enforcement bodies, prosecutors and judges, long accustomed to limiting rights, continue to interpret and apply the law in an overly restrictive manner,” using the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) and the Anti-Terrorism Law to “criminalize legitimate and peaceful activities of human rights defenders.”

Casting the net too wide and sticking a “terrorist” label to people who aren’t directly involved in violent activities undermines the credibility of legitimate investigations, hinders Turkey’s democratization and fosters tension in the country. And the report underlines that “the criminalization of human rights defenders under anti-terrorism legislation risks to expose them again to physical abuse by non-state actors.”

This is not a warning that Turkey can afford to take lightly: Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, it is worth remembering, was murdered after he was prosecuted and judges sentenced him for having allegedly “insulted Turkishness.” Much has changed in Turkey in the past decade, but it emerges from this report that tolerance for dissent remains limited and the temptation to defend the state at the expense of individual freedoms is still strong.