TURKEY

CASE N° TK/39 - LEYLA ZANA	CASE N° TK/52 - SELIM SADAK
CASE N° TK/40 - SEDAT YURTDAS	CASE N° TK/53 - NIZAMETTIN TOGUÇ
CASE N° TK/41 - HATIP DICLE	CASE N° TK/55 - MEHMET SINÇAR
CASE N° TK/42 - ZÜBEYIR AYDAR	CASE N° TK/57 - MAHMUT KILINÇ
CASE N° TK/43 - MAHMUT ALINAK	CASE N° TK/58 - NAIF GÜNES
CASE N° TK/44 - AHMET TÜRK	CASE N° TK/59 - ALI YIGIT
CASE N° TK/48 - SIRRI SAKIK	CASE N° TK/62 - REMZI KARTAL
CASE N° TK/51 - ORHAN DOGAN

Resolution adopted without a vote* by the Inter-Parliamentary Council
at its 162nd session (Windhoek, 11 April 1998)

The Inter-Parliamentary Council,

Referring to the outline of the case, as contained in the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians (CL/162/11(a)-R.1), and to the resolution adopted at its 161st session (September 1997) concerning the case of the above-mentioned parliamentarians, former members of the Turkish Grand National Assembly,

Taking account of the communication from the President of the Turkish Grand National Assembly dated 1 April 1998,

Also taking account of the observations made by the Turkish delegation at the hearing held on the occasion of the 99th Inter-Parliamentary Conference (April 1998),

Recalling that Leyla Zana, Hatip Dicle, Orhan Dogan and Selim Sadak were found guilty of being members of the PKK and sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment,

Recalling that they were never accused of any acts of violence or advocacy of violence; that the verdict relied heavily on the deputies' public speeches and writings quoted in the indictment - in which they repeatedly assert the Kurdish minority to be a group with a distinct identity but do not advocate violence - as evidence of their membership of the PKK; that the acts relied on in the judgment as evidence of membership of the PKK include: a press statement in connection with the taking of the parliamentary oath; the " wearing of yellow, green and red accessories " while taking the oath; a public statement to the United Nations on 2 April 1992 calling for investigation of the killing of civilians during disturbances at the time of Newruz, the Kurdish New Year, of 21 March 1992 and a petition of 20 November 1991 to the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe calling for that organisation to appoint a body to monitor human rights in Turkey,

Recalling that contacts they had with PKK members were also adduced as evidence; that some of them had indeed met Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the PKK; that, however, that mission had had the blessing of the then President Turgut Özal, who agreed in early 1993 that they should mediate in the conflict; that during their mission to Damascus which resulted in an extension of the cease-fire, they were reportedly welcomed by an official from the Turkish Embassy in Syria,

Recalling that the many appeals of international bodies, such as the European Parliament, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and the OSCE's Parliamentary Assembly, for their release went totally unheeded,

Recalling in this connection that, in his letter of 16 December 1997, the President of the Turkish Grand National Assembly stated that " Mr. Türk, Mr. Dicle, Mr. Dogan and Mrs. Zana were convicted of being members of a terrorist organisation, as stipulated in Article 168 of the Turkish Penal Code, while Mr. Alinak and Mr. Sakik were convicted under the Anti-Terrorism Law of praising terrorist violence against the unity of the State. To grant amnesty to these parliamentarians requires a general consensus within the Turkish Parliament for a constitutional amendment since Article 87 of our Constitution prohibits an amnesty to persons convicted for such acts ",

Recalling that, on 26 November 1997, the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment on the complaint which Mr. Sakik, Mr. Türk, Mr. Alinak, Mrs. Zana, Mr. Dicle and Mr. Dogan had lodged in March 1994 with the European Commission on Human Rights, regarding inter alia their arrest and detention in police custody; that the Court found that Turkey had breached Article 5, paragraphs 3 (right to be promptly brought before a judge), 4 (right to judicial review) and 5 (right to compensation) of the European Convention on Human Rights and awarded the former MPs concerned compensation for non-pecuniary damage; that the Committee found the judgment to be an additional ground for releasing the former MPs concerned,

Considering that, in his letter of 1 April 1998, the President of the Turkish National Group expressed the view that the European Court decision was not an additional ground warranting the Committee's appeal for their release since the Court had not found a violation of Article 5, paragraph 1, which meant that their arrest was lawful,

Considering that, in January 1996, Mrs. Zana, Mr. Dicle, Mr. Dogan and Mr. Sadak appealed against the judgment handed down on them; that this case is currently pending with the European Commission on Human Rights, which on 24 October 1997 declared it partly admissible and partly inadmissible,

Recalling the judgment handed down on Mr. Türk, Mr. Alinak, Mr. Sakik and Mr. Yurtdas, who have been stripped of their political rights for life, and on Mr. Alinak and Mr. Yurtdas, both lawyers, who have further been debarred for life from exercising their profession,

Considering that Mr. Hatip Dicle was sentenced to a further four months' imprisonment for " disseminating separatist propaganda "; that charges were laid against him reportedly because of a supportive letter he had sent from prison to prisoners in Cankiri Prison who were on a hunger strike and whereby he attempted to raise the prisoners' morale; that letter reportedly never reached its addressees; that the sentence was reduced on appeal from 8 to 4 months because the letter had never reached its destination,

Recalling the assertion of the Turkish delegation to the 97th Inter-Parliamentary Conference (April 1997) that the Turkish Government was making every effort to bring Turkish legislation into line with European human rights standards, and that the approaching end of the fight against terrorism in south-eastern Turkey permitted a broader interpretation of the concept of freedom of expression,

Bearing in mind the interpretation given by the European Court of Human Rights to freedom of expression, namely that " freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of (such) democratic society, one of the basic conditions for its progress and for the development of every man. Subject to Article 10 (2), it is applicable not only to "information" or "ideas" that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no democratic society " (Handyside v. UK, September 1976),

1. Thanks the President of the Turkish National Group for the information he provided and for his consistent co-operation;
2. Also thanks the Turkish delegation for the observations it supplied;
3. Can but reaffirm its conviction - in view of the evidence adduced to substantiate the charges held against Ms. Zana, Mr Dogan, Mr. Dicle and Mr. Sadak - that they were sentenced on account of having exercised their right to freedom of expression by advocating a political solution to the conflict in south-eastern Turkey;
4. Calls once more on the Turkish authorities to release the former MPs concerned in line with their stated commitment to adapting Turkish legislation to European human rights norms, and invites once again the Turkish Grand National Assembly to make every effort to that end;
5. Considers that this would be a tangible demonstration of the stated political will of the Turkish authorities to review Turkey's human rights policy and would undoubtedly further a solution to the conflict in south-eastern Turkey;
6. Considers that the judgment delivered by the European Court on Human Rights on 27 November 1997 is an additional ground warranting their immediate release pending a decision on the second case before the European Commission;
7. Once again calls on the authorities to reconsider the judgment handed down on Mr. Türk, Mr. Alinak, Mr. Sakik and Mr. Yurtdas, who have been stripped of their political rights for life, and on Mr. Alinak and Mr. Yurtdas, both lawyers, who have further been debarred for life from exercising their profession;
8. Is concerned at the additional prison term handed down on Mr. Dicle and fails to understand how the facts, as brought to its knowledge, could be described as disseminating separatist propaganda;
9. Considers that his conviction indicates no great willingness on the part of the Turkish authorities to abide by their pledge to bring their legislation into line with European human rights standards;
10. Requests the Secretary General to bring these considerations to the attention of the Turkish parliamentary authorities;
11. Requests the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians to continue examining the case and report to it at its next session (September 1998).

Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 99th Conference and related meetings of the Inter-Parliamentary Union" in PDF format (file size approximately 540K). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.