IPU Logo-top>>> VERSION FRANÇAISE  
 IPU Logo-middleInter-Parliamentary Union  
IPU Logo-bottomChemin du Pommier 5, Case postale 330, CH-1218 Le Grand Saconnex/Geneva, Switzerland  

TURKEY
CASE N° TK/39 - LEYLA ZANA
CASE N° TK/40 - SEDAT YURTDAS
CASE N° TK/41 - HATIP DICLE
CASE N° TK/42 - ZÜBEYIR AYDAR
CASE N° TK/43 - MAHMUT ALINAK
CASE N° TK/44 - AHMET TÜRK
CASE N° TK/48 - SIRRI SAKIK
CASE N° TK/51 - ORHAN DOGAN
CASE N° TK/52 - SELIM SADAK
CASE N° TK/53 – NIZAMETTIN TOGUÇ
CASE N° TK/55 - MEHMET SINÇAR
CASE N° TK/57 - MAHMUT KILINÇ
CASE N° TK/58 - NAIF GÜNES
CASE N° TK/59 - ALI YIGIT
CASE N° TK/62 - REMZI KARTAL
Resolution adopted unanimously by the Governing Council
at its 173rd session (Geneva, 3 October 2003)


The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

Referring to the outline of the case of the above-mentioned parliamentarians, former members of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TGNA), as contained in the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians (CL/173/11(b)-R.1), and to the relevant resolution adopted at its 171st session (September 2002),

Taking account of the observations provided by the Chairman of the Turkish Inter-Parliamentary Group at the hearing held on the occasion of the 109th Assembly,

Recalling that, apart from Mr. Sinçar, whose assassination in September 1993 has remained unpunished, the persons concerned lost their parliamentary mandate as a result of the banning of the political party to which they belonged; six went into exile and the others were sentenced to prison terms which four of them, having been sentenced in December 1994 to a 15-year prison term, namely Ms. Zana, Mr. Dicle, Mr. Dogan and Mr. Sadak are still serving; in its judgment of 17 July 2001 on their case, the European Court of Human Rights concluded that they had not been tried by an independent and impartial court on account of the presence of a military judge and that "they suffered such violations of their right to defence that they did not enjoy a fair trial", and granted them an equitable satisfaction,

Considering that, acting on the repeated invitations addressed to them by the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe to ensure the implementation of the Court judgment, the Turkish authorities, in January 2003 passed legislation permitting the retrial of the case of Leyla Zana et al.; the proceedings started on 28 March 2003 before the Ankara State Security Court; since then, seven hearings have taken place, most recently on 15 September 2003; the Court dismissed their application for a suspension of the execution of their prison sentence and their petition to be released on bail; according to trial observer reports, the Court has so far failed to respect the principle of equality of arms between the prosecution and the defence and "…was neither independent nor impartial"; the Court refused in particular almost all requests of the defence for defence witnesses to be heard and did not allow the defence to put direct questions to witnesses; moreover, the judge who presided the initial trial in 1994 remains the presiding judge in the retrial and recently commented in open court that "the deficiencies and mistakes identified by the European Court of Human Rights will not alter the guilt of the accused",

Considering that, at the hearing held in Geneva, the President of the Turkish Inter-Parliamentary Group stated that Turkey was rapidly harmonising its laws to comply with European standards; several harmonisation packages were passed to this effect, providing among other things for the suppression of military judges in the State Security Courts; as to the retrial of Ms. Zana and her colleagues, he stated that the Turkish judiciary was independent and that the former deputies concerned enjoyed their right to defend themselves; he was, however, not aware of the trial observer reports critical of the conduct of the proceedings and undertook to relay the matter to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice,

  1. Thanks the President of the Turkish Inter-Parliamentary Group for his observations and cooperation;

  2. Notes that the trial of Ms. Zana, Mr. Dicle, Mr. Sadak and Mr. Dogan was finally reopened; is nevertheless alarmed at reports from trial observers suggesting that they may yet again be subject to an unfair trial and be deprived of their right to present their defence, the very abuse that gave rise to the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the first place;

  3. Is shocked that the Judge who presided the initial proceedings is also presiding over the current proceedings, particularly since he openly stated his conviction of the guilt of the accused; affirms that the principle of the presumption of innocence, as an essential element of the right to fair trial, must also apply in retrial proceedings;

  4. Urges the competent authorities to ensure that the retrial proceedings fully respect all fair trial guarantees and that Ms. Zana, Mr. Dicle, Mr. Dogan and Mr. Sadak may fully exercise their right to present their defence;

  5. Deeply regrets the decision of the Court not to grant bail to the four former MPs concerned, who have already spent seven years in prison owing to an unfair judgment; and considers that this is completely contrary to the spirit of the recommendations made by the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly;

  6. Reaffirms that the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 17 July 2001 warrants the immediate release of Leyla Zana, Orhan Dogan, Hatip Dicle and Selim Sadak; and urges the competent authorities once again to release them forthwith;

  7. Requests the Secretary General to convey this decision to the Turkish parliamentary and other competent authorities and to the Council of Europe;

  8. Requests the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians to continue examining this case and report to it at its next session to be held on the occasion of the 110th Assembly.

Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 109th IPU Assembly and related meetings in PDF format (file size 615K approximately). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.Get Acrobat Reader

HOME PAGEred cubeHUMAN RIGHTSred cubeMAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITYred cubeIPU STRUCTURE AND DOCUMENTS