Family punishment in Turkey: The case of Melek İpek

Family punishment in Turkey: The case of Melek İpek

Written by Panashe Marie Louise Mlambo

The recent arrest of Melek İpek, the 78-year-old mother of Akın İpek, a prominent Turkish businessman who has been purged from the country, has brought renewed attention to the practice of family punishment in Turkey. This concept, also known as Sippenhaft—a term originating in Nazi Germany—refers to penalising family members for the actions of a relative, particularly in authoritarian regimes. According to the Stockholm Centre for Freedom, Melek İpek was sentenced to over six years in prison for alleged ties to the Gülen Movement, which the Turkish government has designated as a terrorist organisation since 2015 (Stockholm Centre for Freedom, 2023, p. 1).

 

This is an example of the ongoing violations of the rule of law in Turkey, which mandates that all individuals and institutions, including lawmakers and leaders, are accountable to the same laws. This fundamental principle, which underpins democratic governance, continues to be undermined in Turkey, particularly with respect to freedom of speech and association (Amnesty International, 2022, p. 3).

 

This article analyses cases like that of Melek İpek, explaining how Turkey’s legal system propagates family punishments and their effects. It further examines various methods employed by the Turkish government, including blacklisting, arbitrary detention, passport revocation, and property confiscation, as forms of collective punishment that undermine the rule of law and individual rights.

Historical Background

Family punishment has roots in authoritarian practices throughout history. The term Sippenhaft was notably used during Nazi Germany to hold family members accountable for the crimes of an individual. In Turkey, this practice has resurfaced as a tactic to suppress dissent against President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s administration. The government has systematically targeted relatives of individuals associated with the Gülen Movement, aiming to deter opposition by instilling fear within families (Freedom House, 2023, p. 5).

The Turkish government uses the July 2016 coup attempt as justification for the imprisonment of anyone associated with suspected members of the movement. Anti-terrorism laws have been broadly interpreted to justify extensive crackdowns on dissent. For example, Melek İpek was convicted under these laws for “membership in a terrorist organisation,” reflecting a legal environment where mere association with disfavoured groups can lead to severe penalties. The vagueness of these laws raises significant concerns about due process and individual rights (Human Rights Watch, 2023, p. 7). Additionally, family members with no proven connection to any alleged crimes are frequently targeted, perpetuating a climate of fear and suppression.

Incidents of Family Punishments in Turkey

Melek İpek’s arrest is part of a broader pattern where family members of political dissidents face legal repercussions. Similarly, Enes Kanter Freedom, a former NBA player, has spoken out about the harassment his family faced, which led him to cut ties with them in 2016 (Kanter Freedom, 2016, p. 3). His criticism of the government also resulted in his youth camp in New York being targeted. Another example is journalist Can Dündar, known for exposing government misconduct. His wife faced travel restrictions after his reporting on sensitive issues, such as Turkish intelligence’s arms transfers to Syria (Dündar, 2016, p. 4). Likewise, Hakan Şükür, a former football star and vocal critic of Erdoğan, has seen his relatives harassed and subjected to legal challenges following his departure from Turkey (Freedom House, 2023, p. 8).

The Stockholm Centre for Freedom reports that over two million individuals in Turkey have been blacklisted, including alleged supporters of the Gülen Movement and members of the Kurdish political movement. This blacklisting serves as a punitive measure, circumventing due process and resulting in severe restrictions on daily life. For instance, disabled teenagers have reportedly been denied benefits solely because their fathers were blacklisted (Stockholm Centre for Freedom, 2023, p. 12).

As of July 2023, over 122,000 individuals have been sentenced for alleged links to the Gülen Movement, with 12,108 still in prison. Such measures highlight the expansive reach of the government’s punitive practices, which extend far beyond individuals to encompass their families (Amnesty International, 2022, p. 15).

Legal Framework and Implications

The Gülen Movement was officially designated as a terrorist organisation (Fethullah Terrorist Organisation – FETO) in 2016, enabling the government to arrest and detain individuals under anti-terrorism statutes. By July 2023, over 117,000 terrorism-related convictions had been recorded (United Kingdom Government, 2023, p. 9).

This legal framework permits arbitrary detention without due process for individuals suspected of links to the Gülen Movement. Family members of alleged dissidents, including spouses and children, are frequently detained to coerce compliance or silence dissent. The Turkish government has faced widespread criticism for using vague definitions of terrorism to justify these actions (Human Rights Watch, 2023, p. 11). However, a lack of international accountability has allowed such practices to persist.

The erosion of judicial independence in Turkey further exacerbates these issues. Judges and lawyers have been dismissed or imprisoned for defending dissenting voices, leading to a judiciary that enables politically motivated prosecutions and undermines fair trial rights (Amnesty International, 2022, p. 17).

The Consequences

The implications of Melek İpek’s case extend beyond her individual circumstances. By extending punitive measures to family members, the government effectively discourages dissent and creates a culture of fear. Vulnerable populations, such as the elderly and disabled, are disproportionately affected. For instance, elderly individuals like Melek İpek suffer health complications exacerbated by detention, while disabled individuals are denied state benefits due to familial affiliations (Stockholm Centre for Freedom, 2023, p. 20).

The international community, including organisations such as Amnesty International, has condemned Turkey’s human rights record. Reports highlight abuses linked to anti-terrorism laws and call for reforms to protect individual rights. However, meaningful action, such as imposing sanctions or initiating diplomatic interventions, remains limited (Amnesty International, 2022, p. 22).

Conclusion

Melek İpek’s arrest serves as a stark reminder of the Turkish government’s systematic use of family punishment as a tool for suppressing dissent. The legal framework surrounding her case reflects broader trends within Turkey’s authoritarian regime, where anti-terrorism laws are wielded to justify human rights violations and erode the rule of law. Addressing these systemic issues will be crucial for Turkey to restore individual freedoms and uphold democratic principles. The international community must take decisive action to hold the Turkish government accountable and advocate for the protection of human rights (Amnesty International, 2022, p. 25).

 

Reference List

  1. Stockholm Centre for Freedom. (2024). Family punishment in Turkey. Stockholm Centre for Freedom. Retrieved from https://stockholmcf.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Family-Punishment-in-Turkey.pdf
  2. Loeffel, R. (2012). Family punishment in Nazi Germany: Sippenhaft, terror and myth. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137021830
  3. UK Home Office. (2023). Country policy and information note: Gülenist movement, Turkey. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/turkey-country-policy-and-information-notes/475f9b93-76c5-4312-b918-68756604f8ed
  4. BBC News. (2016). Turkey coup attempt: US basketball star Enes Kanter disowns family. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37024429
  5. Middle East Eye. (n.d.). We are arrested: How one explosive story led Can Dündar to jail, exile and his life on stage. Retrieved from https://www.middleeasteye.net/discover/we-are-arrested-how-one-explosive-story-led-can-dundar-jail-exile-and-his-life-stage
  6. Nordic Monitor. (2021). Turkey issues 9 arrest warrants for top goal scorer who turned a critic of Erdoğan regime. Retrieved from https://nordicmonitor.com/2021/08/turkey-issues-9-arrest-warrants-for-top-goal-scorer-who-turned-a-critic-of-erdogan-regime/

Turkish authoritarianism continues to flout international law

Turkish authoritarianism continues to flout international law

The arrest of Orhan Artar, an internationally protected asylum seeker, highlights the growing trend of international repression practiced by Turkish leaders.

 

President Erdoğan has constructed a sophisticated apparatus of repression, reaching from domestic institutions to international arenas. This machinery has been activated at several pivotal moments: the Gezi Park protests, which revealed deep public discontent; the 2013 corruption probes, which threatened Erdoğan’s inner circle and were linked to Gülenist-aligned prosecutors; and the failed 2016 coup, widely seen by the government as the culmination of Gülenist infiltration. While Ankara blames the Gülen movement for the attempted coup, international observers have consistently dismissed this claim as politically motivated and unsubstantiated. Once allies, the movement and the ruling party are now fierce adversaries; the former has been designated a terrorist organisation by the Turkish state. Its alleged members have faced sweeping purges, arbitrary arrests, and extraterritorial targeting. The recent illegal deportation of Orhan Artar and his three children from Rwanda to Turkey illustrates the reach of this repression. Upon return, Mr. Artar was detained on suspicion of Gülenist ties, while his children were reportedly placed with relatives.

Who is Orhan Artar?

Orhan Artar is a father, husband, and educator.

In the aftermath of the 2016 coup attempt attributed to the Gülen movement, Turkish pressure prompted Pakistani officials to order the expulsion of 108 Turkish families. Among those affected was Orhan Artar, who, at the time, worked within a network of schools in Pakistan linked to the movement—an affiliation that drew official scrutiny. In response, the Artar family briefly went into hiding before registering for asylum with the UNHCR in Islamabad in 2017. This application was accepted which meant that: Orhan and his family could not be legally returned to a country where their safety and liberty would be threatened.

Despite the official protection offered, the family continued to feel unsafe in Pakistan as compatriots who had received similar legal protections were repatriated to Turkey. In 2018, Mr. Artar was charged in absentia in Turkey with an arrest warrant issued. The family sought refuge in Kenya where they remained until 2023. Here, the family parted ways as Mr. Artar did not have a valid passport; his wife and child went to claim asylum in Germany while he planned to meet them with the other three children later. Further complicating the issue, Mr. Artar’s wife eventually had her asylum claim rejected in May 2024. In spite of these difficulties, Mr. Artar planned to meet his wife and child in Germany, via Rwanda, this month. After travelling through Tanzania, Mr. Artar planned to fly to Belgium before finally reuniting with his family. Instead, Mr. Artar and his children were forcibly detained by Rwandan officials and forcibly deported to Turkey – where he currently awaits trial.

International Law

Seeking asylum is an inalienable human right protected under customary international law, human rights law, and treaty law. The principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning individuals to a country where they face persecution, is enshrined in international law through the 1951 Refugee Convention. Both Rwanda and Turkey are signatories to the Convention meaning that both Mr. Artar and his family should enjoy these protections. In deporting the Artar family, Rwanda is in contravention of international law. Furthermore, if Turkey’s actions result in persecution or torture, it too risks breaching its obligations under both refugee and human rights law.

Turkish Repression

Transnational repression has become a systematic weapon wielded against Turkish dissidents based abroad. The Artar case is far from unique: over 100 Turkish nationals based abroad have been forcibly returned since 2016. Turkish authorities level diplomatic demands of repatriation of citizens abroad, with varying degrees of success. For example, while Sweden has steadfastly refused to comply with these demands, other states have proven much more open to accede. Pakistan, Rwanda, and Kenya have facilitated the repatriation orders in violation of international law.

Extrajudicial kidnappings are another tool of the Turkish National Intelligence Organisation (MIT). Freedom House has reported that security forces brazenly carried out such an operation in Azerbaijan against Turkish businessman Uğur Demirok. Tajikistan has seen similar disappearances of at least two Turkish citizens who have since reappeared in Turkish prisons.

Broken Chalk

Broken Chalk stands with the international community in decrying the rise in transnational authoritarianism coming from Turkey. Orhan Artar is a symptom of the growing disdain exhibited by states towards international law. To stem the erosion of the international legal system, supranational organisations, states, and other stakeholders must address the rising tide of authoritarianism. Below are our demands to address the ongoing situation:

  1. Broken Chalk calls for the immediate release of Orhan Artar following his illegal repatriation and arbitrary detention.
    His continued imprisonment contravenes international refugee protections and the principle of non-refoulement. Turkey must release Mr. Artar and drop all charges linked to peaceful association or political affiliation.
  2. We call for an independent international investigation into the actions of both Rwandan and Turkish authorities.
    This investigation should examine the circumstances of Mr. Artar’s detention and deportation, the legality of Rwanda’s cooperation with Turkish demands, and any breaches of international human rights and refugee law.
  3. We urge the UNHCR and relevant UN Special Rapporteurs to publicly condemn this violation of international law.
    The UN Special Rapporteur on torture and the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants should formally request information from both governments and raise the case before the Human Rights Council.
  4. We demand EU Member States suspend deportations to Turkey of individuals affiliated with the Gülen movement.
    Until credible safeguards are in place to prevent arbitrary detention or torture, no individual should be returned to Turkey where they face a real risk of persecution.
  5. We emphasise the binding obligation which states have undertaken to uphold their non-refoulement obligations and resist diplomatic pressure to return Turkish dissidents.
    The use of asylum law must remain rooted in principle, not politics. Countries must resist bilateral pressure and prioritise international legal standards over appeasement.
  6. We condemn the continued inaction of the international community to establish stronger safeguards to prevent transnational repression.
    This includes creating accountability mechanisms for states that collaborate in cross-border targeting of dissidents, especially where asylum seekers and refugees are involved.

Silenced Erasure of the Kurdish Language in Turkey’s Education System

Introduction 

Education is a basic human right. It is a pivotal tool for both the individual and the collective. It provides a base for self-fulfilment, self-development, and a brighter future; moreover, it offers [marginalized] communities a medium to preserve their culture, thus language, practices, art, literature, and history. Schooling has become a means of socialization, cultural transmission, and identity formation. Given such functions, however, education may become a propagandistic tool, a medium for an end far away from ethical values. For instance, it may transmit unity messages through a revision of history, like in the case of some Cyprian schoolbooks i Furthermore, education reproduces economic, cultural, and social inequalities; it is a primary mechanism of the network of power used by the State to punish, discipline, and legitimize. This paper focuses on such aspects of Turkey’s education system. In particular, the essay deals with Kurdish linguistic discrimination in Turkish schooling through specific legislative measures. Kurdish is an Indo-European language, related to Persian, and belongs to a different linguistic family tree from Turkish. There are two primary dialects of Kurdish: Sorani and Kurmanj ii. It is the fortieth most spoken language worldwide and the first in Kurdistan, a geo-cultural region divided between four countries ii. 

Methodology 

The essay will start by explaining the history of the Kurdish people. It will mention the first settlements in the area, how Kurds lived under the Ottoman Empire, and the changes that First World War brought. Then, the paper will explore the life of the Kurdish population in Turkey post-Lausanne, and highlight the discriminatory legislative measures taken to ensure internal cohesion. Finally, the essay will explain the consequences of such “linguicide”iii on education.  

The paper is based on academic manuscripts, national newspaper articles, a qualitative interview, and blogs.  

This essay focuses exclusively on discrimination faced by the Kurdish population; however, it is important to mark how other Muslim minorities are negatively impacted by such nationalistic policies.  

 

A Look At The Past 

Kurdistan has the nickname of “invisible nationiv:” it is there, it exists, but it doesn’t have any tangible geo-political borders. This section will focus on such invisibility. 

Kurdish people have lived in Central Anatolia since the Middle Ages when the first tribe arrived in 1184v.Then, three centuries later, they founded the first large settlement named Kürtler, in proximity to modern-day Ankaravi When the Ottomans reached the region, they formed an alliance with Kurdish groups and the latter worked as local officials and informators during the Battle of Chaldiran. Due to their great involvement in belligerent actions, the Ottoman Empire rewarded the tribes. The Kurds benefitted from fiscal exceptions, and the recognition of a semi-autonomous status, entailing virtual independence and the maintenance of the Kurdish tribal organizative systemviiOttomans and Kurds’ relationship changed in the 1830s with the start of a centralization process, resulting in the weakening of the Kurdish semi-autonomous status and tribal system.  

 

During the First World War, Kurds’ dissatisfaction with the Empire resulted in a series of uprisings. The relationship with the Ottomans deteriorated as the Kurdish people wanted more autonomy and aimed at the creation of a Kurdish state. They fought the Ottomans encouraged by the British and the Russians who shared the idea of Kurdish independence. When the war ended, the Kurds should have received an independent state, according to the Treaty of Sevrès which promoted self-determination and autonomy for nationalities under the Ottomans. However, the Kurdish population was split into 4 States: Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkeyviii. 

Kurds in Turkey 

The Treaty of Lausanne officialised the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the partition of the Kurdish population. The new Turkish leader, Mustafa Atatürk promised to treat the Kurdish minority equal to the Turkish population. However, the Treaty itself recognized only non-Muslim minorities in Turkish territories: Greeks, Jews, and Armenians ix; as a result, the Kurdish population was left out, without any concrete protectionsxand, despite the promises,  the Turkish President promoted a process of assimilation and homogenization which entailed territorial reforms and the removal of the “Kurds race”xi. The government aimed at canceling any trace of multi-ethnicityxii as it represented a threat to internal unity. Inhabitants of the Dersim region refused the new policies and did not pay taxes; thus, it became Turkey’s “…most significant interior problem…”xiii.The government levied new laws to contain the threat. They involved displacement: Dersim kids were forced to attend schools outside their native region and Dersim authorities were free to resettle the residentsxiv. Moreover, in the Eastern part of the country, Turkish troops led a massacre that killed over 4000 civiliansxv.  

 

Kurdish: a forbidden language 

“New-born” Turkey made cultural homogenization and assimilation its goal. Everybody must be of Turkish heritage, and, in case this is not plausible, everybody must act like a Turk, marry a Turk, and speak like a Turk. In 1924, the Turkish government banned the Kurdish language, Kurdish dictionaries, and the words “Kurdistan” and “Kurds”xvi. The government also kept the schooling rate low in Kurdish regions in fear of future independence ideas and national consciousnessxvii. Turkish nation-building went through processes of forced standardization, cultural assimilation, and consequent domestic and international legislative measures to legitimize the subordination of non-Turkish languages. For instance, domestically, the Constitution proclaims Turkish as the mother tongue and the official language of the State; internationally, Turkey expressed doubts regarding Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which states that individuals belonging to minorities should not be refused the right to speak their language, perform cultural activities, and profess their religionxviii. Furthermore, it had some reservations regarding articles of the UN Convention Right of Child proclaiming that kids from minority groups have the right to preserve their cultural identityxix. Finally, the country refused to sign the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages which states that minorities have the right to learn and speak their first languagexx. 

 

Linguistic homogenization aims to awaken a sense of nation, identity, and community within people living in the same State. Such a strategy is implemented through education; thus, it is no surprise that Turkey follows a one-language instruction policy, prohibiting public schools from teaching Kurdish as a native language. As a matter of fact, Article forty-two of the Constitution states that “no language other than Turkish may be taught as a mother tongue to Turkish citizens at any institutions of training or education.” Moreover, in 1980, following the military coup, the government banned the usage of Kurdish in public and private life. Despite the prohibitions, teachers unofficially and secretively still used Kurdish in madrasah institutionsxxi. The ban on domestic usage would be lifted in 1991xxii. Turkey implemented positive education reforms in the following decades, attentive to minority rightsxxiii. For instance, the first Kurdish language class is organized at the University in Mardin. Moreover, fourth-grade-and-up schools offered Kurdish lessons as electivesxxiv.  

The status of the Kurdish language changed after the 2016 military coup when Kurdish media programs were terminated, and Kurdish cultural institutions, and NGOs were shut down. Furthermore, the government closed private schools teaching in Kurdish and language departments of universitiesxxv. Such legislative and governmental adversity towards the Kurdish language led to popular aggressions. In 2019, an elder couple was expelled from an hospital after they spoke Kurdish to each other; in 2020, several seasonal workers were killed because of “kurdophobia” a couple of years prior, an elementary school kid was beaten up for speaking his language with their family on the phone xxvi. 

 

Education, Employment and Language 

The consideration of the Kurdish language held by the Turkish State “…as a divisive, existential threat rather than an instrument of unity…”xxvii has terrible effects on the realm of education. 

Kurds do not have the right to learn their native language as a subject or employ it as a medium to study other educational topics. In some Eastern parts of Turkey, like Diyarbakir, parents oppose the governmental policies and encourage their children to “academically” learn Kurdish. For instance, a human-right activist from that area sent his child to a Zarokistan preschool xxviii. Moreover, in the Eastern and Southeastern parts of the country, where the majority of the Kurdish population resides, people still speak the vernacular at home. Researchers identified several issues connected to the erasure of the Kurdish language in schoolsxxix. Firstly, a linguistic -and legislative- barrier separated Turkish-speaking teachers and Kurdish-speaking pupils. They do not understand each other, forcing the former to stay quiet in class as they could not express themselves in the correct languagexxx. Secondly, Kurdish students usually learn how to read and write and develop literary skills, and comprehension later than their counterparts xxxi. They are generally made to fail and, thus, repeat the grade. Those who have to repeat several years tend to develop a negative view of schooling and drop outxxxii. According to Balkan and Cilasunxxxiii, Kurds have a lower rate of finishing high school studies than their Turkish counterparts, and even less probabilities of achieving a bachelor’s degree or higher education. Quitting school before completion leads to unemployment and poverty, hence “uneducated” people are employed as “low-skilled,” unspecialized workers. My interviewee identified two different job paths for Kurdish and Turkish people. The latter tend to work in more mentally draining fields; whereas, the former are employed in physical fields such as construction, and agriculture. Another disadvantage that Kurdish people face is their place of living as location correlates with employment: people living in urban areas experience better labour market outcomes. Turkish urban areas tend to be populated by Turks, whereas the Kurdish population tend to reside in rural locationsxxxiv. Education and location come together and created disadvantageous circumstances for the Kurdish people in the workplace Kurdish people tend to be unemployment longer than their Turkish counterparts xxxv.  

 

The subordination of the Kurdish language leads to catastrophic consequences in the educational dimension. As a matter of fact, such linguistic -and cultural- discrimination measures create a hostile learning environment, and the school becomes an oppression site, instead of a liberation force. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that “everyone has the right to education” and the Turkish Constitution declares that “no one shall be deprived of the right of education;” however, various factors interfere between Kurdish students and the achievement of education. The Turkish nation-building project stand on “othering” processes, thus on dividing citizens with Turkish heritage from citizens belonging to ethnic minorities by implementing strategies to standardize the former and forcing the latter to adjust their language and culture to the finely crafted norm. Ethnic minorities, including Kurdish people, hence, become an obstacle to a strong national sentiment, and education becomes a weapon, another mechanism through which dissolving multi-ethnicity by reproducing the language everybody must speak and the culture everybody must adhere to. Schooling, however, should not be an aggressive weapon, but rather an emancipation tool for the individual and the community. Kurdish people do not benefit from education and do not have the same access to higher studies as Turkish people. It is important to implement policies that will positively impact marginalized groups’ schooling rates which will, eventually, lead to a betterment in future opportunities.  

 

Conclusion 

The essay delved into linguistic discrimination towards Kurdish people in scholastic environments. Language represents a pivotal tool for creating internal cohesion and a shared identity, and history, thus, the emphasis of Turkish authorities on the realization of linguistic homologation within the national borders. However, the legislative measures taken to achieve such a goal negatively impact learning-age children. As a matter of fact, despite the prohibitions, families still prefer to communicate in Kurdish and kids do not understand Turkish when starting the first grade; as a result, a student with a Kurdish background will face more obstacles than their Turkish counterparts, leading them to develop a negative view of education and quitting school.  

It is pivotal to tackle this issue, internationally and domestically, to ensure that 1) Kurdish-heritage kids have the same opportunities as Turkish-heritage kids and 2) no erasure of the Kurdish language is carried out. 

REFERENCES

i Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction to Social and Cultural Anthropology. London: Plutopress, (1995) 2015. 

ii Hassanpour, Amir, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, and Michael Chyet. The Non-Education of Kurds: A Kurdish Perspective. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift Für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de L’Education 42 (4): 368. 1996 

iii Idem, 369. 

iv Torelli, Stefano. Kurdistan La Nazione Invisibile. Milano: Mondadori, 2017. 

v Cowen, Katie. The Kurdish Dilemma in Turkey. Washington Kurdish Institute. 2023. https://dckurd.org/2023/01/26/the-kurdish-dilemma-in-turkey-2/. 

 vi Ibid. 

vii McDowall, David. A Modern History of the Kurds. London: I.B. Tauris. 1997.  

viii Ali, Othman. The Kurds and the Lausanne Peace Negotiations, 1922-23. Middle Eastern Studies 33 (3): 521–34. 1997. 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4283891 

ix LoBianco, Joseph. The Cultural Dimension in the Educational Process (The case of Turkey). Maat for Peace, Development and Human Rights. 2016.  https://www.jstor.org/stable/3444908.

xi Cowen, Katie. The Kurdish Dilemma in Turkey. Washington Kurdish Institute. 2023. https://dckurd.org/2023/01/26/the-kurdish-dilemma-in-turkey-2/. 

xii Çevik, Esra. KURDISH LANGUAGE RIGHTS and MOTHER TONGUE in EDUCATION. Civil Rights Defenders, 2. 2019. 

https://crd.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/EUTH-Turkey-Kurdish-Language-Rights-Mother-Tongue-in-Education-Esra-Cevik.pdf. 

xiii ibid.  

 xiv Ibid.  

xv Cowen, Katie. The Kurdish Dilemma in Turkey. Washington Kurdish Institute. 2023. https://dckurd.org/2023/01/26/the-kurdish-dilemma-in-turkey-2/. 

xvi Ibid.  

xvii Çevik, Esra. KURDISH LANGUAGE RIGHTS and MOTHER TONGUE in EDUCATION. Civil Rights Defenders, 2. 2019. 

https://crd.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/EUTH-Turkey-Kurdish-Language-Rights-Mother-Tongue-in-Education-Esra-Cevik.pdf. 

xviii LoBianco, Joseph. The Cultural Dimension in the Educational Process (The case of Turkey). Maat for Peace, Development and Human Rights. 2016. 

xix Kaczorowski, Karol. Kurdish Language and Multicultural Education in Turkey. Ez Mafê Xwe Dizanim! I Know My Rights! – Manual on Human Rights Education and the Right to Mother Tongue Education, 57. 2016. 

https://www.academia.edu/48963803/Kurdish_language_and_multicultural_education_in_Turkey. 

xx Ibid.  

xxi Ibid.  

xxii Hassanpour, Amir, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, and Michael Chyet. The Non-Education of Kurds: A Kurdish Perspective. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift Für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de L’Education 42 (4): 371. 1996. 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3444908. 

xxiii Aydin, Hasan. Status of Education and Minorities Rights in Turkey. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. 2020. 

https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2020/12/20/status-of-education-and-minorities-rights-in-turkey/ 

xxiv Ibid.  

xxv Ibid.  

xxvi Editor. Suppression of Kurdish language in Turkey is reflection of general intolerance towards Kurds: community leader. 2021. https://stockholmcf.org/suppression-of-kurdish-language-in-turkey-is-reflection-of-general-intolerance-towards-kurds-community-leader/ 

xxviii Letsch, Constanze. In Turkey, Repression of the Kurdish Language Is Back, with No End in Sight. The Nation. 2017.  

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/in-turkey-repression-of-the-kurdish-language-is-back-with-no-end-in-sight/ 

xxix Çevik, Esra. KURDISH LANGUAGE RIGHTS and MOTHER TONGUE in EDUCATION. Civil Rights Defenders, 4.2019. 

https://crd.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/EUTH-Turkey-Kurdish-Language-Rights-Mother-Tongue-in-Education-Esra-Cevik.pdf. 

xxx ibid.  

xxxi Ibid.  

xxxii Ibid.  

xxxiii Balkan, Binnur and Seyit Mumin Cilasun. ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION IN THE TURKISH LABOR MARKET: EVIDENCE FROM SURVEY AND FIELD DATA. 2018.  

xxxiv Ibid. 

 xxxv Ibid.  

 

Photo by ‪Salah Darwish on Unsplash

Broken Chalk urges international response to the mass detentions in Türkiye

The human rights organization Broken Chalk is urging the international community to take action following the detention of over 200 individuals primarily university students by Turkish authorities during protests earlier this month.

The recent wave of detentions happened on May 6, 2025. It is particularly worrying that the detainees were not allowed access to a legal counsel and their families for the first 24 hours. The case details were not transparent either, leading to serious worrying from families and their legal representatives. Due process and transparency are missing in the detention process.

This latest operation also marks a continued effort to detain individuals alleged to be linked to the Hizmet Movement (or “FETÖ”, as referred to by Turkish authorities). Framed as a counter-terrorism effort, the Interior Minister Ali Yerlikaya shared a propagandistic video depicting routine activities by headscarved women as subversive acts. Multiple arrests were based on questionable grounds such as attending educational events, traveling abroad, or living with persons who were detained in earlier waves of arrests of Hizmet Movement affiliated persons. Notably, young female students were heavily targeted—some detained for cultural trips or mere associations. In one tragic case, a woman was arrested despite having lost her father to cancer while he was imprisoned under similar charges. It is clear that the Turkish authorities are using the term “terrorism” broadly, increasingly targeting civic or religious activity with this approach, and consequently, undermining rule of law and civil freedoms.

The arrests did not start on the 6th of May. Ever since the arrest of the Mayor of Istanbul on the 19th of March, 2025, the number of detentions has been increasing. President Erdogan is cracking down on the freedom of speech of the population, trying to drown the voice of the people who are questioning the arrest and the withdrawal of the bachelors diploma of Mr Imamoglu. It is important to note that the diploma is needed for signing up for the presidential candidacy. It is suspected that this was a deliberate move to make the Mayor of Istanbul disqualified early on from the presidential race. The Turkish population mobilised in big numbers but this also came at a cost, more than 2000 persons, have been detained and the number could be way higher.

Broken Chalk wishes to raise awareness of these events, especially to the clear violation of fundamental human rights such as the right to freedom of assembly and the right to due process. The way the arrests are conducted and the detention procedure is happening, it is clear that there is a lack of transparency, which undermines the trust in authorities and in general, the government.

Broken Chalk is calling on global leaders and human rights bodies to monitor the situation closely and pressure the Turkish government to respect civil liberties and the rule of law:

High Commissioner for Human Rights,
Secretary General of the Council of Europe,
Chairman of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention,
Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
Special Rapporteur on the Protection of Private Life,
Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression,
Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers and
Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Photo by Mathias Reding on Unsplash

References

 1. BBC, “Thousands turn out for Turkey protests after more than 1,400 arrests” March 26 2025, <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgz58rz3k8o> 

2.  Al-Monitor, ‘Over 400 detained in Istanbul’s May day protest” May 1 2025 <https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2025/05/over-400-detained-istanbuls-may-day-protest-turkey-restricts-transit>

Arrest of Turkish-Brazilian Businessman in Brazil Raises Human Rights Concerns

Introduction

On May 1, 2025, Turkish-Brazilian dual national Mustafa Göktepe was arrested in São Paulo, Brazil, following an extradition request from the Turkish government over alleged links to the Gülen movement.

Background

Mustafa Göktepe, 47, has resided in Brazil for approximately two decades and became a naturalised citizen in 2012. He is married to a Brazilian woman and has two daughters, aged 8 and 13, both born in Brazil. Göktepe is a prominent figure in the Turkish-Brazilian community, operating a chain of Turkish restaurants that employ over 100 individuals. He also serves as the president of the Institute for Intercultural Dialogue (Instituto Pelo Dialogo Intercultural), a Brazilian NGO dedicated to promoting intercultural dialogue. He also worked as a computer teacher in Türkiye at a school known as Gülen School.

Legal Proceedings

Justice Flávio Dino of Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court (STF) ordered the arrest, which is provisional pending the court’s decision on the extradition request. The Turkish government accuses Göktepe of having links to the Gülen movement, which it classifies as a terrorist organisation. However, the movement denies involvement in any terrorist activities.

Ankara accuses Gülen, a U.S.-based Muslim cleric, of orchestrating the July 15, 2016, coup attempt, and has declared his movement a terrorist organisation. He denies any connection with the abortive putsch.

At its peak, the Gulen movement operated schools in 160 countries, from Afghanistan to the United States. Since the coup attempt, Türkiye has pressured allies to shut down Gulen-run establishments.

 

Human Rights Considerations

The case raises significant human rights concerns, particularly regarding the potential for political persecution. Given Göktepe’s long-standing residence in Brazil, his Brazilian citizenship, and his family’s ties to the country, extradition could have profound implications for his rights and well-being. It is crucial that Brazilian authorities thoroughly assess the extradition request, ensuring compliance with international human rights standards and protections against political persecution.

 

Since 2015, hundreds of men alleged by the Turkish authorities to have links with the Gülen movement, living in countries around the world, have been arbitrarily detained and forcibly returned to Türkiye. All these people are faced with very serious human rights violations in Türkiye.

 

Conclusion

The arrest of Mustafa Göktepe underscores the complexities at the intersection of international law, human rights, and political considerations. As the Brazilian judiciary deliberates on the extradition request, it is imperative to uphold the principles of justice and human rights, ensuring that individuals are not subjected to political persecution under the guise of legal proceedings.

 

References

​​Turkish Minute. (2025, May 3). Turkish businessman arrested in Brazil, faces extradition to Turkey over Gülen links. https://www.turkishminute.com/2025/05/03/turkish-businessman-arrested-in-brazil-faces-extradition-to-turkey-over-gulen-links/ ​

 

Six Turks arrested in Kosovo over Gulen links extradited to Turkey – Anadolu https://www.reuters.com/article/world/six-turks-arrested-in-kosovo-over-gulen-links-extradited-to-turkey-anadolu-idUSKBN1H5213/

 

Press Release: Enforced Disappearances of Educationist Orhan Inandim https://www.reuters.com/article/world/six-turks-arrested-in-kosovo-over-gulen-links-extradited-to-turkey-anadolu-idUSKBN1H5213/

Freedom of expression in Turkey: Lawyers and Arrests: Dilek Ekmekçi and others

By Panashe Marie Louise Mlambo

Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right that protects the ability to express oneself without unjustified restrictions. It is normally undisputed when dealing with social media presence when individuals share their opinions without erroneous implications. However, in Turkey, despite the Constitution providing for freedom of speech, many laws and legislations have been enacted, and amendments have been made to undermine the very principle of freedom of expression. This article will provide an analysis of freedom of speech and the legal system in Turkey and take a look at the charges against different lawyers in the context of International law, Turkish Law, and countries near it, using the 2024 case of Dilek Ekmekçi as the case study. 


The Arrests of Lawyers

A lawyer named Dilek Ekmekçi was released from prison on October 22, 2024, only to be promptly detained again by police, reflecting the ongoing repression faced by legal professionals in Turkey. This incident follows a troubling trend highlighted by the Court of Cassation’s ruling on September 18, 2020, which upheld the sentences of 14 human rights lawyers from the People’s Law Office, , who were convicted on similar charges. The crackdown continued with the recent arrest of Naim Eminoğlu and Doğa İncesu on July 2, 2024, both prominent members of the Progressive Lawyers Association, accused of being part of the Gülen Movement.  In January 2024, a staggering sentence of over 125 years was handed down to 19 lawyers,  further illustrating the Turkish government’s aggressive stance against those perceived as dissenters. These cases underscore the precarious situation for lawyers in Turkey, where legal actions are increasingly viewed as tools for political suppression rather than justice.


The law against the people

Under The Social Media Law (2020), the Turkish government can restrict and monitor any social media interactions and online free speech if necessary  and this is one of the ways in which all these lawyers mentioned above had their data used for a case to be made against them. Coupled with Turkey’s Anti-Terror Law (Law No. 3713), which penalises individuals who disclose or publish the identity of officials on anti-terrorist duties or who identify such persons as targets, this is used broadly, and in most cases of online discourse, the different individuals are arrested for incitement and spreading of terrorism rhetoric.  


In addition to the above, law enforcement usually limits freedom of speech with Article 125 of the Penal Code, which criminalises defamation and slander. In 90% of the cases above, the three legislations are cited together to justify the limitation of freedom of speech and arrest individuals who use online platforms to share their opinions on fraud, murder, and many more. Recent developments, such as the passing of the controversial “disinformation law” in October 2022, exemplify this trend by criminalising the dissemination of false information, which is determined by the government. 


As can be deduced from the above cases and legal frameworks in Turkey, the country’s laws are against international laws of freedom of speech, particularly breaches Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which guarantees the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information without interference by public authority.  The disinformation law also violates Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which protects the right to seek, receive, and impart information.  


In 2021, the ECHR ruled that Turkey violated freedom of expression rights in the case of Vedat Şorli, who faced criminal charges and pre-trial detention for criticising the president on social media.  The ECHR concluded that this conviction represented unjustified interference with Şorli’s freedom of speech and in a 2014 case, journalists Ahmet Şık and Nedim Şener were detained as part of the OdaTV investigation after publishing material critical of government-linked entities. The ECHR ruled that their detention violated both their rights to a fair trial and freedom of expression. 


Despite these findings, he Turkish government continues utilising the legal frameworks to arrest and detain different individuals who use social media to criticise the government. 

Lawyer Dilek Ekmekçi

The case of Dilek Ekmekçi highlights the ongoing challenges to judicial independence and freedom of expression in Turkey. Ekmekçi, after accusing prominent leaders of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) of being involved in the assassination of former Grey Wolves leader Sinan Ateş, was arrested; her allegations targeted high-ranking MHP members, including figures close to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan; she was charged with defamation and insulting public officials through social media posts. Despite an initial release, the prosecutor’s appeal led to her re-arrest by the Istanbul 25th High Criminal Court. 


In her court statements, Ekmekçi claimed that her detention was due to a fabricated indictment and referenced other government actions intended to undermine her legal standing. She cited instances where she was pressured, including through threats of psychiatric evaluations and multiple lawsuits. Ekmekçi’s defence argued that her prosecution was a retaliatory measure aimed at silencing her criticism, categorising the case as a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), often used to intimidate and suppress dissenting voices. 


The state of freedom of expression 

The state of freedom of expression in Turkey has reached a critical juncture, characterized by systemic repression and legal frameworks that stifle dissent. Recent legislative measures, such as the controversial “disinformation law” passed in October 2022, exemplify the government’s tightening grip on free speech, allowing for the criminalisation of information deemed false and imposing severe penalties for those who share it (Amnesty International, 2022).  


This law has been criticised for creating a chilling effect, deterring individuals from expressing their opinions, or engaging in public discourse for fear of prosecution. Additionally, the Turkish judiciary has increasingly become an instrument of political control, often disregarding rulings from the European Court of Human Rights that emphasise the protection of free expression (English PEN).  


The cases of lawyers like Dilek Ekmekçi, who faced charges under anti-terrorism laws for their advocacy work, highlight the precarious position of legal professionals in Turkey. As the government continues to utilise vague legal definitions to target critics, it undermines not only national constitutional guarantees but also international human rights obligations, effectively rendering freedom of expression nearly non-existent in Turkey’s current political climate (Freedom House).


Conclusion

It is evident that the Turkish government’s restructuring of the legal system aims to suppress all criticism of its officials and minimise freedom of expression. The excessive measures employed to address issues such as slander against officials do not resonate with the general public, and the blatant disregard for international law and democratic principles raises serious concerns that must be addressed. The legal profession, much like activism, journalism, and other sectors of society, deserves to uphold its freedom of expression. The direct targeting of the judicial system, evidenced by the significant number of lawyers arrested in less than a decade, signals a broader issue within the system and undermines the Turkish government’s claims of democracy. The case of Dilek Ekmekçi is not an isolated incident; rather, it reflects a troubling pattern of similar cases occurring throughout the country.

Featured Photo by Wesley Tingey on Unsplash

References

 i       Front Line Defenders. (n.d.). 14 lawyers arrested and charged. Front Line Defenders. Retrieved from https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/14-lawyers-arrested-and-charged 

 ii       International Observatory for Lawyers in Danger. (n.d.). Joint statement of international protest condemning Turkey’s arrest of Naim Eminoglu and Doğa İncesu of the Progressive Lawyers Association (CHD). International Observatory for Lawyers in Danger. Retrieved from https://protect-lawyers.org/en/joint-statement-of-international-protest-condemning-turkeys-arrest-of-naim-eminoglu-and-doga-incesu-of-the-progressive-lawyers-association-chd-2/ 

 iii      The Arrested Lawyers Initiative. (2024). Ankara appeal court defies ECHR, sentences 19 lawyers to 125 years. The Arrested Lawyers Initiative. Retrieved from https://arrestedlawyers.org/2024/01/31/ankara-appeal-court-defies-echr-sentences-19-lawyers-to-125-years/ 

 iv      Kandemir, E., & Hudson, M. (2022). Turkey’s new media law is bad news, but don’t report it. Brookings Institution. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/articles/turkeys-new-media-law-is-bad-news-but-dont-report-it/ 

 v      Republic of Turkey. (1991). Anti-Terrorism Law (Law No. 3713) on crimes committed by terrorist organizations. Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkey.

 vi      United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). United Nations Treaty Collection.  

  European Court of Human Rights. (2021). Şorli v. Turkey. European Court of Human Rights.

 vii    JURIST. (2021). Europe rights court: Turkey liable for freedom of expression right violation. JURIST News. Retrieved from https://www.jurist.org/news/2021/10/europe-rights-court-turkey-liable-for-freedom-of-expression-right-violation/ 

 ix    Turkish Minute. (2024). Lawyer arrested after accusing Erdogan, far-right ally of ex-Grey Wolves leader’s murder. Turkish Minute. Retrieved from https://www.turkishminute.com/2024/09/02/lawyer-arrested-after-accusing-erdogan-far-right-ally-ex-grey-wolves-leaders-murder/ 

 x    Amnesty International. (2022). Turkey: New disinformation law poses serious threat to freedom of expression. Amnesty International.  

 xi      English PEN. (n.d.). Turkey: Freedom of expression in jeopardy. English PEN. 



Seven Turkish Citizens Abducted in Kenya Press RELEASE

Panashe Mlambo and The Journalism Department.

Broken Chalk is deeply concerned about the proposed amendments to the Iraqi Personal Status Law No. 188 of 1959 and appeals to the government to safeguard the interests of children. If enacted, these amendments would pose a significant threat to the rights of women and children in Iraq.The proposed changes aim to reinstate religious laws over the current constitutional laws that govern Iraq. A particularly alarming aspect of this proposal is that it would allow for the legal marriage of girls to be 9 years and boys 15 years. Currently, Iraqi law prohibits marriage under the age of 18, ensuring a level of protection for children.The enactment of this proposal would have far-reaching consequences, not only economically and politically but also in terms of education. Every child has the right to education and to be treated as a child. As a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Iraq is obligated to protect the interests of its children. This proposal represents a serious deviation from Iraq’s commitments under the UN Convention and would likely result in grave human rights violations.Research has consistently shown that child marriages reduce educational opportunities, increase school dropout rates, and restrict the freedom of children. Moreover, this law would likely exacerbate gender-based violence and further diminish accountability for perpetrators who target children.Broken Chalk strongly urges the Iraqi government to safeguard the interests of children and to protect their childhood and freedom by rejecting this harmful proposal.

Seven-Turkish-Citizens-Abducted-in-Kenya-Press-RELEASE

Interview with Mr Hakan Kaplankaya on the importance of the ECtHR judgement in YÜKSEL YALÇINKAYA v TÜRKİYE

ECHR courtroom - Copyright AP Photo Euronews.com

By Maria Popova

I had an interview with Mr Hakan Kaplankaya. Together, we discussed the ECtHR decision Yuksel Yalcinkaya vs Turkey.

Hakan Kaplankaya is a legal advisor and former Turkish diplomat. His research and consultancy services focus mainly on human rights advocacy and international commercial arbitration. During his tenure at the Ministry, he worked at the NATO Desk. He is also a board member of InstiduDE, Belgium’s research-driven NGO.

  1. Mr Kaplankaya, can you elaborate for us what the judgement is about and its importance?

The Turkish government launched a crackdown on the Gulen Movement (GM), especially after the graft probes in December 2013, which escalated to an annihilation campaign after the failed coup on July 15, 2016. GM was designated as a terrorist organisation, which paved the way to widespread criminal prosecutions for membership in a terrorist group against members, followers, and sympathisers of the movement. Within criminal proceedings, routine activities were treated as evidence of terrorist organisation membership, such as subscribing to a daily, enrolling children in GM-affiliated schools, depositing money in Bankasya, using the Bylock mobile chat application, joining GM-related associations, and participating in religious talks.

Over 600,000 people were prosecuted, with more than 300,000 detained and over 100,000 convicted on terrorism charges. The ECtHR’s judgment is a long-awaited response to this travesty of justice.

Another notable aspect of these persecutions and the judgment is that this judicial practice has risen to crimes against humanity. As fellows of the Institute for Diplomacy and Economy, we drafted a report on this issue two years ago. In various opinions, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) has concluded that the arbitrary detentions faced by numerous Turkish individuals linked to this group since the coup attempt follow a systematic and widespread pattern, possibly amounting to crimes against humanity. The international community should give due consideration and examination to this dimension.

  1. The Grand Chamber judgment in the case highlighted violations of Article 7 (no punishment without law) and Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) of the ECHR. Could you explain how the Court found that the applicant’s conviction, based on the use of the ByLock application, departed from the requirements of national law and was contrary to the object and purpose of Article 7, which aims to provide safeguards against arbitrary prosecution, conviction, and punishment?

The Court observed that the applicant’s conviction for membership in a terrorist organisation was primarily based on his alleged use of the ByLock messaging application, while other evidence, such as his account at Bank Asya and his membership in a trade union and an association, served as corroborative sources. The mere use of the ByLock application, regardless of the content of the messages or the recipients’ identities, was deemed sufficient in domestic law to establish all the elements of the crime of belonging to an armed terrorist organisation.

Interview with Mr Hakan Kaplankaya on the importance of the ECtHR judgement in YÜKSEL YALÇINKAYA v TÜRKİYE App no 15669/20 (ECtHR, 26 September 2023)

The Court acknowledged that the use of the ByLock application could indicate some connection with the Gülen Group but disagreed with the domestic courts’ conclusion, which was merely downloading and using the application pointed out the complete submission to the organisation and its hierarchy. Instead, the Court found that relying on the mere use of ByLock alone to establish the elements of the offence was an unforeseeable and expansive interpretation of anti-terror legislation. This interpretation essentially created an almost automatic presumption of guilt based solely on ByLock usage, making it extremely difficult for the applicant to prove his innocence.

Without examining the presence of ‘knowledge’ and ‘intent,’ which are requirements in the legal definition of the offence under domestic law, the Court observed that objective liability was effectively attached to the use of ByLock. This interpretation by the domestic courts effectively bypassed the essential, particularly mental, element of the offence and treated it as a strict liability offence, thus deviating from the established requirements in domestic law. Consequently, the Court ruled that there had been a violation of Article 7 of the Convention.

  1. The judgment identifies procedural shortcomings in the criminal proceedings against Mr Yalçınkaya, particularly regarding his access to and ability to effectively challenge the ByLock evidence, breaching his right to a fair trial under Article 6. Can you elaborate on the specific failures in the courts’ handling of the ByLock evidence and how these shortcomings undermined the applicant’s opportunity to challenge the proof effectively, as outlined by the Court?

Regarding Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the Court examined whether the applicant, who faced non-disclosure of crucial ByLock data, was given adequate procedural safeguards and whether the applicant was afforded a suitable opportunity to prepare his defence.

The Court criticised the silence of domestic courts concerning their rejection of the applicant’s request for Bylock raw data, as well as the applicant’s substantiated concerns about the reliability of the evidence. The refusal of the applicant’s request to independently examine the raw data to verify its content and integrity was also noted. The Court emphasized that proceedings should have allowed the applicant to fully comment on the decrypted material, ensuring a “fair balance” between the parties.

In conclusion, the Court found insufficient safeguards for the applicant to challenge the evidence effectively and on equal footing with the prosecution. The failure of domestic courts to address the applicant’s requests and objections raised doubts that they were impervious to the defence arguments. The Court ruled that the applicant was not genuinely ‘heard,’ concluding that the criminal proceedings fell short of a fair trial, breaching Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

  1. The Court held that Türkiye must take general measures to address systemic problems, particularly concerning the Turkish judiciary’s approach to using ByLock. As a legal expert, what specific measures do you believe would be necessary to rectify the identified systemic problems and ensure that future cases involving digital evidence, like ByLock, comply with the requirements of the ECHR, particularly in safeguarding individuals against arbitrary consequences and upholding the principles of a fair trial?

The Court highlighted the systemic nature of the issue, with over 8,000 similar cases and the potential for around one hundred thousand more cases from Turkey to reach the European Court. To address this, Turkey needs to implement general measures for resolution. Although the anti-terror legislation has faced criticism for its broad interpretative potential, mainly from scholars, the Venice Commission, and some European Court judgments, I believe the core problem lies in the arbitrary interpretation by the Turkish judiciary rather than the legislation’s wording. Despite Yalçınkaya reflecting the Court’s stance on this interpretation, there is still room for legislative amendment. However, the most immediate solution would be a jurisprudential change, with the Turkish judiciary aligning itself with the Yalçınkaya judgment, refraining from incriminating people for ordinary, non-criminal activities. Unfortunately, four months after the release of this judgment, Turkish courts have not given a clear signal that they have aligned with it.

Reopening cases in Turkey that have already been presented to the European Court could present a viable solution. Although Turkish criminal procedure permits the reopening of a case if the European Court identifies a violation, this right is currently not extended to similar cases. Nevertheless, a recent ruling by the Turkish Constitutional Court lends support to this potential solution. Consequently, a legal amendment would be beneficial to address and clarify this issue explicitly. Unfortunately, I am unaware of any instance where a domestic court has approved reopening a case similar to Yalcinkaya.

Following the Yalcinkaya case, individuals convicted of terrorism charges based on their alleged membership in the GM should be acquitted. The Bylock evidence, riddled with numerous shortcomings, was examined by the Strasbourg Court, which criticised the Turkish court’s flawed examination without explicitly affirming its evidentiary value. However, given the significant deficiencies in the Bylock evidence, it becomes untenable for any impartial court to accept it as credible. Moreover, the Court identified a more substantial issue, emphasising a violation of Article 7. Thus, the result should be an acquittal.

Bas du formulaire

Interview with Mr Hakan Kaplankaya ECtHR YÜKSEL YALÇINKAYA v TÜRKİYE By Maria Popova
  1. Given the historical significance outlined in the Yalçınkaya judgment and its impact on Article 7 violations, can you elaborate on the specific legal principles related to the “legality of crimes and punishments” that make an Article 7 violation so severe and why the ECHR has been cautious in finding such violations for its member states over the years?”

The “No punishment without law” principle is a fundamental legal tenet. In societies governed by the rule of law, the violation of this principle is not encountered. The recent judgment marks the sixtieth violation ruling by the Court in its history. The incrimination of hundreds of thousands of people in contravention of this principle is profoundly shocking. Witnessing such a grave systemic violation is, in my view, a source of shame for all Europeans.

  1. The Yalçınkaya decision highlights a systemic issue with over 8,000 pending cases of a similar nature and suggests the potential for over 100,000 more cases based on ByLock usage. How do you think non-compliance with the Yalçınkaya decision could impact Turkey’s judicial system and its international standing, and what steps should the authorities, particularly the Constitutional Court, take to address this issue promptly?

As stated in the judgment, it is binding on the Turkish judiciary. Therefore, the Turkish Constitutional Court and other superior courts should align with it. Failure to do so may result in the European Court issuing violation judgments for similar cases and potential future applications. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe will monitor the execution of the judgment, involving a political and diplomatic process. Significantly, according to the Turkish Constitution, the decisions of the European Court are binding, and I hope that they will eventually be implemented in Turkey by Turkish authorities.

Current issues in Turkish prisons submitted to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture

https://i.duvarenglish.com/2/814/458/storage/files/images/2021/05/19/hapishane-l9BQ_cover.jpg.webp

By
Carolina Silvestre, Dimitrios Chasouras, María Núñez Fontán, Olimpia Guidi, Samantha Orozco, Vahit Uzunlar

Through this report, our organisation aims to address current issues and promote good practices in prison management, focusing on Turkey. In alignment with the objectives set forth by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), this thematic report endeavours to shed light on the prevailing challenges and commendable practices within the Turkish prison system. The report considers the OHCHR’s delineation of eight crucial focus areas, which serves as the foundational framework for our comprehensive assessment of Turkey’s prison management practices through “Call 9.” As a critical contribution to the discourse on human rights and prison conditions, this report aims to offer valuable insights and recommendations for enhancing the well-being and dignity of detainees within Turkey’s correctional facilities, thereby advancing the cause of human rights on a global scale.


For the comprehensive evaluation of prison management in Turkey, “Broken Chalk” has laid down ten critical points of focus that underpin the core objectives of this report. These ten key areas encompass issues of profound importance in understanding prison conditions and human rights in the Turkish correctional system. These points are as follows:

  1. Babies in Turkish Prisons: The presence of infants in correctional facilities raises concerns about the rights and well-being of both the child and the incarcerated parent.
  2. Sick Prisoners in Turkey: Ensuring adequate healthcare and treatment for ill inmates is fundamental to their human rights.
  3. Pregnant Women in Turkish Prisons: The unique needs of expectant mothers behind bars require special attention and care.
  4. Deaths Due to COVID-19 in Turkish Prisons: In light of the global pandemic, examining the impact of COVID-19 on prison populations is of utmost importance.
  5. Deaths Due to Sickness in Turkish Prisons: Understanding the circumstances leading to deaths within prisons is essential to addressing systemic issues.
  6. Parole Right Violations in Turkish Prisons: Ensuring prisoners’ rights to parole are respected and upheld is critical in fair and just incarceration.
  7. Allegations of Torture and Ill-Treatment in Turkish Prisons: Investigating claims of torture and ill-treatment is critical for upholding human rights and international standards.
  8. Exceeding Capacity in Turkish Prisons: Overcrowding poses significant challenges to the well-being of inmates, and its implications are central to this report.
  9. Denial of the Right to Defence in Turkish Prisons: Ensuring access to legal representation and due process is pivotal in safeguarding the rights of those incarcerated.
  10. Access to Health Services in Turkish Prisons: Adequate healthcare services are a fundamental human right for those within the prison system.

    Each of these points has been included in the report to shed light on specific areas of concern within the Turkish prison system, with the ultimate goal of improving conditions, safeguarding human rights, and contributing to international discourse on the subject.
9A-Current-issues-and-good-practices-in-prison-management-–-Thematic-report-of-the-Special-Rapporteur-on-TortureDownload

Unveiling Human Rights Violations: The Targeting of Gülen Movement Followers in Turkey

Sümeyye Tercanoğlu

By Anna Moneta

In October 2023, Sümeyye Tercanoğlu and her husband, a Turkish Gulen teacher, faced conviction for suspected affiliation with the Gulen movement. The allegations centred around their purported use of ByLock, a phone application believed by the government to be a platform for Gulen movement supporters engaging in secret communication since the failed coup attempt in 2016. It’s essential to note that no concrete evidence supports these allegations. The Gulen movement, led by an influential Islamic cleric, aims to provide devout Muslims with the necessary secular education for success in contemporary society while also emphasizing the importance of traditional religious teachings. The movement promotes a tolerant form of Islam, highlighting values such as altruism, modesty, hard work, and education (Pew Research Center, 2010). The Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been actively targeting followers of the Gülen movement since the corruption investigations of December 17-25, 2013. The government’s actions against the Gülen movement have raised concerns about human rights violations and the erosion of democratic principles.

taken from https://polatlipostasicom.teimg.com/crop/1280×720/polatlipostasi-com/uploads/2023/10/zarif-sumeyye-tercanoglu-neden-tutuklandi.png

Upon Sümeyye Tercanoğlu’s arrest, a deeply distressing situation unfolded. She was separated from her 4-month-old child, who, since the day of the arrest, had not been breastfed and lacked access to his mother’s breast milk—crucial for his healthy growth. Legislator Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu, known for his human rights advocacy and affiliation with the Green Left Party (YSP), raised concerns about the plight of pregnant women or mothers with infants, asserting that such separations occur on a near-daily basis. He specifically called for the release of Sümeyye Tercanoğlu, shedding light on the human rights implications of these incidents.

Simultaneously, the European Court of Human Rights issued a significant judgment in the case of Yüksel Yalçınkaya v. Türkiye, holding violations of Article 7 (no punishment without law), Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial), and Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Much like the case of Sümeyye Tercanoğlu, Mr. Yalçınkaya’s conviction was significantly based on the use of the encrypted messaging application ByLock.

The judgment underscored that the Turkish judiciary’s uniform and global approach to ByLock evidence did not comply with national law or the object and purpose of Article 7, designed to safeguard against arbitrary prosecution, conviction, and punishment. Procedural shortcomings in criminal proceedings, specifically regarding access to and compelling challenge of ByLock evidence, were also noted, breaching the right to a fair trial under Article 6. This systemic problem has broader implications, with approximately 8,500 applications on the Court’s docket involving similar complaints under Articles 7 and/or 6 of the Convention. Under Article 46, the ECHR mandated that Turkey implement general measures to address these systemic problems, particularly concerning the Turkish judiciary’s approach to ByLock evidence. This underscores the urgent need for Turkey to address the human rights violations associated with convictions based on ByLock usage.

Bibliography

Liu, J. (2010) Gülen movement, Pew Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2010/09/15/muslim-networks-and-movements-in-western-europe-gulen-movement/. Last visited November 13th 2023.

European Court of Human Rights. (2023) Judgment concerning Türkiye, ECHR. Available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/w/grand-chamber-judgment-concerning-turkiye. Last visited November 13th 2023.

Yüksel Yalçinkaya v. Türkiye. (2023). European Court of Human Rights. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-227636%22]}. Last visited November 13th 2023.