24 January 2002

1. "Turkey Seeks to Quell Kurd Language Demands; 17 Held", in a move likely to further jeopardize Turkey's hopes of joining the European Union, authorities imprisoned 17 students Tuesday as a crackdown continued against Kurds demanding the right to study their own language.

2. "Education in mother tongue is a demand for democracy", demand of education in mother tongue is a demand for democratisation in Turkey. In this respect it interests not only Kurds but everybody living in Turkey and yearning for democracy. Therefore it should be reclaimed by democracy forces. In fact it can be a step towards democracy."

3. "The Kurdish Question: a priority for the new political agenda organised", a report on the meeting The Kurdish Question - a priority for the new political agenda organised by Liberation and hosted by Jeremy Corbyn MP in the House of Commons on 15 January 2002.

4. "Pearson: Turks seek more democracy", the Turkish nation wanted more democracy and is seeking the government to improve the battered human rights image of the country, a top American official said Wednesday.

5. "These cannot be called adaptation laws", articles 312 and 159 are being amended in order to achieve harmonization with the EU. If the bill gets passed in its existing form it cannot serve any useful purpose.

6. "Costs of the bill of decision of AIHM for Turkey is high", the amount of financial indemnity that Turkey gave as a result of the decisions of Human Rights Court of Europe (AIHM) has reached to $ 11 million, said the Anatolia news agency on Wednesday.

1. - The Los Angeles Times - "Turkey Seeks to Quell Kurd Language Demands; 17 Held":

ANKARA

In a move likely to further jeopardize Turkey's hopes of joining the European Union, authorities imprisoned 17 students Tuesday as a crackdown continued against Kurds demanding the right to study their own language.

The students were accused by a special state security court of "promoting separatism and inciting racial hatred" by signing a petition calling on their local university to introduce a course on the Kurdish language. They were jailed pending trial in the largely Kurdish province of Malatya in eastern Turkey and face a minimum sentence of three years in prison if found guilty.

The students were acting in concert with about 11,000 ethnic Kurdish students, their families and sympathizers across Turkey who have signed petitions during the last two months in a bid to end constitutional bans on Kurdish language education. Education in Kurdish is forbidden under the Turkish Constitution, and Education Minister Metin Bostancioglu reaffirmed the government's position against Kurdish language courses Tuesday.

The government is under pressure from the European Union to offer ethnic Kurds the right to express themselves freely in their own language as a precondition for Turkey's entry into the economic bloc.

Use of the Kurdish language was banned during military rule in 1980 and has emerged as the main political battleground between Kurdish nationalists and the Turkish government.

The ban on using Kurdish in public places was eased in 1991, but restrictions on broadcasting, publication and education continue to be enforced. Turkish authorities fear that granting such broader language rights would be followed by further demands for autonomy from the country's estimated 12 million ethnic Kurds and the establishment of an independent Kurdish state in the largely Kurdish southeastern provinces.

Turkey's three-party coalition government led by Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit charges that the Kurdish language campaign, which began in November, is being orchestrated by the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, to rekindle separatism.

Abdurrahman Demir, a 20-year-old student at Dicle University in the largely Kurdish province of Diyarbakir, said in a recent interview that security forces arrested him last month after he joined the Kurdish language campaign.

"I was stripped naked and beaten by security forces until I signed a confession saying that I had been acting under orders from the PKK," he said.

Demir signed the confession and is awaiting trial on charges of promoting separatism.

Not all students who have signed the petition have been jailed, but many of them have been expelled by their universities.

Hopes that Turkey would work toward accommodating Kurdish demands rose after the 1999 capture of PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan. A Turkish court sentenced Ocalan to death by hanging the same year, but the government stayed his execution pending a review by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France. In return, Ocalan called off the PKK's 15-year armed campaign for an independent homeland.

Ocalan, who is the sole inmate of an island prison off the coast of Istanbul, now says that lifting bans on Kurdish language education and broadcasting will satisfy the Kurds' demands for more cultural rights. However, some of his former followers now regard him as a traitor to the cause.

The Ankara government has brushed aside Ocalan's overtures as a ploy to place the Kurdish issue on an international platform in the context of Turkey's bid to join the European Union.

Turkey's parliament passed legislation in October that eased bans on Kurdish language broadcasting but left the education ban in force. Despite the new law, at least two radio stations in Diyarbakir province and the southern Mediterranean port of Mersin received heavy fines in recent months for airing Kurdish songs.

2. - Kurdish Observer - "Education in mother tongue is a demand for democracy":

Demand of education in mother tongue is a demand for democratisation in Turkey. In this respect it interests not only Kurds but everybody living in Turkey and yearning for democracy. Therefore it should be reclaimed by democracy forces. In fact it can be a step towards democracy."

NURDOGAN AYDOGAN

PKK Council of Leaders member Mustafa Karasu replied our questions about the campaign for Kurdish education and the latest political developments.

What would you say about the existing level of the actions for Kurdish education?

It would be wrong to consider language merely a means of communication. Language has also a spirit. Properties of a nation are absorbed to its language and culture. It is possible to express Kurds and Kurdish culture only in Kurdish. In this respect it should be considered as an important part of the declaration of identity as well. To limit it only with students is to make it narrow. Therefore it is important to spread it. For example small-scale retailers can have their signs in Kurdish. Normal transactions even at official places can be made in Kurdish But if educational institutions is made as a motor of the campaign, its effectiveness will be more comprehensive. Students can contribute to the campaign by speaking only Kurdish except in courses.

It would be insufficient to present the Kurdish education only as a demand. Steps can be taken even without state makes it official, because there are things which can be done by the people itself. Democratic rights become legal mostly after they have made themselves be recognized unofficially. It would be wrong to expect state permission, expect everything from the state. Therefore in cities, towns and villages practical steps can be taken for Kurdish to be learned and developed. Private schools can be established. Laws are not against it.

How do you consider the approach of the Turkish party to the campaign?

Demands for Kurdish education are demands for democratisation for Turkey. In this respect it interests not only Kurds but everybody living in Turkey and yearning for democracy. A regime which does not tolerate even Kurdish will not to be able to enjoy any human or societal rights. In fact Mihri Belli who knows this fact well and have dedicated himself to the democratic revolution of the Turkish people says, 'Demand for education in mother tongue is a demand for democratisation of Turkey.' Therefore it should be reclaimed by democracy forces. In fact it can be a step towards democracy.

Today problems of democracy cannot be solved by agreeing on a detailed program, but if an important matter is solved democratically, it will also extend to other matters. As far as the Kurdish identity which is the most taboo matter in Turkey is concerned, this is more important. To eliminate all bans on Kurdish language is to eliminate the most big shame of Turkey. In fact democracy forces and Turkish intellectuals lead the struggle to remove such a big shame, because such a ban causes degeneration on the Turkish identity too.

Although amendments to the Constitution has gone into effect, a circular of Interior Ministry gives permission to detentions and arrests. What would you say on the matter?

In the Constitution there is such a concept as banned languages. With the amendments it is annulled. But we know that the real reason behind the amendments is only make-up, therefore a confused law discourse is used. Thus we can say that an obstacle before education in mother tongue is removed rather than saying it is taken under constitutional guarantee. Here the matter is far from whether the Constitution guarantees education in mother tongue or not. They detain the students who presents petition. The Constitution may emphasize that no language other than Turkish shall be taught. As such if a teacher teaches in Kurdish the state may make investigation. But submitting petition cannot constitute a crime. It is a legal and democratic right under both international law and Turkish law. Thus it violates its own law.

Such actions are attempted to be repressed by saying "it is urged by PKK"...

It is difficult to understand such a mentality. It tries to explain the lack of democratisation in Turkey by resorting such justifications. Nobody can be able to show a most democratic demand of a nation as illegal. What is important is the content and quality of the actions. Every one is equal before the law. But when Kurds submit petition, it considered a crime. Turkey approaches every action of the Kurdish people in a hostile manner. If Kurds are to be citizens of Turkey, if they are to be live together, the state should abandon its hostile manner. If one-third of the population is considered enemy, there can be no peace and trust.

If there is enmity against Turkey, those who have this negative stance cause it. Enemies of Turkey naturally exploit this weakness. It is those pawing the way who are guilty, not those who exploit it. Those who accuse PKK and the Kurdish people of being dependent on foreign states should know that it is themselves who invite all criticisms and pressure of the outside world. Everybody accuses those who deny language and identity of a people.

The demand of the Kurdish people for identity and mother tongue will be recognized sooner or later. And it will not take much time. The political, social and cultural spirit of the 21. century cannot tolerate such a shame. Turkey itself cannot endure it. Therefore the existing denial mentality is not the reality of Turkey. This reactionary resistance will be broken. In any case, Turkey has no other chance.

"There can be no dialogue when there is denial"

Do you interpret the suggestions package of 12 articles recently published by media and probably leaked by the Turkish state as an attempt for a dialogue?

One must draw attention to the timing of it. The report was leaked at a point in time in which the Kurdish people launched a campaign for education in Kurdish, tendency towards democratisation increased and the outside world expected steps towards democratisation. There is no question that a clique of the state has leaked it. It is also clear that it is a translation of actual politics and the approach to the Kurdish question. The fact that all of the 12 proposals are not at all serious shows that the authors of it are not those who are determined to solve the problem. Even if it has a certain degree of importance as far as discussion is concerned, it is wrong to see it as an attempt for dialogue.

We must once again emphasize that the Kurdish people cannot be approached by such a way. First of all the existence of the Kurdish people and their language should be recognized. When you say they do not exist how can we establish dialogue? They say there can be no such thing as Kurdish linguistic institution! Even other countries study the Kurdish and the history of Kurds. Kurds cannot do what others do! It is out of question. In fact Turkey should be the first to establish institutions for it.

Why should Turkey be disturbed about the word Kurdistan? Only those who deny the existence of the Kurdish people can be disturbed about it. If the Kurdish identity is recognized, then the word Kurdistan will cease to be inconvenient. Seljucides have called the region Kurdistan for the first in history. Before that it had other names. In fact Ottoman documents also called it Kurdistan. Kurdistan is a geographical name and is used across the world. It is an objective fact. They assume that if a country is pretended not to exist, then it will cease to exist. We do not have a complex as to put Kurdistan into every sentence. But such controversies are expression of ill-will.

Some say that the report is leaked as a test to see the sincerity of the PKK...

PKK has shown its opinions on the Kurdish question and Turkey clearly and sincerely. Today the sole movement which has clear policies about almost every problem is PKK. Defence statement of President Apo to European Court of Human Rights is the striking document of this fact. Before us Turkey should show its sincerity by taking some steps. PKK has shown everybody its insistence on co-living in a common land. It is Turkey itself which encourages separationism. Our party wants to solve the problems within the borders of Turkey. They can hold our hands any time they want.

They say, PKK achieves what it could not by waging war by engaging in politics. Well, it is true. Our aim is the recognition of our identity and Kurdish education. We do not conceal it. Both the Kurdish people and their language have been there before PKK. PKK struggled for them to be recognized. But our Party did it not to separate Turkey but to enrich it and contribute to its democratisation. Kurds are not separatist. Those who are really separatists are the ones who deny the Kurdish identity and language. Every other discourse is demagogy and deceit. Turkey should abandon to show the PKK as justification. It is Turkey's change that a leadership such as President Apo and PKK are born on these lands. Turkey needs brave intellectuals and patriots who cry the reality more than ever. They should slip out of their PKK complex and approach the problem scientifically. Those who do not see the reality are the ones who are afraid of being accused of "high treason" by reactionary circles and have complex against PKK.

If the related report is leaked by those who want to send an indirect message for dialogue, then their approach should be more serious. Set aside the Kurdish question, if you think what Turkey has lost for the last 80 years or 30 years, then you can see that it should be approached seriously.

( TO BE CONTINUED )

3. - Kurdish Media - "The Kurdish Question: a priority for the new political agenda organised":

By Dr David Morgan

A report on the meeting The Kurdish Question - a priority for the new political agenda organised by Liberation and hosted by Jeremy Corbyn MP in the House of Commons on 15 January 2002.

Liberation with a long track record of campaigning for the rights of the Kurdish people can claim a success in playing host to this timely forum. Representatives of Kurdish organisations from various parts of Kurdistan and their supporters came together in friendly debate to share perspectives on the nature of the challenges they faced in the new political climate now dominated by the 'war on terrorism'. Liberation President Stan Newens stated in his opening remarks that the organisation's aims were to raise the profile of the Kurds and show solidarity to help enable the Kurds to achieve their own objectives. A conference on 4 December 1999 drew up a statement on basic aims signed by all the leading Kurdish parties. That statement was updated at a further conference on 4 December last year which also agreed on the present meeting designed to allow all the main parties to make presentations and enter into dialogue.

A special guest speaker was to have been the respected human rights lawyer Eren Kesken from Istanbul, but she was only able to submit a written message as the return of her passport had been delayed by the Turkish authorities. Estella Schmid from Peace in Kurdistan felt this delay had been deliberate and drew attention to the latest report from the Turkish Human Rights Association (IHD) on recent rights violations in Turkey which was circulated.

Speakers were chosen from the floor with equal time allocated to each. Dilshad Miran, from the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), began with a generous tribute to Liberation¹s long support even in the darkest days of the Kurdish movement. Mr Miran spoke of the tremendous improvements in the peace process between the PUK and KDP in Iraqi Kurdistan over the last year. Co-operation between the two parties had improved both in the implementation of the oil-for-food programme and in the opposition to the Iraqi government.

Some issues were still outstanding, namely the continuing existence of the two assemblies and he urged the PUK to return to the administration to ensure it becomes a more legitimate institution. Mr Miran said the funds that the Kurdish authorities had been allowed to distribute to improve the lives of the local people under oil-for-food were vital. For the first time in the entire history of the Kurdish region, people were benefiting directly from funding as central governments in Iraq had systematically underfunded them. He warned that the removal of sanctions without providing guarantees would only lead to a humanitarian crisis. The achievements of the Kurdish Regional Government in the fields of democratisation and civil freedoms should be recognised.

Latif Rashid, UK representative of the PUK, praised Liberation for its important work in communicating the Kurdish cause to the British people. He stated that the aims of the PUK since its formation in 1987 were to win the right of self-determination for all the Kurdish people. This could take different forms in the various parts of Kurdistan and in Iraq the Kurds were seeking a federal solution. He felt that without a genuine national political solution the entire region would remain unstable. Forty million people without a recognised state was unacceptable. The PUK sought good relations with all other Kurdish parties and was seeking to promote peaceful co-existence in all parts of Kurdistan.

Mr Rashid stated that the Kurds had legitimate demands on the international community including the British government which must start with ensuring security for the Kurds, victims of terrorism in the shape of Anfal and chemical weapons. In the aftermath of the Gulf War, he recalled, not a village was left standing and all the agricultural land was destroyed. He said that the Kurds had been grateful for the previous support from Britain, but that although there had been improvements over recent years, threats still existed. The fate of the Kurds in the future remained uncertain because of the fear that sanctions on Iraq could be removed with no guarantees.

Nilufer Koc, from the Kurdistan National Congress (KNK), stressed that she was not just representing Kurds in Turkey since her organisation comprised members from all parts of Kurdistan. She said that after 11 September it was essential for the Kurdish parties to organise for a national strategy as at present there was no Kurdish strategy. She recalled that a conference had recently been held by the KNK on this issue, but that not all the Kurdish parties had been persuaded to participate. This had been a missed chance to discuss the future of the Kurds in the Middle East. She said that a solution for Iraq was becoming crucial for the Kurdish people. Ms Koc stated that democracy should apply to everyone irrespective of nationality. Turcomans, Assyrians and others in Iraq have rights but not all Kurds. She asked what were the proposals from the Iraqi Kurdish parties for a democratic solution in Iraq? She thought that the parties were making a mistake if they did not involve the people in discussions about their future. She said that the position was different in the Turkish part of Kurdistan where the PKK was trying to involve the Kurds in a democratic solution. The Turkish state had responded with the mass arrest of 500 Kurdish students asking for the basic right for education in the mother tongue. Kurdish people were mobilising for their rights and for a democratic Turkey. The fate of Turkey and Iraq were linked together closely, seen in the visit of Turkish Prime Minister to Washington where he will discuss policy on Iraq. She argued that the Kurdish parties needed to hold a discussion soon on these issues.

The diverse plurality of viewpoints expressed illustrated the sophisticated political culture existing among the Kurds. Inevitable disputes were kept to a minimum with all speakers broadly concentrating on two main issues; how to awaken greater solidarity for the Kurdish cause and how best to defend the rights of the Kurds in the present volatile international situation.

Jawad Mella, president of the KNC umbrella organisation which seeks a Kurdish state via diplomacy, made the case for a free Kurdistan as the only means by which security can be guaranteed. The Kurds deserved to be reunited under the new international order, like Germany had been. Simond Banaa, UK representative of the Kurdish Regional Government, questioned why lobby groups such as Liberation were not today as effective as in their heyday. He thought one obstacle to raising the Kurdish question was the fact that Kurds now resident in Europe had become alienated from their homeland and thus were not properly reflecting the demands of Kurds back home. He stated that a priority of everyone should be to defend the gains of the KRG in the safe haven which was the result of years of struggle. He urged Liberation to listen more to the voice of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Labour MP Rudi Vis stated that the Kurds must first more clearly decide for themselves what they want as a first step to success in influencing public and politicians. He spoke as a member of the Council of Europe and offered his services to raise issues from Kurdish groups in this international arena. He urged the Kurds to learn from the example of the Cypriot lobby which had forced Cyprus onto Europe's agenda. If the Kurds spoke with a clearer voice Mr Vis believed that their support would grow as many politicians were sympathetic to their plight.

Other speakers echoed these sentiments urging the Kurds to sink their differences and agree on a common set of basic aims to present to the world community.

Estella Schmid then read out the message from Eren Keskin which described increased human rights violations in Turkey, thus indicating that here had been little progress since the country's engagement with Europe so far. Ms Schmid also made the point that one great issue that should concern all Kurds whether from Turkey or Iraq was that there was no legal recognition of them anywhere in international law. Intense efforts should be made to support the Kurdish campaign for the recognition of Kurdish identity and education in the mother tongue in Turkey and Europe. She also said that solidarity campaigns in Britain like the Ilisu Dam, the Campaign Against Criminalising Communities (CACC) against the Terrorism Acts 2000 and 2001, and the repeal of the ban against the PKK should be supported by all Kurdish parties and organisations including the KDP and PUK.

It was also announced that copies of Kurdistan Report, the magazine published for ten years in London by the Kurdistan Solidarity Committee, had been impounded by police officers at the door of the House. This appeared to have been a use of the new Terrorism Act and was an outrage on legitimate political activity. It showed how the Kurds were being criminalised. Jeremy Corbyn agreed to take up the matter as it was not usual practise to confiscate political literature.

A message of solidarity was delivered by a representative of the Baluchi people who stressed that his people and the Kurds should make common cause as nationalities who were denied their rights. Both peoples were victims of "state terrorism".

Monireh Moftizadeh, from the Kurdish Women's Organisation, reminded everyone that large Kurdish populations also existed in Syria and Iran and asked why this was not reflected in the meeting? The complex division of the Kurds was one of the difficulties of the Kurdish struggle that had been imposed on them by outside powers. She said that a Kurdish government in Iraq would never be tolerated by its neighbours, Iran, Turkey and Syria who would unite against it. She thought this was a lesson for the Kurds to be united just like their enemies.

Ihsan Khadr urged more Kurds to become involved in local politics and said that he wanted to campaign for the recognition of Kurds as an ethnic minority community in the UK and the rights of Kurdish children in British schools. Jamal Abdulla reminded everyone that the Kurds were divided by colonialism and that powers such as Europe now had to be pressured to make amends. He felt that Kurds were described as terrorists unjustly when they were forced into acting in self-defence against the atrocities committed against their people. Concern was expressed that Kurdish leaders seeking to topple Saddam Hussein appeared to be inviting the bombing of Iraq which would not necessarily bring the expected benefits to the Kurdish people.

A series of future actions were agreed:

A - The updated statement to form the basis of a activities

B - To invite Kurds to supply Rudi Vis with issues of concern to raise at the Council of Europe and for MPs to raise in the House

C - To seek to form a deputation to visit the Foreign Office

D - To consider how practical concerns such as Kurdish identity and education, green issues such as the Ilisu dam and the campaign against the Terrorism Acts and for the defence of civil liberties could facilitate greater awareness of problems confronting the Kurds.

E - To reconvene a meeting within six months

F - Appeal for funds and members for Liberation to make its work more effective

4. - Turkiesh Daily News - "Pearson: Turks seek more democracy":

The Turkish nation wanted more democracy and is seeking the government to improve the battered human rights image of the country, a top American official said Wednesday.

Robert Pearson, the U.S. ambassador to Turkey, said Turkish people sought to see further moves taken by the government to improve the country's human rights performance, an issue at the heart of Turkey's relations with its western allies.

Pearson's comments came amid a government dispute over a legislation reform package that aims to harmonize current laws with last year's constitutional amendments. Detentions of scores of people for submitting petitions demanding Kurdish education in schools have added to the western worries over Turkey's poor human rights record.

Turkey, a country aspiring for European Union (EU) membership, has to adjust its rights record according to EU standards to be able to begin membership negotiations with the 15-nation bloc. Close-ally and NATO-partner the United States also wants to see an improved rights performance by Ankara.

Pearson mentioned neither the detentions nor the controversy over the harmonization legislation. But he said Turkish people desired higher human rights standards not because of outside pressure but because of their own will.

"Turkish people want more democratic reforms and steps taken for democratization," Anatolia news agency quoted Pearson as saying before meeting Parliamentary Speaker Omer Izgi.

Stressing that it was inappropriate for him to express evaluations on the draft laws being handled by the Turkish Parliament, Pearson said, "The harmonization laws that will put the constitutional amendments into effect has a major importance." The American ambassador said the constitutional amendments legislated by Turkish Parliament last year earned Turkey praise in the world and the U.S. administration considered them as "a step in the right direction." Within the amendments, Turkey stripped restrictions on Kurdish broadcasting and lifted the death penalty, excluding times of war and for terror crimes.

The draft package of reform legislation includes steps such as reducing police detention periods from seven days to four and allow detainees to inform relatives or lawyers. It is, however, reported to have failed in easing restrictions on the freedom of expression, scrapping the capital punishment placed in particular laws and handling the sensitive issue of broadcasting and education in Kurdish.

A parliamentary commission, debating the package has the opportunity to expand its limits before it goes before Parliament next week. But disagreements between senior coalition partner The Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the conservative Motherland Party, junior member of the government, over the context of the harmonization legislation has led to cracks in the government ranks.

ANAP leader and deputy premier Mesut Yilmaz labelled the reforms "a compromise text" in the face of stern opposition by MHP leader and another deputy Prime Minister Devlet Bahceli who resisted abolishment of the death penalty without any exemption or legal amendments expanding the limits for freedom of expression.

The detentions of hundreds of students who petitioned the authorities demanding permission for education in Kurdish have added to strained relations between the two government-allies. Yilmaz urged tolerance for Kurdish education demands but added making such a move was impossible under the current laws.

Bahceli described the demands as a bid to assert Kurdish identity. The EU wants Turkey to grant cultural rights to its some 12 million Kurdish people while Ankara says Kurds do not have a minority status and enjoy equal rights with the Turkish people.

5. - Turkish Daily News - "These cannot be called adaptation laws":

* Articles 312 and 159 are being amended in order to achieve harmonization with the EU. If the bill gets passed in its existing form it cannot serve any useful purpose. On the contrary, the relevant provisions would become all the more ambiguous. You will see that soon we would have to amend them anew after a while Turkey is trying to cover ground swiftly to adapt itself to the European standards. It is as if we are running a marathon race. A new democracy package will clear Parliament by March starting with amendments to Articles 312 and 159 of the Turkish Penal Code.

* The aim is ensure adaptation to the European Human Rights Convention and the European Court of Human Rights decisions.

The mentality with which we want to adjust to, differentiates between the freedom of thought and the crime of terrorism. It draws a broad line between the effort to protect the country's secular system and integrity and the freedom of thought.

In Europe the freedom of thought concept is quite clear: People can express their views the way they like. They can criticize what they want to criticize the way they want.

Let us give a substantial example:

According to that mentality people can say, "In Turkey, the people of the Aegean region should set up an independent state," and that would not be a crime. This is the freedom of thought approach. However, if they say, "The people of the Aegean region, rise up, take arms and get your rights. Take action to set up your independent state," that would be punished because these words would be considered criminal since they would be inciting people to rebel and to resort to arms, that is, to terrorism.

Though the situation is so clear, look what we are trying to do.

The latest state of 312 still vague

In the past, Article 312 was introduced for two reasons: To prevent Kurdish nationalism and terrorist acts, and to intimidate the Islamist movements. With these provisions, the country's secular system and integrity were to be preserved.

The most significant part of the article was the part which said:

"The person who would openly incite people to hate and hostility by underlining class, racial, religious, sectarian or regional differences will be given a prison sentence in the one to three years range..."

In that particular form the article was so vague that it was implemented in varying ways depending on the mood of the day, the direction the winds were blowing and the political atmosphere. Each judge interpreted it in his own way and took a decision accordingly.

Even intellectual discussions and criticism have been punished by the judges -- in different ways depending on the nature of the judge involved -- in a way stretching the limits of the law. And that came to be called "fighting against terrorism." Even Justice Minister Turk had to admit, during one episode of the 32nd Day TV program, that this article had been interpreted in an exaggerated manner. The enforcement of Article 312 has been constantly criticized by the European Court and Turkey has pledged to the EU that it would amend it and ensure full adaptation to the European Human Rights Convention.

The amendment drafted to keep that pledge is as follows:

"The person who publicly incites people to harbor hate or enmity against one another by underlining the social class, racial, religious, factional or regional differences in a way that would create the possibility of disrupting the public order, would be punished with a prison sentence in the one to three years range..."

The same elements remain. Only the phrase, "publicly inciting to harbor hate or enmity in a way that would create the possibility of disrupting the public order,' is being inserted. Compared to the "old" version this is a little more substantial. However, it is still not clear and specific enough. It is still ambiguous. Again the "freedom of thought" and the act of "inciting terrorism" have been interlinked. Again it will be interpreted in many ways by the judges. Punishment will be meted out according to the winds blowing or the climate.

Some 159 being rendered even more strict

Article 159 concerns the punishments to be given to those who defame and insult the Turkish identity, the Turkish nation, the Parliament, the military and the police, the Council of Ministers or the judiciary. This article has to be changed since it fails to draw any line between criticism on one hand and defamation and insult on the other, causing critical writings to be grounds for punishing the writers for "insulting the state."

However, the draft that has been put before us is even more severe and more vague than the "old one", that is, the article in effect.

For example, if somebody came up and said, "The police or gendarmerie station in our neighborhood is serving no useful purpose. It should be closed down and the units there should be dissolved," he could be punished for insulting the Turkish police or the Turkish army. The proposed draft would allow that.

But what about criticism?

What about freedom of thought?

Where is the line separating criticism from insult?

It is not known to what extent harmony can be achieved with the mentality that exists in Europe and with the Court of Human Rights decisions. For example, Riza Turmen, the Turkish judge at the European Court, says that especially with regard to 312 "the new draft is better than the old one." Others make exactly the opposite argument.

The factor that is all too visible is that Turkey is still preferring to live in a fog of uncertainty. And it is not possible to understand why exactly it fears clarity and openness.

6. - Asia Intelligence Wire - "Costs of the bill of decision of AIHM for Turkey is high":
The amount of financial indemnity that Turkey gave as a result of the decisions of Human Rights Court of Europe (AIHM) has reached to $ 11 million, said the Anatolia news agency on Wednesday.

Turkey will have to pay $ 1.5 million as a result of the AIHM decisions in the following months. Turkey was charged mostly because of the law of protection of property and rights at the AIHM. Following this law comes the rights of fair jurisdiction and banning of torture.