< < <
Date Index > > > |
There are further lies by Sabri Oncu 22 January 2002 23:56 UTC |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |
Friends, The subject title of this message is the English translation the title of an article from the "not-so-radical" Turkish newspaper called Radikal. Except from a few odd voices, like Cumhuriyet and Evrensel, almost all Turkish newspapers are owned by a few holding companies. The owner of Radikal, Aydin Dogan, or Dogan Holding, also owns two other widely read newspapers, Hurriyet(Liberty) and Milliyet(Nationality), as well as a few TV channels. Given your familiarity with the suffix STAN in these days, would it be difficult for you to understand what I mean if I say that the current day Turkish media is a MONOPOLISTAN? For those of you who can read Turkish, the article I mentioned in the above is here: http://www.radikal.com.tr/veriler/2002/01/22/haber_27033.php By the way, the English translation of the Turkish abbreviation TCK that you will see in that article is TPC. I am sure our American friends immediately understood what TPC means, given their great aptitude for understanding abbreviations. For the rest of us, TPC means Turkish Penal Code. Most likely, Noam Chomsky violated TPC 159 but if not, who knows, may be it is TPC 312. And if not that one, who cares? As long as they think there is a crime, the "ones with whom I am deeply in love" wouldn't have any difficulty in inventing the appropriate penal code they need. For your information, we once had TPC 141 and 142: many were hung because of these ones; TPC 1402: many leftist professors were removed from their posts because of this one, and so forth. Hey, we also had, and still have, JC 101, that is, Jungle Code 101: many leftist intellectuals were assasinated by the fascists by bombs, fires and other weapons because of this one. For your information, all of the above codes I mentioned are somehow related with the so-called "Crimes of Thought". Now, let me choose the easy way out and, rather than translating the article I mentioned in the above, send you a realed article from Turkish Daily News, which is already in English. Best, Sabri --------------------------------------------------------- Gul: Article 312 amendment is more restrictive --------------------------------------------------------- Pro-religion Justice and Development Party (AKP) Deputy Chairman Abdullah Gul said that the amendment that the government was willing to make in Article 312 on freedom of expression, was more restrictive. Holding a press conference in Parliament on Monday, Gul said that open and clear definition of a crime in the laws was a constitutional must and added that the new amendment draft law, which stipulated the determination of freedoms with rules and regulations, was full of threats that would put judges under pressure and lead to the dictatorship of the execution. Gul claimed that the government bill, which the parliamentary committees will start discussing this week, was of a quality that would further restrict the current freedoms, especially the freedom of expression. "The aim and target of these amendments should have been the preparation of Turkey for European Union (EU). Unfortunately, Turkey will be far more away from the union if the bill is legislated in its initial form," Gul said and added that the bill granted higher authority to the judges which would in turn make court verdicts vulnerable to political conjuncture. Gul also said that the definition of the crime was vague and obscure in the bill and added: "Mr. Yilmaz is loosing his credibility totally since he speaks the true but does the wrong. On one hand, you will mention about democracy, human rights and EU criteria and repeat that the chance is about to be missed, while on the other hand you sign bills that restricts even the current freedoms." Gul informed that they would demand Parliament to include the "clear and present" danger as well as the "concrete danger" concepts in Article 312 for freedom of expression to be counted as a crime. He also said that the bill did not have any direct link with the lifting of AKP leader Erdogan's political ban and added that AKP have been supporting every step that would provide democratization. Yalcinbayir petitions Justice Committee Finding the amendment to Article 312 included in the adaptation bill package submitted to Parliament by three partite coalition government insufficient, AKP will struggle for the changes, it seeks for the current form of the bill, in the parliamentary Justice Committee on Wednesday. AKP Secretary General Ertugrul Yalcinbayir appealed to the Justice Committee Chairman Democratic Left Party (DSP) Deputy Emin Karaa for the discussion of his own motion pertaining to Article 312 together with the government bill by the committee on Wednesday. Yalcinbayir's motion is on the agenda of Parliament. Yalcinbayir asked the committee to discuss the two bills together since his motion included the same articles with the bill. Yalcinbayir used the full text of the draft prepared by Justice Minister Hikmet Sami Turk in 1998. The bill that contains the amendment to Article 312, had become null and void because of the 1999 elections. Yalcinbayir had presented the same text to Parliament after the 1999 elections. According to Yalcinbayir, Turk's text was different from the government bill. He said that the government's bill included the possibility of disturbing public order and criticized that there was no crime in possibility. He urged the government to clarify the Article 312 amendment. Where does this confusion stem from? AKP sees the government's expression "in a way to arise the possibility of disturbing public order" in the bill amending Article 312, as a more restrictive arrangement on freedom of expression. The current form of this article rules that inciting people to enmity and hatred by marking class, religion, race or region differences is a crime. On the other hand, government's bill foresees that inciting people to enmity and hatred "in a way to arise the possibility of disturbing public order" by marking class, religion, race or region difference, is a crime. Accordingly, the acts, statements or expressions that will incite people to enmity are left to the judges' discretion. However, the rationale of the bill stresses that the judges will seek "clear and present" danger as well as European Court norms in ruling on an act or expression as crime. Responding to questions from the Turkish Daily News after his press conference, Gul said that their aim was to include "clear and present" danger concepts in the bill itself as an article, rather than including them in its rationale in order to eliminate the uncertainty over the bill. AKP deputies do not very much appreciate the bill as they did at first since the bill does not include expressions that will abolish Erdogan's political ban. However, they cannot bargain for the inclusion of such an expression. Inclusion of the "clear and present" danger concepts in the criminal code norms will not restrict but expand the freedom of expression. Gul's criticism reads that the acts and expressions that will incite people in a way which will arise the possibility of disturbing public order, are left to the judges's discretion, which may in turn lead to contradictory rulings. However, this criticism is found unnecessary since judges will take European Court criteria into consideration. The inclusion of the above mentioned concepts to the bill as an article is an expectation, which is seen as a low possibility. Ankara - Turkish Daily News
< < <
Date Index > > > |
World Systems Network List Archives at CSF | Subscribe to World Systems Network |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |