< < <
Date Index
> > >
There are further lies
by Sabri Oncu
22 January 2002 23:56 UTC
< < <
Thread Index
> > >

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:


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

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.



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

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

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

Ankara - Turkish Daily News

< < <
Date Index
> > >
World Systems Network List Archives
at CSF
Subscribe to World Systems Network < < <
Thread Index
> > >