The Turkish government has refused to respond to allegations of systematic repression against individuals allegedly affiliated with the Gülen movement made by United Nations special rapporteurs, according to official documents published on Friday by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
In a joint letter dated October 7, 2024, seven UN special rapporteurs asked the Turkish government about alleged measures of “systematic repression against persons ostensibly affiliated with the Gülen Movement through the misuse of counter-terrorism legislation, and the concomitant impact on civil society, human rights defenders, political dissidents, and journalists.”
The allegations center on Turkey’s treatment of people allegedly associated with the faith-based Gülen movement, inspired by the late Muslim cleric Fethullah Gülen.
In its response via a diplomatic note dated October 30, the Turkish government refrained from answering the allegations brought up by the special rapporteurs and instead listed their accusations against the Gülen movement and requested the “Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council not to allow FETÖ and its members to abuse these mechanisms, and to dismiss their allegations.”
FETÖ is a derogatory acronym used to refer to the Gülen movement as a terrorist organization.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been pursuing followers of the Gülen movement since corruption investigations revealed in 2013 implicated then-Prime Minister Erdoğan and some members of his family and his inner circle.
Dismissing the investigations as a Gülenist coup and conspiracy against his government, Erdoğan designated the movement a terrorist organization and began to target its members. He intensified the crackdown on the movement following an abortive putsch in 2016 that he accused Gülen of masterminding. The movement has strongly denied involvement in the coup attempt or any terrorist activity.
The rapporteurs outlined practices they say violate international human rights laws, including arbitrary arrests, torture, transnational renditions and surveillance abuses.
The UN Rapporteurs said these individuals face intensified crackdowns involving mass detentions, forced disappearances and unjust prosecutions under vague anti-terrorism laws. Between June 2023 and June 2024, more than 8,800 people were detained and 1,500 were charged with terrorism offenses, they said.
Among the rapporteurs’ chief concerns was the treatment of children detained as part of these operations. In May 2024, 16 children were arrested in İstanbul and allegedly subjected to psychological pressure, physical torture and denial of legal counsel. The UN rapporteurs described these actions as clear violations of international protections for children under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The rapporteurs also criticized Turkey’s use of public “grey lists,” wanted lists where individuals — ranging from journalists to human rights defenders — are labeled as terrorists, often without evidence or due process. These lists, which include photos and personal details, are made public alongside monetary rewards for information leading to their capture. This practice, according to the rapporteurs, endangers lives, undermines freedoms and creates a “hitman economy.”
Another key concern involved transnational renditions. The rapporteurs alleged that Turkey has systematically abducted and forcibly returned suspected Gülen affiliates from other countries under vague bilateral security agreements. Victims were reportedly detained in secret, subjected to torture and coerced into confessions used in prosecutions.
The misuse of surveillance powers also drew heavy criticism. Turkey’s intelligence agency was accused of fabricating evidence from the ByLock messaging app to convict thousands of people on tenuous charges of affiliation with the Gülen movement. The UN noted that such actions lack due process and violate privacy rights under international law.
The rapporteurs called on Turkey to address these alleged violations, halt ongoing abuses and ensure compliance with international human rights standards. They expressed particular concern about the government’s expansive interpretation of anti-terrorism laws, which they argue target legitimate political activity, dissent and human rights advocacy.
The letter was authored by seven UN special rapporteurs and a UN expert, including Mary Lawlor, special rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders; Alice Jill Edwards, special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism. Other contributors included Gabriella Citroni, chair-rapporteur of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and Irene Khan, special rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression.
Mehmet Onat Sarıtaş, UN Volunteer with UNICEF in Türkiye supports the design and implementation of climate change-related programmes.
Diana Assenova, Mehmet Onat Sarıtaş and Madinabonu Salaidinova have one thing in common — They are young volunteers who believe that progress cannot be made without youth. Let’s hear from them in their own words.
“By investing in education, building the capacity of community members, and fostering global citizenship, young people play a crucial role in creating a better future that is inclusive, equitable, and sustainable for generations to come.” The words of Diana Assenova, a UN Volunteer Education Assistant with the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Kazakhstan resonate with the importance of youth and progress.
Diana focuses on the rights of youth refugees by making sure they have equal access to education. She coordinates the DAFI Scholarship Programme, through which, young refugees get education support. She encourages many more opportunities for education for refugee youth in Kazakhstan via awareness and advocacy campaigns.
The enthusiasm of youth propels her efforts — she recounts how she volunteered to organize a summer camp for teenagers from the displaced population.
The energy of working together with young people was unforgettable! This reaffirmed my dedication to making a positive impact through volunteerism.” Diana Assenova, UN Volunteer with UNHCR Kazakhstan
Another young and skilled UN Volunteer is Mehmet Onat Sarıtaş who serves with the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in Türkiye as an Adolescent Development and Participation Assistant. Onat is witness to the disproportionate impact of climate change on the lives of children and adolescents in Türkiye and that is when he decided to volunteer. He values collective volunteer action to create a greener world for children.
Onat supports the design and implementation of environment-related projects. He also coordinates UNICEF’s climate-focused youth platforms, performs administrative tasks and collects data.
Youth platforms give Onat the opportunity for peer-to-peer support and technical assistance to young people. This close communication and learning has helped strengthen UNICEF’s relations with young people, he notes.
Next, we have the voice of UN Volunteer, Madinabonu Salaidinova, “I focus on increasing the engagement of young leaders from the south of Kyrgyzstan in civic activism and strengthening their potential to promote human rights.”
Madinabonu serves as a Legal and Monitoring Volunteer with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for Central Asia in Kyrgyzstan.
She monitors media channels, observes trials, and engages with the government and civil society partners, including human rights defenders. She also responds to individual complaints of alleged human rights violations submitted to OHCHR from five Central Asian countries — Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.
Including youth in decision-making is crucial, says Madinabonu. She feels that her voice is heard and appreciated. This gives her momentum to bring her ideas to fruition.
I appreciate that OHCHR gives me opportunities to integrate my interests and ideas into my work. I feel that I’m where I’m supposed to be right now.” Madinabonu Salaidinova, UN Volunteer with OHCHR Kyrgyzstan.
On 1 April 2024, Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA is a human rights organization committed to protecting freedom of expression, press freedom, the right to assemble and protest, and access to information in Turkey. It serves as a vital platform where journalism and legal expertise merge to safeguard these freedoms, particularly for journalists, lawyers, and human rights defenders facing increasing challenges). SEMRA PELEK wrote about Mine Özerden, a human rights defender now detained for 700 days. The detailed statement if woth reading in full:
From Mine Özerden’s standpoint, the Gezi Trial began with an unsubstantiated criminal complaint. Despite efforts, no informant was identified. Tax inspectors investigated the allegations but couldn’t confirm them. The court ruled the phone taps used as evidence were illegal. Nonetheless, Özerden was sentenced to 18 years and has been in prison for nearly two years.
“I’ve said this repeatedly, and I’ll say it again: I still can’t comprehend why I’m here, and there hasn’t been anyone who could logically explain it to me yet.”
With these words, Mine Özerden began her defense during the session of the Gezi Trial held at the Istanbul 13th Heavy Penal Court on October 8, 2021. She posed the same question during her defense at the session held on January 17, 2022. Özerden has been asking the same question at every hearing since the initial session of the Gezi Trial on June 25, 2019. However, in the years that have passed, she has received no answer to her question throughout the entire legal process.
Mine Özerden’s lawyer requested an explanation from the prosecutor through the court regarding this matter. However, the court rejected the request: “The request for a statement from the Public Prosecutor regarding which acts and crimes are being attributed to the defendant Mine Özerden by the defense attorney has been rejected…”
The court failed to provide any justification or further clarification of the rejection. However, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, every defendant has the right to effectively present their defense, and the right to “be informed.” This means that prosecutors and courts are obligated to inform the defendant of the accusations against them to ensure a fair trial. The laws clearly state this right, however, Mine Özerden was not granted this right throughout the entire trial, and the judiciary system did not provide any logical explanation for this.
Let’s ask a question of our own here: Is there no answer to Ozerden’s question in the 657-page indictment written by the prosecution, which led to Osman Kavala’s aggravated life sentence and the 18-year sentences that Mine Özerden, Çiğdem Mater, Tayfun Kahraman, and Can Atalay have been given in the Gezi Trials? They are currently convicted of serious charges such as “attempting to overthrow the Republic of Turkey by force and violence” and “aiding this attempt,” which means the higher Court of Cassation also signed off on the decision. In the document of approval released by the Court of Cassation, is there any answer to the aforementioned question? No, there isn’t!
Scrutinizing the Gezi Trial files, one question remains: Why is Mine Özerden in prison?
And you can’t find the answer to that question. After poring over the files line by line, one can’t help but be reminded of Kafka’s novel, The Trial. So much so that you could replace the protagonist Josef K.’s name with Mine Özerden’s: “Somebody must have made a false accusation against Mine Özerden, for she was arrested one morning without having done anything wrong.”
This is exactly how the Gezi Trial, which today stands like a specter against the freedom of expression and assembly not only of the defendants but of the whole society, began for Mine Özerden.
Let’s start from the beginning: On September 26, 2013, a “criminal complaint” was sent via email to the Istanbul Communication Electronics Branch Directorate. According to the indictment, the person, who didn’t provide their name in “criminal complaint number 11167,” claimed to have “important information regarding the Gezi protests” and alleged that “before the protests began in Taksim, Mine Özerden opened bank accounts for several individuals under the direction of Osman Kavala from the Open Society Foundation.” According to the informant’s claim, the money collected in these accounts was intended to purchase “gas masks, bandages, and goggles,” which would then be “distributed to protesters.”
In the thousands of pages of the Gezi Trial file, this is the sole allegation concerning Mine Özerden.
Following up on this allegation requires due diligence in seeking the facts. Unlike Kafka’s novel, Özerden’s experiences are not allegorical but real; she has been held in Bakırköy Women’s Prison for nearly two years due to this unsubstantiated criminal complaint.
In the indictment, the prosecutor – after quoting the informant’s claim in quotation marks and bold black letters – immediately indicates in the next sentence that they “could not locate the informant”: “Upon the instruction of our Republic Prosecutor’s Office, an investigation was conducted into the IP address to obtain a detailed statement from the informant, however, no identification was made.”
In other words, the informant could not be found. So, were the bank accounts alleged by the informant opened?
No!
That, in fact, is the following sentence, where the prosecutor offers his admission that the informant could not be found. In the indictment, Istanbul Foundation’s 1st Regional Directorate’s investigation of the accounts of the Open Society Foundation, eventually preparing a report on this inquiry, but the report clearly stated that “no determination could be made regarding these allegations.”
In other words, the claim of an unidentified informant could not be substantiated.
On April 22, 2022 Mine Özerden’s lawyer submitted Tax documents, which proved that the informant’s claim was false to the file.
The court dismissed the Tax Inspectorate report and did not consider it as evidence.
Fact Two: No bank accounts opened; no purchase was made
Typically (in any rule-of-law state), when an informant cannot be found and an unsubstantiated criminal complaint is involved, the case is closed with a verdict of non-prosecution.
Moreover, according to the established jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation, evaluating a purely unsubstantiated complaint on its own is also unlawful. Thus, this jurisprudence also warranted closing the case at this stage. The law is clear: you cannot prosecute anyone with a non-existent crime and an unsubstantiated allegation.
However, instead of closing the file at this point, the prosecutor opened another investigation completely unrelated to the Gezi inquiry. Mine Özerden was incidentally wiretapped within the scope of this investigation. It wasn’t until much later, when the Gezi Trial indictment was prepared, that the fact Özerden had been coincidentally wiretapped in this investigation emerged. When her lawyer officially questioned this, it was revealed that Özerden had never been a suspect in this investigation. Furthermore, there was no wiretap order issued against her in this investigation. Her lawyer had requested wiretap orders from the court, neither the police nor the prosecution had submitted these orders to the file.
In one of these coincidental wiretaps included in the Gezi Trial indictment despite having no relevance to the Gezi investigation, Mine Özerden had a conversation with Osman Kavala on May 30, 2013. In this conversation, Mine Özerden mentioned to Osman Kavala that she had received “some offers.” Someone suggested, “Let’s buy gas masks and distribute them to the youth.” The conversation continued with discussions on how this could be done, such as “maybe opening a bank account.” It was nothing more than an exchange of ideas, with the conversation ending with the suggestion, “One of the volunteers could probably do that.”
The claim of the unidentified informant was based on this conversation. Özerden, who was coincidentally wiretapped in an investigation, where she was not a suspect, was accused on the basis of this wiretap turned into a criminal complaint. Özerden’s lawyer requested the full resolution of this wiretap. However, neither the complete resolutions of wiretaps nor the wiretap recordings were found by the prosecution and were never submitted to the file.
The conversation between Mine Özerden and Osman Kavala remained at the level of ideas because the content of the conversation was not substantiated during the investigation and trial process. No bank account was found to have been opened. Something that doesn’t exist can’t be found in the first place.
There is no evidence in the file that gas masks, bandages, or goggles were purchased. Not a single invoice exists, nor is there any evidence anywhere that these items were found.
So, suppose even one piece of evidence existed in the file – for example, if a bank account had been opened or if an invoice for goggles had been found – what would happen? Opening a bank account and buying gas masks, bandages, or goggles is not a crime under any law. Therefore, Özerden’s lawyer brought goggles, gas masks, and bandages to the trial and asked the panel, “Is acquiring these items a crime?”
Fact Three: No Press Statements or Meetings were Found to Constitute a Crime or Incitement to Commit a Crime
Despite the lack of concrete evidence, the indictment directed the accusation of “aiding an attempt to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Turkey by force and violence” against Mine Özerden. To strengthen such a serious accusation, the prosecutor highlighted Özerden’s voluntary coordination of the Taksim Platform and her continued membership in the board of directors of Anadolu Kültür, where she had worked years ago.
The Taksim Platform was established as a peaceful dialogue platform, holding weekly exchange of ideas meetings, and organizing art events. Although the activities of the platform fell within the scope of freedom of assembly and expression, it was criminalized in the indictment, yet no crime associated with the platform can be found.
Not a single press statement by the platform was included in the indictment. There was not any piece of evidence regarding which press statement or meeting of the platform, on which date, would constitute a crime according to the law. There was also no evidence that any post or statement released by the Taksim Platform could constitute a crime or incitement to violence in the indictment or the file.
The rationale behind the establishment of the Taksim Platform and all updates, statements and press releases ever released by the platform is still accessible today on the website taksimplatformu.com. So, if there had been even the slightest evidence that Taksim Platform was inciting violence, it would be easy for the prosecution to find and include in the indictment.
Moreover, the accusations against Özerden based on her membership in the board of directors of Anadolu Kültür were already refuted explicitly by the Tax Inspectorate report.
Fact four: Özerden was not in Istanbul during the Gezi protests.
It gets even stranger from here. In the indictment, Özerden is accused of organizing meetings of the Taksim Platform in Istanbul during the Gezi protests, attending the platform’s meetings, and even participating in violent actions in Gezi Park.
But the problem here is this: Mine Özerden was not in Istanbul during the Gezi protests.
The Gezi protests began on May 31, 2013. However, Özerden was working at a language school in Fethiye from June 1 to July 31, 2013. Furthermore, not a single video, photograph, or technical surveillance recorded by the police indicating Özerden’s presence in Istanbul during that period has been included in the case file.
However, official Social Security Institution (SGK) records proving Özerden’s presence in Fethiye during that period were submitted to the court. But neither the prosecutor during the investigation process nor the Istanbul 13th Heavy Penal Court during the trial took this into account. The Court of Cassation 3rd Criminal Chamber, which upheld the 18-year prison sentence, also did not. .
Even if it were the opposite, if Mine Özerden were in Istanbul during that time, it still wouldn’t prove anything. Being in Istanbul during the Gezi protests, organizing a meeting, or attending one is not a crime. On the contrary, the right to assembly and freedom of expression are protected by the Constitution.
Fact Five: Wiretapping is Illegal
So, what was written about Mine Özerden on all those pages in the indictment whenthere was no concrete evidence of a crime against her?
The indictment merely contains pages of phone conversations between Özerden and her friends! These conversations delve into personal matters, discussing, for instance, the exhaustion of life and the beauty of getting away from some stressors of life. In one conversation, for instance, Mine Özerden advises a friend to attend a conference in Istanbul where world-renowned philosophers Slavoj Žižek and Alain Badiou are speakers. The conference, titled ‘Globalization and the New Left,’ was organized by Bakırköy Municipality and MonoKL publications. However, this advice was included in the indictment as if it were a crime.
Similarly, Özerden’s response of “enjoy the beautiful weather, how lovely” to a friend saying “the weather was even better two or three days ago” is also included in the indictment as part of these casual conversations. None of the phone taps contain any reference to the organization of the Gezi protests. Instead, they clutter the file. Moreover, these wiretaps are illegal!
The Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court, which handled the case, determined that the wiretaps were illegal. In its decision dated February 18, 2020, acquitting 16 defendants in the Gezi trial, including Osman Kavala, Mücella Yapıcı, Can Atalay, Yiğit Aksakoğlu, Tayfun Kahraman, Çiğdem Mater, Mine Özerden, Yiğit Ekmekçi, and Ali Hakan Altınay, the court made the following legal assessment:
“We have 53 wiretap orders in our file. It is understood that the first wiretap order was issued for the offense of ‘forming and leading a criminal organization,’ not for the offense of ‘crimes against the government.’ Later, it was observed that Article 312 of the Turkish Penal Code (crimes against the government) was added to the requests and decisions for extending the wiretapping. However, Article 312 was not among the crimes subject to legal wiretapping as listed in Article 135/8 of the Criminal Procedure Code at that time. There is no wiretap order issued after that date. Therefore, it is accepted that the wiretap recordings are in violation of the law and are illegal evidence, considering the established precedents of the Court of Cassation and the principle that ‘the fruit of the poisonous tree is also poisonous.’ Hence, the wiretaps included in the indictment are considered as prohibited evidence.”
In other words, all phone conversations used as evidence against Mine Özerden, along with other defendants, were the fruits of the poisonous tree. In summary, the real crime was the wiretapping of phones.
But as if that weren’t enough, a new term called ‘revaluation’ was coined to justify the inclusion of wiretap recordings in the indictment. The indictment stated that “the revaluation of all evidence concerning the investigation, especially the wiretaps, was ordered.” However, there is no procedure called ‘revaluation’ in the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mine Özerden asks: “Isn’t this openly insulting to use the word ‘revaluation’?”
They Were Convicted with the “Poisonous Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”
Ultimately, the acquittal verdicts were overturned. Despite no additional evidence being presented to substantiate the allegations, the convictions handed down by the Istanbul 13th High Criminal Court on April 25, 2022, against Osman Kavala, Can Atalay, Çiğdem Mater, Mine Özerden, and Tayfun Kahraman were upheld by the Court of Cassation’s 3rd Criminal Chamber.
Osman Kavala, who was sentenced to an aggravated life sentence for the allegation of “attempting to overthrow the Government of the Republic of Turkey,” has been in prison for over six years. Can Atalay, Çiğdem Mater, Mine Özerden, and Tayfun Kahraman, who were each sentenced to 18 years in prison for “aiding this attempt,” have been deprived of their freedom for 700 days.
Responding to our questions from prison, Mine Özerden made the following comment regarding the entire legal process:
“Not only do the institutions and decision-makers of the country I am a citizen of fail to protect our rights, but they also increasingly violate our fundamental, constitutional, and legal rights more and more everyday. For nearly two years, we have been deprived of our physical freedom without reason, evidence, or truth…
I find myself involuntarily caught in a senseless quarrel of irrationality and illogic. We are continuously instrumentalized by different political segments with various affiliations. My wish is for people from all walks of life to stand up against injustice and for a collective will demanding basic human rights to emerge.”
Mine Özerden still awaits a logical explanation as to why she is being tried, why she is being punished, and why she has been held at Bakırköy Women’s Prison for years.
Instead of explaining, the judiciary merely extends to her the poisonous fruit of a poisonous tree.
On 14 December 2023, the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that the 2023 Human Rights Tulip has been awarded to Hülya Gülbahar, a feminist attorney from Türkiye and founder of the Equality Watch Women’s Group (EŞİTİZ) and the Women’s Platform for Equality Türkiye (EŞİK). Minister of Foreign Affairs Hanke Bruins Slot presented the prize on 14 December at a ceremony in the Peace Palace.
In her speech, Ms Bruins Slot said: ‘Human rights are among the most important resources we have at our disposal to tackle the major problems of our time, such as war, poverty and climate change. ..The nominees for the Human Rights Tulip understand this at a profound level. Through their tireless efforts, these human rights defenders make a real difference for people and society.’
EŞİTİZ and EŞİK publish legal analyses of legislative bills and amendments on feminist and LGBTIQ+ issues, conduct awareness-raising campaigns (for example on the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence) and promote social mobilisation by the Turkish feminist movement.
‘For more than 40 years,’ Ms Bruins Slot said, ‘Hülya Gülbahar has been defending women’s rights and fighting injustice in Türkiye. She does so using her extensive legal expertise and through her influential network, comprised primarily of women, which is too extensive to ignore. And she has been very successful at it.
Other finalists
The two other finalists for the 2023 Human Rights Tulip were:
Julienne Baseke is a journalist and human rights defender who fights for women’s rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). As a journalist, Ms Baseke founded the South Kivu Women’s Media Association (AFEM), which aims to enhance women’s visibility and participation in the DRC media.
Claudelice dos Santos is a human rights and environmental activist in the Amazon region. She is the founder of the Zé Claudio e Maria Institute, whose shelter and protection house provides a safe haven for indigenous land, environmental and human rights defenders.
The award ceremony took place on at the Palace Cultural Center in St. Gallen.
Paula Weremiuk from Narewka on the Polish-Belarusian border works as a teacher during the day and as a refugee aid worker in the Bialowieza forest at night. According to the Paul Grüninger Foundation, a refugee drama of enormous proportions has been taking place there since 2021.
Paula Weremiuk searches for people in need in the inaccessible areas of Bialowieza, providing them with clothing, food, sleeping bags and the most basic necessities, writes the Paul Grüninger Foundation. The Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenka is forcing thousands of refugees from the Middle East and Africa across the border to Poland, where they are met with strong political rejection.
At the border, in the primeval forest of Bialowieza, there is often brutal violence, abuse, rape and repeated deaths. The refugees, including women and small children, are helplessly abandoned to their fate in the inaccessible terrain and are chased back and forth across the border by the authorities. Refugee helpers are being harassed and criminalized, the press release continues.
Ayşe Gökkan’s award was accepted by her lawyer, Berfin Gökkan. The lawyer read out a letter from Ayşe Gökkan written in Kurdish: “I greet you with the warmth of the sun and the enthusiasm of Jin-Jiyan-Azadî. As a member of the Movement of Free Women, I accept this award on behalf of thousands of struggling Kurdish women. There are many fighting women in prison in Turkey.”
The foundation justified the awarding of the recognition prize of 10,000 francs to the Kurdish feminist and human rights defender Ayşe Gökkan for her civil society commitment and her criminalization:
“Ayşe Gökkan has particularly distinguished herself as a journalist and as an activist for women’s rights. For almost forty years, she has been writing newspaper columns against racial and gender discrimination, speaking at national and international podiums and seminars, leading workshops on the topic of gender inequality and taking part in peaceful demonstrations in this context.
From 2009 to 2014, Ayşe Gökkan was mayor of the Kurdish city of Nusaybin, which lies on the border between Turkey and Syria. When Turkey began to build a wall against refugees between Nusaybin and the neighbouring Syrian town of Qamishlo, the mayor protested against this “wall of shame” with, among other things, a sit-in strike.
Because of her civil society commitment, Ayşe Gökkan has been arrested in Turkey more than eighty times, subjected to more than two hundred investigations and, in 2021, sentenced to more than 26 in a grotesque court case based on the statements of a single “secret witness” for membership in a “terrorist organization”.
She is a victim of the criminalization of the political opposition in Turkey. Ayşe Gökkan is in prison, her sentence has not yet been confirmed by the Turkish Court of Cassation, and proceedings are also pending before the European Court of Human Rights.”
The eleventh Václav Havel Human Rights Prize has been awarded to imprisoned Turkish human rights defender, philanthropist and civil society activistOsman Kavala.
Mr Kavala, a supporter of numerous civil society organisations in Türkiye for many years, has been in prison continuously since 2017 following his arrest for his alleged links to the Gezi Park protests.
In a letter written from prison, read out by his wife Ayşe, Mr Kavala said he was honoured by the decision, and dedicated the Prize to his fellow citizens unlawfully kept in prison. He said the award reminded him of the words of Václav Havel, writing to his wife Olga from prison in 1980: “The most important thing of all is not to lose hope. This does not mean closing one’s eyes to the horrors of the world. In fact, only those who have not lost faith and hope can see the horrors of the world with genuine clarity.”
Responding to the awarding of the 2023 Václav Havel Prize to Turkish prisoner of conscience, Osman Kavala, by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for Europe, Dinushika Dissanayake, said:
“While we celebrate the fact that Osman Kavala has been recognised with this top human rights award, the fact that he cannot be in Strasbourg to collect it in person is heartbreaking. Instead, having already been in jail for almost six years, he is languishing behind bars in Türkiye on a politically-motivated life sentence without the possibility of parole.
Rather predictably: in a statement posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, Justice Minister Yılmaz Tunç said it was unacceptable for the CoE to award a “so-called” human rights prize to a convict, whose verdict of conviction was approved by one of Türkiye’s top courts.
A group of nine nongovernmental organizations including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International said the prosecution of rights defender and businessman Osman Kavala and four codefendants in connection with mass protests a decade ago was unfair and essentially a political show trial from the beginning, calling for an urgent international response.
Leyla Zana, a renowned Kurdish politician and human rights activist, and the first Kurdish female member of the Turkish parliament, will face prosecution on 7 September 2023, with her international awards being cited as “criminal evidence” in the indictment.
Former Member of Parliament Leyla Zana is due to stand trial in a Turkish court on 7 September 2023, facing accusations of “terrorist propaganda” in her speeches and charges of accepting international awards, deemed as “crimes” under Article 325/1 of the Turkish Penal Code. The penal code article, titled “Acceptance of Titles and Similar Honours from the Enemy,” stipulates that a citizen who accepts academic degrees, honours, titles, medals, or other honorary ranks from a state at war with Turkey could face imprisonment from one to three years.
Zana’s lawyer, İbrahim Çeliker, has questioned the basis of the charges, asking, “Which awards received by Ms. Zana could be a source of crime? Which country has Turkey declared war on? These need to be clarified. The awards in question that Ms. Zana received are awards given from European countries and America on human rights,” Çeliker stated. [see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/82F7AAA5-88D1-47E8-8B62-4EBC66D1602D]
Zana is internationally recognised for her human rights work and political activism. Her accolades include the Thorolf Rafto Memorial Prize, the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, the Aachen Peace Prize, the Bruno Kreisky Prize, and the Freedom Medal by the American Human Rights Association. One should add the Juan Maria Bandres Prize for Human Rights and Refugee Protection in 2008. She has also been awarded the Silver Medal of the City of Paris and has been recognised as an “Honorary Citizen” by the cities of Paris and Geneva.
The indictment also implicates pro-Kurdish Democracy Party (DEP) former MP Orhan Doğan and Vedat Aydın, the People’s Labour Party (HEP) Diyarbakır (Amed) Provincial Chairman who was killed in 1991, citing their participation in memorial programmes as criminal. Çeliker responded to this, stating, “The prosecutor considers Orhan Doğan and Vedat Aydın as members of the PKK [Kurdistan Workers’ Party]/KCK [Kurdistan Communities Union]. He sees the mention of these names as a criminal element. However, Orhan Doğan is a Kurdish politician who spent years in prison with Leyla Zana and served as an MP. Vedat Aydın is a Kurdish intellectual who fell victim to an unsolved murder.”
Çeliker also emphasised that the indictment targets freedom of speech, stating, “The main point that the prosecutor focuses on is Ms. Zana’s speaking in Kurdish. There is a special clause in the indictment about her speaking in Kurdish. He emphasises this as a fault and evidence of the alleged crime; the crime of making terrorist propaganda. There are expressions picked out from speeches made in the fields of peace, brotherhood, and democracy … Ms. Zana has never praised violence, she has fought for peace to come, she is a politician who has paid the price.”
Aftonbladet, the biggest daily newspaper of Sweden published a call where it was stated that the Turkish authorities and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan among them, are making calls, at every opportunity, for Sweden to repatriate some authors, journalists, academicians, and human rights defenders living freely in Sweden by obtaining refugee status, the number of whom ranges between 33 and 130.
“Simultaneously with Turkey requesting Sweden to repatriate its opponents, Sweden is facing the largest organized criminal actions in its history. Almost every day comes reports of armed attacks and killings from all parts of Sweden,” the call states*.
“It is as if anyone can be killed anywhere at any time. Most of these cruel attacks are being organized by Swedish criminals now living in luxury in Turkey. These criminals have obtained Turkish citizenship and Turkey is therefore arguing that they cannot be returned to Sweden.”
“One such leader of a criminal gang threatening security in our country is Rawa Majid, the leader of the criminal organization called “Foxtrot” (with nickname Kurdish Fox). Another one organizing these crimes belongs to the group called Bandidos .”
“On the one side, Turkey claims to be fighting terrorism and requests that people who are in Sweden because of their political opinions to be returned to Turkey. On the other side, the country is rejecting to return to Sweden criminals of grave offences, people who risk the security and the future generations in Sweden.
“No, this cannot go on Turkey! It is time to act like a serious state. Return the “Kurdish Fox” and the other criminal people from Sweden to Sweden.”
The signatories of the call:
Kurdo Baksi, Author Göran Eriksson, Ex-Chief of Stockholm Workers Education Center (ABF) Göran Greider, Author, Dala-Demokraten Gazetesi Baş Redaktörü Pierre Schori, Ex-Minister responsible for Refugees and UN Ambassador Olle Svenning, Author
On 28 October 2022 HRW reports on the continuing crackdown on human rights defenders in Turkey, where Şebnem Korur Fincancı is the latest human rights defender to be jailed as authorities pursue a bogus investigation against her for “spreading terrorist propaganda.” Korur Fincancı is head of the Turkish Medical Association, former head of the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, and a retired professor of forensic pathology. Her work was central to the creation of the United Nations’ “Istanbul Protocol,” a landmark manual on how to identify and document signs of torture. She has also worked on the exhumation of mass graves and forensic documentation of war crimes in different countries. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2018/11/05/turkish-human-rights-defender-and-forensic-doctor-sebnem-korur-fincanci-honoured/
Korur Fincancı’s arrest and pre-trial detention followed an interview she gave to pro-Kurdish TV on October 19. Responding to allegations that the Turkish military had used chemical weapons against the armed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, Korur Fincancı said the video footage she had seen suggested use of toxic gases affecting the nervous system and that there should be a full investigation. Turkish pro-government media and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan accused Korur Fincancı and the Turkish Medical Association of slandering the Turkish military. Prosecutors and courts rapidly responded by ordering her investigation and detention.
Korur Fincancı’s arrest is the latest in a pattern of politically motivated cases as the Erdoğan government continues its crackdown on critics and opponents. Just this week, police also detained 10 Kurdish journalists on top of 16 incarcerated in June. The Turkish authorities show all the signs of being determined to silence the voices of experts like Korur Fincancı as well as the journalists who report their words.
Authorities also appear focused on a broader plan of reshaping and taking over professional bodies that have been critical of government policies. On October 27, Turkey’s justice minister announced a plan to restructure both the Turkish Medical Association, from which Korur Fincancı will be removed as head, and the Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects. Mücella Yapıcı, a prominent member of the latter, was convicted and jailed in April along with rights defender Osman Kavala and six others for her alleged role in the 2013 Gezi Park protests.
In the run-up to the 2023 presidential and parliamentary elections, the Turkish government is likely to continue to misuse criminal charges and detention against individuals it wants to silence and attempt to seize institutions outside its control.
The court found in Kavala v. Türkiye, a case brought by the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers, that Turkey failed to fulfil its obligation under Article 46(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights to comply with its judgment issued on December 10, 2019. The judgment is an important step toward accountability for Turkey’s systemic disregard for the convention system and as recognition of the urgency of implementing the court’s order to release Kavala.
“This is the only second time, after Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, that the ECtHR has ever conducted infringement proceedings and determined that a member state has not complied with a European Court judgment,” said Helen Duffy of the Turkey Litigation Support Project.
“It is an acknowledgement of Turkey’s ever-deepening rule of law crisis, which has involved seriously undermining the Convention system and the escalating use of criminal law for political purposes.”
In its new judgment, the court held that “Türkiye has failed to fulfil its obligation under article 46§1 to abide by the Kavala v. Türkiye judgment of 10 December 2019.”
The European Court underlined that:
Its finding of a violation of Article 18 taken together with Article 5 in the Kavala judgment had vitiated any action resulting from the charges related to the Gezi Park events and the attempted coup. It is nonetheless clear that the domestic proceedings subsequent to the above judgment, which resulted first in an acquittal and then a conviction, have not made it possible to remedy the problems identified in the Kavala judgment (para. 172).
The Grand Chamber judgment addresses these practices of the Turkish authorities by stating that “the measures indicated by Türkiye do not permit it to conclude that the State Party acted in ‘good faith,’ in a manner compatible with the ‘conclusions and spirit’ of the Kavala judgment, or in a way that would make practical and effective the protection of the Convention rights which the Court found to have been violated in that judgment” (para. 173).
Aisling Reidy, senior legal adviser at Human Rights Watch said: “As the European Court has now confirmed Turkey’s failure to execute the 2019 Kavala judgment, the Committee of Ministers needs urgently to take all feasible measures to ensure the judgement is respected and Kavala released“.
The Committee of Ministers is expected to resume its supervision process and take more robust steps to discharge its mandate of ensuring the necessary individual and general measures are taken by Turkey to implement the court’s ruling.
Now, it is up to the Committee of Ministers, which oversees the implementation of the ECtHR rulings, what measures to take against Turkey after the country failed to comply with the court’s ruling. This could lead to Turkey’s suspension from the Council of Europe. In anticipation, the Foreign Ministry of Turkey said they expected the Committee of Ministers “to act without bias and with common sense” in a statement.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 