Reporters Without Borders hails the lifting of the last restrictions on the use of the Kurdish language by the Turkish news media.
"This is an important and symbolically-charged step but its impact will be very limited as long as the media cannot tackle Kurdish issues without risking prosecution," the press freedom organisation said.
The government gazette published a directive on 13 November 2009 indefinitely lifting all remaining restrictions on the broadcast media’s use of minority languages.
No point
Use of Kurdish had been allowed in the print media and the national public TV station TRT 6 since January 2004, but privately-owned radio stations were limited to five hours of Kurdish programming a week while privately-owned TV stations were limited to four hours.
Furthermore, all Kurdish-language TV programmes had to be subtitled in Turkish, which made live broadcasts impossible. As a result, the only TV stations that offered any Kurdish programmes were the local station Gün TV and, in the past two months, the satellite TV station Su TV.
"What is the point of broadcasting in Kurdish if coverage of Kurdish issues from an independent or activist viewpoint is banned in practice," Reporters Without Borders said. "The lifting of language restrictions must not be allowed to eclipse the fact that the media are still the victims of intimidation and self-censorship when they try to tackle sensitive issues."
The press freedom organisation added: "There will be no real progress for free expression in Turkey until the repressive legislation has been
repealed and the media are finally allowed to tackle the subjects that the Turkish state has declared off limits."
Discussion still silenced
The Turkish Criminal Code, with its vague articles open to wide interpretations, is a considerable deterrent to journalists. Read guest post by Felix Colchester at Index on Censorship blog:
"The Turkish government’s much anticipated “Kurdish Initiative” was discussed in parliament on 10 November, with many political parties eager to have their say on how best to solve the long-standing “Kurdish problem”.
Speculation is rife as to the details of the initiative; thought to be amongst its key policies are the decentralisation of power away from Ankara, a more inclusive definition of citizenship, and the use of dialogue to pacify and eventually integrate militant groups such as the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) back into the political process.
Why, then, if the “Kurdish Initiative” seems to favour mediation over military campaigns and dialogue over coercion, does it remain almost impossible for the Turkish media to discuss the initiative?
Self-censorship
The Turkish Criminal Code, with its vague articles open to wide interpretations, is a considerable deterrent to journalists. A notorious example is Article 216, which punishes “inciting hatred and hostility amongst the public and humiliation of the public”.
A journalist at Milliyet newspaper, Devrim Sevimay, and actress Hülya Avşar fell foul of this article by conducting an interview on 24 August in which Avşar expressed doubts about the “Kurdish Initiative”. Bianet, a Turkish news agency, reported that Avşar had said it would be difficult to “convince the terrorist operatives of the separatist Kurdistan Workers’ Party to lay down their arms”. Criminal behaviour indeed. The pair remain under criminal investigation.
If the Turkish Criminal Code doesn’t provide enough of an incentive for self-censorship, the Turkish Anti-Terror Law adds further muscle to force the Kurdish question off the media’s agenda. Article 7/2 of the Anti-Terror Law in particular has been put to prolific use; Günlük columnist Veysi Sarisözen and managing director Ziya Ciçekçi each face up to seven years in prison for making “propaganda for a terrorist organisation”.
The paper published an article on 6 February testifying to the support of the PKK in Diyarbakir. The defence for these journalists is in the very title of the article they are being charged for: “We do not make propaganda for an organisation, the people do”.
Constructive dialogue prevented
More recently, journalist Namik Durkan and his managing director Hasan Cakkalkurt at Millyet newspaper were both charged under Article 7/2 for publishing an announcement made by PKK executive Duran Kalkan. Kalkan had said that a general amnesty would not bring about the disarmament of the PKK. Durkan and Cakkalkurt could face up to seven-and-a-half years in prison if found guilty.
The “Kurdish Initiative” has faced criticism from opposition parties, most notably from the Nationalist Movement Party, led by Devlet Bahçeli, who believe that the “Kurdish Initiative” abandons the fight on terror and condones the actions of the PKK.
If the Turkish government wishes the policies it sets out for the Kurdish question to prove robust and successful once implemented, it would do well to consider the dissenting voices not only of parliament, but also of the media and key stakeholders such as the PKK. Unfortunately, Turkey’s criminal laws have prevented such a constructive dialogue from occurring. "
***
More than 15 journalists are currently being prosecuted under Anti-Terrorist Law No. 3713 and criminal code article 216 (on inciting
hatred) just for referring to the demands of the outlawed Kongra-Gel, also known as the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), or for quoting its leaders, even in an article that criticises them.
The Turkish legislative arsenal – including criminal code article 301, under which "insults to the Turkish nation" are punishable by up to two years in prison – imposes considerable restrictions on democratic debate by defining the limits that cannot be crossed as regards such subjects as the armed forces, police, judicial system, torture, secularism and the republic’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.
And in practice this legislative arsenal allows many local judges and prosecutors to resist the government’s declared policy of making Turkish society more open.
