Amnesty International USA
March 24 2005

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Public Statement

AI Index: EUR 44/011/2005 (Public)
News Service No: 072
23 March 2005

Turkey: Concerns about new Penal Code should be addressed

In recent days, press groups in Turkey have articulated their concerns
regarding the new Penal Code which is due to come into effect on 1
April. Professional bodies such as the Press Council and Society
of Turkish Journalists have called on the government to urgently
review the new law which they are concerned will restrict press
freedom. Justice Minister Cemil Cicek has stated that the government
may review the legislation. Amnesty International shares these concerns
and urges the government to take further steps to bring Turkish law
into line with international human rights law and standards related
to freedom of expression.

While the new Penal Code has introduced many positive changes – most
notably in the removal of gender-discriminatory articles – it still
contains numerous restrictions on fundamental rights. Some provisions,
which the authorities had used before to breach international standards
related to freedom of expression, were carried over from the old Penal
Code. For example, Article 159 which criminalized acts that “insult or
belittle” various state institutions, and which Amnesty International
has repeatedly called for to be abolished, reappears as Article 301
of the new Penal Code in the section entitled “Crimes against symbols
of the states sovereignty and the honour of its organs” (Articles 299
– 301). Amnesty International is concerned that this section could
be used to criminalize legitimate expression of dissent and opinion.

In other cases, new articles have been introduced which appear to
introduce new restrictions to fundamental rights. For example, Article
305 of the new Penal Code criminalizes “acts against the fundamental
national interest”. The written explanation attached to the draft,
when the law passed through Parliament, provided as examples of
crimes such acts as “making propaganda for the withdrawal of Turkish
soldiers from Cyprus or for the acceptance of a settlement in this
issue detrimental to Turkey… or, contrary to historical truths, that
the Armenians suffered a genocide after the First World War”. Amnesty
International considers that the imposition of a criminal penalty for
any such statements – unless intended or likely to incite imminent
violence – would be a clear breach of international standards related
to freedom of expression

Many of the provisions in the new law envisage higher sentences if
the “crime” has been perpetrated through the press and raise the
possibility of custodial sentences for journalists. Chair of the
Press Council Oktay Eksi has evaluated the new law as “an unfortunate
reversal from the point of freedom of expression and of the press”.

Background:

The new Penal Code was presented by the government as a less
restrictive and democratic piece of legislation and hastily passed
by Parliament in September 2004 as a result of pressure from the
European Union. This pressure appears to have resulted in insufficient
consultation with members of civil society, such as press and human
rights groups, and may have contributed to the continuing problems
in the law.

Amnesty International is also concerned about aspects of the Penal
Code which are related to areas other than freedom of expression. For
example, Article 122 of the draft of the new Penal Code which forbids
discrimination on the basis of “language, race, colour, gender,
political thought, philosophical belief, religion, denomination
and other reasons” was amended at the last moment so that “sexual
orientation” was removed from the draft. Amnesty International is
therefore concerned that discrimination on the basis of sexuality
was therefore not criminalized in the new law.

In addition, Amnesty International is concerned that the statute
of limitations (the time limit) still applies in trials in which
individuals are accused of torture. While the new law has extended
this time limit, trials against alleged torturers are frequently
deliberately delayed and therefore dropped through this provision
thereby contributing towards a climate of impunity. Given the frequency
with which this happens and the status of torture as a peremptory norm
of general international law, Amnesty International considers that
there should be no statute of limitations for the crime of torture.