EU: EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT CRITICAL OF SLOWDOWN IN TURKEY’S REFORM PROCESS
European Parliament
Sept 27 2006
In adopting a report on Turkey’s progress towards accession, MEPs
stated that they were critical of the slowdown in the reform process.
Relations with Cyprus and Armenia, as well as restrictions on freedom
of expression and religion, figured prominently in the report adopted
by 429 votes in favour to 71 against with 125 abstentions. MEPs
nevertheless welcomed some recent steps by the Turkish government in
the fields of combating torture, fighting corruption and extending
women’s rights.
The report reiterates the Parliament’s position that negotiations with
Turkey are an "open-ended process, and [do] not lead a priori and
automatically to accession while recalling that "the EU’s capacity
to absorb Turkey while maintaining the momentum of integration is
an important consideration in the general interest of both the EU
and Turkey."
MEPs called on the government in Ankara to recognize the Republic of
Cyprus, withdraw its forces from the island and lift its embargo on
Cypriot vessels and aircraft. The report reminds Turkey that a lack
of progress in implementing the Ankara protocol "will have serious
implications for the negotiation process, and could even bring it
to a halt." It also calls on "both Greece and Turkey to refrain from
tension-prone military activities."
Significantly, the EP rejected a provision that would have otherwise
called the acknowledgement of the Armenian genocide a "precondition"
for Turkey’s European Union accession. MEPs nevertheless stress that,
although the recognition of the Armenian genocide as such is formally
not one of the Copenhagen criteria, it is indispensable for a country
on the road to membership to come to terms with and recognise its
past. The House calls in this respect on the Turkish authorities to
facilitate the work of researchers, intellectuals and academics working
on this question, ensuring them the access to the historical archives
and providing them with all the relevant documents. MEPs urge Turkey
to take the necessary steps, without any preconditions, to establish
diplomatic and good neighbourly relations with Armenia, to withdraw
the economic blockade and to open the land border at an early date,
in accordance with the resolutions adopted by Parliament between 1987
and 2005, thereby fulfilling the Accession Partnership priorities and
the requirements of the Negotiation Framework on ‘peaceful settlement
on border disputes’ which are both mandatory for EU accession.
The House, at the same time, called for the abolition of the
"xenophobic and racist" Talaat Pasha committee. MEPs urged Turkish
authorities to "fulfil their commitments regarding freedom of
religion," since they noted an "absence of progress" in this area
since the last EP report.
Parliament condemns PKK terrorist violence
The House welcomed "the opening of broadcasting in Kurdish" while
nevertheless noting the continued intimidation of civil society
representatives in the South East of the country. The report
"strongly condemns the resurgence of terrorist violence on the
part of the PKK" and "calls on the PKK to declare and respect an
immediate ceasefire." It also pleads for "a democratic solution to
the Kurdish issue following Prime Minister Erdogan’s encouraging
statement last year.".
Despite the recent acquittal of the novelist Elif Shafak, the EP
remained troubled by the remaining barriers to freedom of expression in
Turkey. It called for the abolition or amendment of those provisions
of the Penal Code which threaten European free speech norms —
such as Articles 216, 277, 285, 301 (which foresees punishment for
"denigrating Turkishness"), 305 and 318. The Parliament also expressed
its "serious concern" about the "non-respect for women’s rights"
and the high role of the military in Turkish public life.
The European Commission announced last week that the publication of
its next annual report on Turkey’s progress towards accession will
be delayed by two weeks, until 8 November.
Debate – 26 September 2006
Ahead of the vote on the report by Camiel EURLINGS (EPP-ED, NL)
on Turkey’s progress towards accession, MEPs debated the issue and
expressed a wide range of views, many being critical of the slowdown
of the reform process in Turkey. MEPs pointed out that Turkey still
had a long path to tread before accession.
Opening the debate, rapporteur Camiel EURLINGS (EPP-ED, NL) described
his report as "fair but tough" and said its basic conclusion was
that the EP regretted the "slowdown in reforms" in Turkey, although
he did compliment the Turkish government on its 9th reform package.
Freedom of expression was the first problem area Mr Eurlings
highlghted, saying that Article 301 of the Penal Code [on "insulting
Turkishness"] must be changed or abolished. This was important not just
for the EU but for Turkish people. Freedom of religion was another
issue. Confiscated property must be restituted to monasteries and
churches and they must be allowed to start training clergy once more.
Turning to the situation in south-east Turkey, the rapporteur made a
point of strongly condemning PKK violence but called on Turkey to try
to find a political solution. As to Cyprus, Turkey must fulfil its
commitments and implement the Ankara Protocol before the end of 2006
which had sought to find a way of "normalising relations" with Cyprus.
On the sensitive subject of the Armenian genocide, Mr Eurlings
stressed that he wanted to preserve his own wording in paragraph
50 of the resolution, saying that recognition of the events was not
a criterion for accession, although Turkey should seek to "come to
terms with its past" by allowing inquiries into the events.
Minister for European Affairs Paula LEHTOMÄKI, speaking for the Council
Presidency, said: "Every debate provides a good opportunity to increase
awareness of Turkey’s accession process, to engage the citizens of the
EU Member States and of Turkey in this process, and to support the
Turkish government in its accession path. I can assure you that the
Presidency will take due note of the views of the European Parliament.
The Presidency shares the European Parliament’s concerns regarding
Turkey’s reform process. Turkey needs to give new impetus to the pace
of the political reform and vigorously pursue the reform process.
Full and effective implementation of the reforms is of utmost
importance for Turkey to ensure the irreversibility and sustainability
of the changes. Concrete results are required.
We also share your views on Turkey’s limited progress in such crucial
fields as fundamental freedoms and human rights. Even if Turkey has
made significant progress compared to the situation five years ago,
further tangible reforms are necessary especially in the areas of
freedom of expression, freedom of religion, cultural rights, women’s
rights, and combat against torture and ill-treatment. In the revised
Accession Partnership, most of these issues are defined to be among
the short-term priorities that Turkey needs to meet without delay.
At present, the Presidency looks forward to the adoption of the ninth
legislative package with a view to being able to address some of the
outstanding issues. We reiterate that the new laws need to be fully
in line with the EU standards.
In the area of freedom of expression, in particular, the Council
expects immediate action to avoid legal action being brought against
people who have expressed non-violent opinions and thus violated
certain provisions of the Turkish Penal Code. As for freedom of
religion, we expect that Turkey fully and without delay implement
the legislation that provides for the rights of non-Muslim religious
minorities in compliance with the European standards.
Like the Parliament, we are equally concerned about the tense
situation in south-east Turkey. The Presidency has condemned the
recent bomb attacks in several locations in Turkey as irrational
acts of terrorism. Terrorist activities can never be justified. This
is a complex entity of issues that we closely monitor as a part
of the ongoing reform process. Turkey needs to swiftly develop a
comprehensive approach to help reduce regional disparities with a
view to enhancing the economic, social and cultural opportunities of
all Turkish citizens, including those of Kurdish origin.
In addition to the Copenhagen political criteria, Turkey’s progress
in meeting the accession criteria is measured in relation to
the requirements clearly set out in the Negotiating Framework –
including the implementation of the Additional Protocol to the Ankara
Agreement, which is an essential element of the advancement of the
negotiations. Turkey must apply the Protocol fully in its relations
with all EU Member States and remove all obstacles to the free
movement of goods, including restrictions on means of transport. The
opening of negotiations on the relevant chapters depends on Turkey’s
implementation of its contractual obligations concluded with the EU
Member States. Failure to implement these obligations in full will
affect the overall progress in the negotiations.
We will make sure that the progress made on the key issues, set out in
the Declaration of the EC and its Member States on 21 September 2005,
will continue to be monitored this year.
Compliance with the Union’s standards and membership criteria requires
hard work and continuous efforts and determination. Our message is
clear and consistent. We attach particular importance to Turkey’s
accession process, and I can assure you that the Presidency will do
its best in order to facilitate further progress in the negotiations.
The Union will continue to support Turkey in its efforts, but progress
will depend on Turkey’s performance. The accession process will proceed
provided that Turkey respects its commitments to the carrying out of
the reforms and satisfies the existing obligations. "
Enlargement Commissioner Olli REHN agreed that the momentum for
reform had slowed. Progress had been made but the negotiations were
"an open process" with no automatic guarantees. "The integration of
Turkey would be of mutual benefit", he said, adding "the EU needs a
prosperous and stable Turkey".
However, he highlighted freedom of expression as a problem, especially
Article 301 of the Penal Code, which he said "violates European
standards". He went on "I cannot imagine a Member State of the EU which
does not respect the fundamental principle of freedom of expression".
On freedom of religion, he supported Mr Eurlings position on church
property rights and the current restrictions on the training of
clergy. Turning to south-east Turkey he, like Mr Eurlings, condemned
the PKK but called for a government policy not purely based on security
considerations. Regarding Cyprus, the Ankara Protocol must indeed
be implemented, he said, though an end to the economic isolation of
northern Cyprus could not be linked to this.
In conclusion, he told the House, "it is in our mutual interest that
Turkey pursues its transformation". It could serve as a bridge between
Europe and Islam, thus helping Europe to cope with "the greatest
challenge of our time". Ultimately, however, it was up to Turkey to
take reform further. Indeed the Copenhagen criteria should perhaps be
called the Ankara criteria, as "they are there for Turkish citizens,
not to please the EU".
Political group speakers
Speaking on behalf of the EPP-ED group, German MEP Elmar BROK stressed
the issues of human rights, minority rights, freedom of religion and of
expression. These, he said, were "preconditions" for EU membership. We
must clearly "spell out the facts": Turkey must fulfil the criteria. So
far it had not even implemented the Ankara Protocol. He also emphasised
that the financial aspects of the negotiations must be dealt with and
that the EU had "no financial leeway" under the Financial Perspective.
For the Socialists, Jan Marinus WIERSMA (NL) argued that the EU
"needs Turkey as a partner". The negotiation process was the best
way to build better relations with the country and there must be no
ambiguity: the aim of negotiations was to achieve Turkish membership.
He supported rapporteur Camiel Eurlings on the Armenian genocide:
Turkey should "recognise" what happened but this could not be a sine
qua non for membership as it was "not part of the Copenhagen criteria".
Andrew DUFF (ALDE, UK) on behalf of his group, stressed that EP’s
role was "to promote parliamentary democracy in Turkey". This meant
encouraging Turkey’s modernisation not putting up "spurious blocks"
to the process. Turkey’s candidature was a "defining moment for the
EU". If there were a "train crash" in Cyprus, there would be two
trains involved: one carrying "Turkey’s efforts to create a viable
reform of European Islam, where the prophet meets the Enlightenment",
the other carrying Europe’s efforts to develop a strong common foreign
and defence policy, to which Turkey could make "an extraordinary
contribution".
On behalf of his group, Joost LAGENDIJK (Greens/EFA, NL) said there
was a big problem with one point of the Eurlings report in its present
form: the paragraphs in which, following amendments instigated by lobby
groups, recognition of the Armenian genocide by Turkey was described
as a precondition for Turkey to join. He backed Mr Eurlings’ effort
to reinstate his original wording on this point.
More generally, he stressed the importance of being "critical but
fair" towards Turkey. The EP must "support people in Turkey who are
fighting for the same things as us".
For the GUE/NGL group, Vittorio AGNOLETTO (IT) said that his
group favoured Turkish membership of the EU. Nevertheless, there
had to be a political and diplomatic resolution to the Kurdish
question. The Turkish government had labelled the whole Kurdish
people as terrorists. He urged the Turkish government to talk to the
PKK and he also condemned the 80 writers and journalists being held
under Article 301 of the Turkish penal code.
For the UEN group, Konrad SZYMAÑSKI (PL) said that he welcomed the
critical report. Turkey still had a long way to go before it could join
the EU he said, namely Turkey must respect the rights of the Christian
minority. He also compared Ukraine to Turkey saying the former had
a much better record on human rights and prospects for membership.
Bastiaan BELDER (NL), for the IND/DEM group, also welcomed the report
but stated that the freedom of religion could not be exercised in
Turkey. He criticised the so-called "deep-state" for entering all
facets of society.
Andreas MOLZER (AT), a non-attached MEP, said that progress on
reform had been slow in Turkey. The EU had extended the deadline for
the recognition of Cyprus, but Turkey had still not done this. The
political reality was that Turkey was not ready to join because of
Cyprus, the non-recognition of the Armenian genocide and the Kurdish
question.
British and Irish Speakers
Sean Ó NEACHTAIN (UEN, IE) said: "May I say at the outset, that I am
a member of the European Parliament high level contact group that is
dealing with forging closer relations with the Turkish community in
Northern Cyprus. I am clearly aware of the sense of isolation that
many Turkish Cypriots feel, in light of the rejection of the Annan
plan. In fact, I believe that the European Union, together with
the United Nations, should continue to work in building peace and
reconciliation on the island of Cyprus.
But, Turkey too has serious obligations. For example, I do believe
that Turkey must open it’s ports and airports to Cypriot ships and
plans. This is an obligation that Turkey will have to honour, in
accordance, with the accession negotiations dealing with the Customs
Union chapter. I also feel that Turkey is going to have to look at
repealing clause 301 of it’s penal code. It is clear that significant
efforts are still needed in the field of human rights and fundamental
freedoms within Turkey."
Gerard BATTEN (IND/DEM, UK) questioned why Turkey wanted to join the
EU in the first place. May be he said, they wanted to join "the other
parasite nations" living off the British and German taxpayers.
Turkey, he said, should think about the impact of accession on itself;
it would mean, he said, losing control of its own destiny.
Charles TANNOCK (EPP-ED, GB) said that his party was in favour of
Turkish membership of the EU. However, the EU had to consider its
absorption capacity and potential impact on the structural funds. Mr
Tannock also highlighted the risks of unrestricted free-movement of
Turkish workers into the EU. Some studies, he said, had shown that
Turrkey was one of the most anti-American and anti-Israeli countries.
In particular, Mr Tannock criticised Turkey’s support for theocratic
Iran. Mr Tannock also pointed out the problems relating to the
recognition of the Armenian genocide and Cyprus. He said the
negotiations with Turkey would be "lengthy".
Simon COVENEY (EPP-ED, IE) stated that he had spent the previous week
in Turkey with the Human Rights subcommittee. He welcomed the draft
report as "tough but fair". On the Armenian issue, he said, that it
should not be a new pre-condition for accession. Mr Coveney said that
he supported the principal of Turkish membership, nevertheless he
was particularly concerned about the freedom of expression including
Article 301 of the Penal Code and resolving the Kurdish question.
Glenis WILLMOTT (PES, UK), like several other speakers, argued that
"the European Parliament needs to be frank" with Turkey about the
"serious problems" relating to freedom of expression, reform of the
security services and implementation of human rights legislation.
However, criticism must be "balanced, fair and honest". The prospect
of EU membership "has empowered modernisers and human rights defenders
in Turkey". And it would be "wrong to establish new preconditions
for membership that were not applied to other members".
In conclusion, she said "an EU with Turkey will entrench
multiculturalism" and help understanding between different religions.
Response to the debate – Council
Minister LEHTOMÂKI, replying for the Council, said that the debate
had been very thorough and highlighted the many challenges for both
Turkey and the EU. Turkey, was undoubtedly an important strategic
country. Enlargement would be carried out on the principal of equal
treatment and merit. It was important for Turkey to ratify and
implement the Ankara agreement which would allow trade with Northern
Cyprus and the access of Greek Cypriot ships into Turkish ports.
There also had to be a solution found at the UN level.
Response to the debate – Commission
Standing in for his colleague Olli Rehn, Development Commissioner
Louis Michel said the debate had set out the main issues clearly and
the Commission would take it into account in its report on Turkey
due for publication on 8 November. The Commission’s report would
be rigorous, objective and based on a wide range of data, including
Parliament’s views.
He stressed that in areas such as Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, the
dialogue between civilisations and the energy crisis, "Turkey is a
key player and an indispensable ally" of Europe.
It would, however, have to meet all the obligations – no-one would
be waving a magic wand. The Commission would be pushing the process
forward but it was important to point out that "Turkey does not have
to be evaluated today". Negotiations were very much "an evolutionary
process" and it was unfair just to take a snapshot of the current
state of affairs.
On the Armenian genocide, Mr Michel emphasised that this had never
been a precondition and to impose it as such now would amount to
"moving the goalposts". What mattered was "freedom of speech" and a
process of "internal awareness raising and conciliation".
–Boundary_(ID_y00R3gD/AF68m4 s/ejCJAg)–