BLACKLISTING BY STATE FORBIDDEN, LEGAL PROTECTION LACKING

Today’s Zaman
13 August 2008, Wednesday
Turkey

A list found at the house of Ergenekon suspect Fikret Emek shows
that the TSK Special Forces blacklisted 914 individuals in Ä°stanbul
between 1999 and 2000.

Evidence acquired through a probe into the Ergenekon terrorist
organization, a crime network accused of plotting to overthrow the
government, has revealed that the state is once again blacklisting
citizens based on personal information it has gathered even though
laws exist to prevent this.

The European Union accession process prompted Turkey to introduce
measures to prevent the blacklisting of individuals by the state or
other establishments, but more needs to be done. However, despite all
these shortcomings, blacklisted citizens do have some rights and can
fight any charges brought against them.

The evidence in question shows that the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK)
Special Forces blacklisted 914 individuals in Ä°stanbul between 1999
and 2000. The list classifies the individuals according to alleged
political links or leanings and religious identity. It also indicates
that some of the individuals are linked to the outlawed Kurdistan
Workers’ Party (PKK), various religious groups or the extreme left
or right.

The list was found at the house of Ergenekon suspect Fikret Emek,
who said blacklisting is "routine business" for the TSK Special
Forces. He compiled the list just before retiring.

The list brings to mind the events of Sept. 6-7, 1955. Following
rumors that the house in which Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of
the Turkish Republic, was born was bombed in Thessaloniki, Greece,
riots erupted in Ä°stanbul. The mob targeted the Greek minority,
the Jewish population and the Armenians, all noted on a list whose
owner is unknown.

The first laws making gathering information on private citizens more
difficult came into effect as part of the new Turkish Penal Code
(TCK), which was implemented on June 1, 2005. "The new TCK prohibits
gathering personal data and enshrines the protection of life in a
principle. Laws regulating this were for the first time introduced
with the new TCK, which also indicates that if a civil servant is
involved in the said information gathering, the penalty is greater,"
Fikret Ä°lkiz, a lawyer, says.

Ä°lkiz also notes that another law, known as the "right to acquire
information," enables citizens to ask the Interior Ministry and the
TSK if a record has been kept on him or her. If such a record exists,
the citizen in question has the right to seek reparations.

This may be the case in theory, but when Ahmet Aydın, the deputy
governor of Diyarbakır, filed a case against the gendarmerie,
claiming he was blacklisted, the court ruled against him. The
gendarmerie forces in Diyarbakır denied blacklisting Aydın.

Aydın claimed that personal information kept about him was sent to
him in letters by anonymous senders. He used these documents to prove
his case in court and in July demanded YTL 100,000 in compensation.

"We as citizens have more rights to protect us against blacklisting
today than we did in the past," Ä°lkiz points out, but adds that
further regulations are needed to protect personal data, noting
that this has been a requirement of the EU accession process since
2003. The draft bill for this is ready but has not yet been discussed
by Parliament. According to Ä°lkiz, apart from being an economic and
trade arrangement, this bill defines what constitutes personal data
and is something new in Turkish law.

Under the bill, no agency will have the authority to gather information
about an individual’s race, political opinions, philosophical beliefs,
religion, denomination or other types of convictions, membership in
an association, foundation or a union, health condition or private
affairs. It also introduces tough restrictions on the handling of
police and criminal records. The bill allows the gathering of personal
information only when the interest of the public good necessitates
such information gathering — and only as long as there is legislation
in place ensuring the confidentiality of such data. The bill entails
citizens’ right to know whether at any point personal information
about them has been recorded, the right to review any such data
and demand correction in cases of erroneous, mistaken or inadequate
data. Data collection shall not take place without the permission
of the relevant individual, with the exception of cases where legal
obligations might be involved, the bill proposes.

Yusuf AlataÅ~_, a lawyer and the former chairman of the Human
Rights Association (Ä°HD), points out that this bill introduces some
regulations but gives the impression that it was prepared to please
the EU.

"When you read the draft carefully, you can see that the main idea is
to protect the state but to also give some rights to citizens. In a
country like ours, where the human rights record is poor, the mentality
should be to expand the rights of citizens. ‘Public interests’ and
‘state security’ should be strictly defined," he says.

Ä°lkiz and AlataÅ~_ also note that the Code on Criminal Procedure (CMK)
and the Law on Police Powers regulate data gathering, too. For example,
the CMK regulates under which conditions surveillance is allowed. Under
the Law on Police Powers, the state may gather information on
individuals who commit offenses that carry long prison terms, offenses
against public security and property, smuggling or vagrancy, those
who work in brothels, as prostitutes and their procurers and those
who prosecutors or courts of law ask to be investigated.

AlataÅ~_ says when the Ergenekon evidence brought to light the
blacklisting of citizens, some comments suggested that the state had
the right to collect data on its citizens for its interests but that
the data gathering in Ä°stanbul overstepped the limits.

"The real danger is this mentality. To say that the judiciary is
taking care of this crime is not enough. The government has to devise
and implement strict measures to regulate this matter," he says.

–Boundary_(ID_BIMqsNquivzu/ki+J0l94g)–