TURKEY: 20 JUNE
TRIAL OF WAR RESISTERS

Four Turkish war resisters will be on trial before the Military Court of Ankara on 20 June. They face sentences of up to three years in prison for statements made at a press conference held in support of conscientious objection in May 1994. They are accused of "trying to alientate the people from the army" under Article 155 of the Turkish Penal Code.

This message contains:

A. BRIEFING ON THE TRIAL OF TURKISH WAR RESISTERS

BACKGROUND

On 17 May 1994 the Istanbul War Resisters' Assocation (Savas Karsitlari Dernegi - SKD) organised a press conference. Here the association's chairperson Arif Hikmet Iyidogan expressed his views on "the war in the south-east" (in Turkey it is illegal to refer to Kurdistan). He called on conscripts not to go to the war and for the right to conscientious objection in Turkey. Osman Murat Ulke (chair of the Izmir War Resisters' Association) declared that his organisation supported these views. At the press conference four people declared themselves as conscientious objectors: Gokhan Demirkiran (representing a student political platform), Mehmet Sefa Fersal, Caglar Gurbuz and Ertugrul Guresin.

Representatives from three German peace groups also made statements at the press conference in support of the right to conscientious objection.

After the press conference, nine people were arrested, of whom five were released soon afterwards: the three Germans and two Turks.

Later the four remaining Turks (Arif Hikmet Iyidogan, Osman Murat Ulke, Mehmet Sefa Fersal, and Gokhan Dermikiran) were accused of violating Article 155 of the Turkish Penal Law (TCK), by "trying to alienate the people from the army".

Since December 1993, all cases under Article 155 have been dealt with by the Military Court of Ankara under a ruling of the National Security Court.

The trial against the four has already had a number of sessions, of which the session on 20 June is expected to be the last. The military decisions to a decision at or shortly after this last session.

WHY IS THIS TRIAL SPECIAL?

1. The trial does not deal with the breaking of the anti- terror law.

2. The trial is in a military court, but the four accused are civilians. The Turkish military could argue that the accused are conscripts, but the accused have made it clear that they do not see themselves as soldiers, nor they intend ever to be soldiers. (Arif Hikmet Iyidogan, who was for some time imprisoned in the military prison in Ankara, did follow military orders to put on a military uniform, but during a session of the trial on 9 August 1994, while testifying that he was not a soldier and would never be one, he calmly took off his uniform and neatly folded it in a pile in front of him.) It is very unusual in Western countries that civilians can be tried by military courts.

3. The four are accused of breaking Article 155 TCK. This article is used by the Turkish authorities to restrict the freedom of expression of civilians who think that a nonviolent and non-military approach to the problems in the south-east of Turkey is better for all inhabitants of the Turkish state.

4. The military courts in Turkey are by no means independent. The military judges are under military orders and therefore are not free to judge. Also the accused are under military orders during the trial sessions. It often happens that accused are ordered not to have contacts with a lawyer. It is estimated that because of this practice, in 90 per cent of the cases brought before a military court the accused have had no contact with a lawyer and have not been represented by a lawyer at the trial. As a consequence, lawyers in general in Turkey have little knowledge about military laws and military trials.

5. The Military Court in Ankara links the breach of Article 155 TCK with Article 58 of the Turkish Military Penal Law (TACK), which states that an attempt to break the national will to resist can be punished. The four are therefore accused of breaking Article 58 TACK. It is, however, unclear whether this article is applicable in times of peace, as it can be questioned if the national will to resist can be under threat except in time of war. With this trial, the Military Court of Ankara therefore clearly demonstrates that the Turkish state is at war, a fact which is officially denied.

6. The trial is a perfect example of how the human rights violations of basic democratic rights are in close relation to the military operations in the south-east. It is clear that the Turkish government is opposed to freedom of expression in Turkey about the military operations in the south-east as this would weaken the Turkish military. On the other hand, Turkey denies being at war because this means its military activities should be monitored by international observers and judged according to the Geneva Conventions.
   The accused can by no means be described as PKK-activists, Kurdish activists or separatists, as their pacifist intentions make clear. Nevertheless they are considered a threat to the Turkish military. The Turkish government - by letting civilians be tried before a military court for breaking Article 155 simply because they exercised their basic human right of freedom of expression - demonstrates that limited is its commitment to extending the basic democratic rights of Turkish citizens.

7. The Turkish government has officially announced that they will change a number of laws that are at the moment serious restricting the Turkish citizens from exercising their human rights. However, neither Article 155 TCK, nor any of the Military Penal Laws are within the packet of laws due to be changed in the near future. It is clear that whatever moves towards democratisation the Turkish government proposes to consider, these do not include the right to criticise the military or the right conscientious objection to military service.

The accused can be sentenced to anything between two months and three years in prison. Arif Hikmet Iyidogan and Osman Murat Ulke are expected to be sentenced to two years and six months respectively.

B. INTERNATIONAL DELEGATION

The delegation

• supports the right to conscientious objection, and
• condemns the procedure of bringing civilians before a military court

• Andreas Speck - from Oldenburg, Germany - representing War Resisters' International plus the Foederation Gewaltfreier Aktionsgruppen and Graswurzelrevolution
• Bart Horeman - from Utrecht, the Netherlands - representing Verening Dienstweigeraars
• Gillers Berodier - from Evry, France - representing the Comite de Coordination pour le Service Civil
• Ilke Anger - from Cologne, Germany - representing Deutsche Friedensgesellschaft-Vereinigte KriegsdienstgegnerInnen
• Lars Becker - from Brussels, Belgium - representing the European Bureau for Conscientious Objection
• Odette Grille - from Mons, France - representing the Union Pacifiste de France

C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

WRI Turkey-Kurdistan Working Group,
c/o Rudi Friedrich,
tel/fax: +49 69 845016

The coordinating point for the delegation is:

• until 21 June: DFG-VK Hessen / Gernot Lennert +49 69 431440, fax 4990007
• after 21 June: DFG-VK NRW +49 231 818032, fax 818031