Tweet
AKP LOOKING FOR END TO ARTICLE 301 DEBATE
The New Anatolian, Turkey
Feb 21 2007
Disappointed by a recent series of remarks from the elites of
the ruling party, many have come to believe that the debate on
controversial Article 301 will sink into oblivion should civil society
give up pressuring the government.
Faruk Celik, a deputy group leader of the ruling Justice and
Development (AK) Party, yesterday gave signals that they are looking
to put an end to the debate, continuing on from what Justice Minister
Cemil Cicek said late on Monday after a Cabinet meeting. He declined
to comment on whether they planned to end the debate with a landmark
change.
"Proposals from those who find the article ambiguous are no clearer
than the article," Cicek said, adding that the proposals -- given by
four different platforms so far -- fail to provide a solution.
His comments, indicating the common view of the Cabinet, were further
clarified by Celik, who said that there is a commission working on the
issue but that it was not a topic of the party's Central Executive
Committee (MYK) meeting nor had they discussed it with the premier
in detail.
"I will meet with the premier after the group meeting. It should have
been dropped by now. It will either be changed or not, but it really
should be removed from people's agenda," he added.
If the AK Party opts to leave the article as is, it is no secret that
the move would be praised by several political parties beginning with
the main opposition party, according to Republican People's Party
(CHP) deputy leader Onur Oymen, who late on Monday reiterated their
opposition to even the slightest change.
The CHP has said on several platforms that that a change would enable
insults against the state and nation, describing it as an unacceptable
practice not only for Turkey but by all countries in the world.
Oymen, speaking at a special academic gathering to discuss the article
and the offense of insult, said that an insult cannot be accepted
within the limits of freedom of speech, calling on the government to
resist pressure from abroad.
The situation in the country over the article shows a great divide,
with on one side liberal and left-wing activists, and mostly
conservative politicians and lawyers on the other.
Many argue that the debate is not only a legal one but should rather
be considered in terms of the survival struggle of the nation-state
vis-a-vis the globalization process, as put at the same gathering by
Court of Appeals Honorary Public Prosecutor Sabih Kanadoglu.
He said that the ultimate aim behind changing the law in the pretext
of guaranteeing freedom of speech is to damage and even end the
country's unity as a nation-state and leave it vulnerable to all
kinds of threats and assaults.
The debate also bears an explosive angle, including the Armenian
genocide claims, which was underlined by Vural Savas, another Court
of Appeals honorary public prosecutor, saying those who want to annul
the law want to insult the nation with the so-called genocide.
On the other hand, activists, besides holding demonstrations and
making press statements against the controversial law, maintain
their efforts to block the proper operation of courts through filing
complaints against themselves.
Over 500 people, who came together to protest the bill using legal
mechanisms and had earlier denounced themselves, on Monday were called
to Istanbul's Sisli Public Prosecutor's Office for testimonies.
The group has concentrated their 12-year efforts on Article 301,
especially after the killing of journalist Hrant Dink, who was tried
under the law, last month.
Group spokesperson Sanar Yurdatapan said that their passive resistance
campaign will spread to the southeastern cities of Diyarbakir and Urfa.
The New Anatolian, Turkey
Feb 21 2007
Disappointed by a recent series of remarks from the elites of
the ruling party, many have come to believe that the debate on
controversial Article 301 will sink into oblivion should civil society
give up pressuring the government.
Faruk Celik, a deputy group leader of the ruling Justice and
Development (AK) Party, yesterday gave signals that they are looking
to put an end to the debate, continuing on from what Justice Minister
Cemil Cicek said late on Monday after a Cabinet meeting. He declined
to comment on whether they planned to end the debate with a landmark
change.
"Proposals from those who find the article ambiguous are no clearer
than the article," Cicek said, adding that the proposals -- given by
four different platforms so far -- fail to provide a solution.
His comments, indicating the common view of the Cabinet, were further
clarified by Celik, who said that there is a commission working on the
issue but that it was not a topic of the party's Central Executive
Committee (MYK) meeting nor had they discussed it with the premier
in detail.
"I will meet with the premier after the group meeting. It should have
been dropped by now. It will either be changed or not, but it really
should be removed from people's agenda," he added.
If the AK Party opts to leave the article as is, it is no secret that
the move would be praised by several political parties beginning with
the main opposition party, according to Republican People's Party
(CHP) deputy leader Onur Oymen, who late on Monday reiterated their
opposition to even the slightest change.
The CHP has said on several platforms that that a change would enable
insults against the state and nation, describing it as an unacceptable
practice not only for Turkey but by all countries in the world.
Oymen, speaking at a special academic gathering to discuss the article
and the offense of insult, said that an insult cannot be accepted
within the limits of freedom of speech, calling on the government to
resist pressure from abroad.
The situation in the country over the article shows a great divide,
with on one side liberal and left-wing activists, and mostly
conservative politicians and lawyers on the other.
Many argue that the debate is not only a legal one but should rather
be considered in terms of the survival struggle of the nation-state
vis-a-vis the globalization process, as put at the same gathering by
Court of Appeals Honorary Public Prosecutor Sabih Kanadoglu.
He said that the ultimate aim behind changing the law in the pretext
of guaranteeing freedom of speech is to damage and even end the
country's unity as a nation-state and leave it vulnerable to all
kinds of threats and assaults.
The debate also bears an explosive angle, including the Armenian
genocide claims, which was underlined by Vural Savas, another Court
of Appeals honorary public prosecutor, saying those who want to annul
the law want to insult the nation with the so-called genocide.
On the other hand, activists, besides holding demonstrations and
making press statements against the controversial law, maintain
their efforts to block the proper operation of courts through filing
complaints against themselves.
Over 500 people, who came together to protest the bill using legal
mechanisms and had earlier denounced themselves, on Monday were called
to Istanbul's Sisli Public Prosecutor's Office for testimonies.
The group has concentrated their 12-year efforts on Article 301,
especially after the killing of journalist Hrant Dink, who was tried
under the law, last month.
Group spokesperson Sanar Yurdatapan said that their passive resistance
campaign will spread to the southeastern cities of Diyarbakir and Urfa.