Tweet
The Globe and Mail (Canada)
January 20, 2007 Saturday
Editorial: Turkey and Hrant Dink
The murder of Hrant Dink, a prominent Turkish writer and editor of an
Armenian-language newspaper, has been forcefully condemned by Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who said yesterday that "a
bullet has been fired at democracy and freedom of expression" in
Turkey. Indeed it has. But it is not enough to lash out at the
"traitorous hands" behind Mr. Dink's killing. Mr. Erdogan needs to
look at Turkey's own role in assaulting free expression.
Mr. Dink was prosecuted three times on charges of "denigrating
Turkishness" under Article 301 of the Turkish penal code. His crime?
Speaking openly about the mass killings of ethnic Armenians at the
beginning of the 20th century, killings that Turkey refuses to come
clean on. Mr. Dink's conviction on one of those charges was upheld by
a court last year. He is not alone. Dozens of writers and
journalists, including Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk, have been
similarly prosecuted.
Article 301 came into force in 2005, replacing an even harsher law,
as part of a package of reforms aimed at easing Turkey's entry into
the European Union. It was immediately condemned by human-rights
groups, which say it poses a direct threat to free expression.
Amnesty International warned in 2005 that those "who express views
which run counter to 'official history' or the dominant ideology may
find themselves prosecuted." Prosecutions such as that of Mr. Dink
have borne that out. Yet Mr. Erdogan's government has failed to
repeal the law.
Authorities also failed to act on Mr. Dink's understandable fears for
his safety. He had received death threats, and in his last column
expressed concern about the absence of protection by police despite
numerous complaints. "Who knows what other injustices I will be up
against," he wrote. Now, tragically, we all know. The human-rights
campaigner has suffered the ultimate injustice; his life has been
brutally snuffed out. Official Turkey needs to respond to this crime
with more than an obligatory round of hand-wringing.
A spokeswoman for Amnesty International said yesterday that Turkey
retains "a number of harsh laws which endorse the suppression of
freedom of speech. These laws, coupled with the persisting official
statements by senior government, state and military officials
condemning critical debate and dissenting opinion, create an
atmosphere in which violent attacks can take place." If it is ever to
achieve its goal of admission into the European Union, Turkey must
own up to the dark episodes of its past, and at the same time
demonstrate that it is prepared to fully embrace freedoms in the
present - freedoms of the kind that Mr. Dink agitated for at the
expense of his life.
January 20, 2007 Saturday
Editorial: Turkey and Hrant Dink
The murder of Hrant Dink, a prominent Turkish writer and editor of an
Armenian-language newspaper, has been forcefully condemned by Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who said yesterday that "a
bullet has been fired at democracy and freedom of expression" in
Turkey. Indeed it has. But it is not enough to lash out at the
"traitorous hands" behind Mr. Dink's killing. Mr. Erdogan needs to
look at Turkey's own role in assaulting free expression.
Mr. Dink was prosecuted three times on charges of "denigrating
Turkishness" under Article 301 of the Turkish penal code. His crime?
Speaking openly about the mass killings of ethnic Armenians at the
beginning of the 20th century, killings that Turkey refuses to come
clean on. Mr. Dink's conviction on one of those charges was upheld by
a court last year. He is not alone. Dozens of writers and
journalists, including Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk, have been
similarly prosecuted.
Article 301 came into force in 2005, replacing an even harsher law,
as part of a package of reforms aimed at easing Turkey's entry into
the European Union. It was immediately condemned by human-rights
groups, which say it poses a direct threat to free expression.
Amnesty International warned in 2005 that those "who express views
which run counter to 'official history' or the dominant ideology may
find themselves prosecuted." Prosecutions such as that of Mr. Dink
have borne that out. Yet Mr. Erdogan's government has failed to
repeal the law.
Authorities also failed to act on Mr. Dink's understandable fears for
his safety. He had received death threats, and in his last column
expressed concern about the absence of protection by police despite
numerous complaints. "Who knows what other injustices I will be up
against," he wrote. Now, tragically, we all know. The human-rights
campaigner has suffered the ultimate injustice; his life has been
brutally snuffed out. Official Turkey needs to respond to this crime
with more than an obligatory round of hand-wringing.
A spokeswoman for Amnesty International said yesterday that Turkey
retains "a number of harsh laws which endorse the suppression of
freedom of speech. These laws, coupled with the persisting official
statements by senior government, state and military officials
condemning critical debate and dissenting opinion, create an
atmosphere in which violent attacks can take place." If it is ever to
achieve its goal of admission into the European Union, Turkey must
own up to the dark episodes of its past, and at the same time
demonstrate that it is prepared to fully embrace freedoms in the
present - freedoms of the kind that Mr. Dink agitated for at the
expense of his life.