Conscientious Objection in Turkey

Report by Hulya Ücpinar

What happens to somebody who declares his conscientious objection before starting his military service?

The objector is confronted with martial jurisdiction consisting of several elements. In a first step legal action is being taken against everybody who publicly declares his conscientious objection. The offence: Having cooled down the population's enthusiasm for the military service. According to § 155 of the penal code the sentence for this varies from 2 months up to two years of imprisonment, a penalty which can not be suspended on probation or converted into a fine. § 155 is one of the paragraphs dealing with "treason" which standardise offences against the state. Treason is in the responsibility of the state security court. Nevertheless in practice most legal procedures which are brought before a state security court are dropped or not even opened. This situation was not to the satisfaction of the Turkish army's general staff.

At the instigation of this very general staff since December 1993 legal procedures based on § 155 of the penal code are being transferred to the military court of the general staff. It is since then that legal procedures against civilians take place before military courts. The divisions of these courts have only three judges - two lawyers and on non-lawyer as representative of the military. The divisions of this court are not responsible to the judge's principle but are as members of the army under the disciplinary regulations. In these procedures the rule of law is superseded simply because the judges are directly responsible to the minister of defence and therefore not bound to legal principles.

It is almost impossible to make these procedures public. It is not officially forbidden but these courts are located on military territory. Therefore neither photographic nor other cameras can be brought inside and the press is told off the record not to report.

The court can send the CO into custody or back to his unit. This is the next situation the CO is confronted with. Here he is forced to wear uniform. If he insists on his objection, more legal procedures are to follow. From now on the army regards him as a soldier, so all further legal procedures take place before military courts. The CO can as well be taken into custody or remain free for the duration of the procedure. This is completely left to the court. Whereas for the objection to medical examination he can be charged only once, for all "offences" he commits as a soldier he can be charged constantly and repeatedly. This means in practice that one is released and imprisoned again, released and re-imprisoned. It is a vicious circle and nobody knows when it will be broken.

For a CO it is most important that one tries to visit him as well as to build up contact with the commander and convey to him that the issue is conscientious objection. It is important to make evident that this person is not alone but that his objction's procedures are being watched by sympathetic persons and institutions. And it must be made clear that anything that happens to the CO will lead to consequences. Because of the considerable obstructions these actions can only be taken by lawyers. They have to monitor the situation of the CO permanently. This requires them to be well organised and to have the respective idealism and professionalism.

During the procedures before the general staff and in other procedures we have pointed time and again to resolutions, decisions and recommendations of the UN, the European Parliament, the OSCE and the European Union and tried to introduce them as legal documents into the procedures. We have pointed out that the European Human Rights Convention (EHRC) imposes responsibility on Turkey too. Therefore we have read it out loud in court thus introducing it into the procedures but this has not lead to any positive results. Simultaneously we have explained that as well § 155 of the penal code as § 45 of the military penal code contradict the constitution and the European Human Rights Convention. But even on this issue the court did not take on our point of view. In a next step we have executed our individual right to petition after the European Human Rights Convention. In the petition procedure we have pointed out the contradiction between § 155 of the penal code and the freedom of opinion and opposed the structure of the military courts. Another petition was concerned with the maltreatment of COs in the prisons.

In Turkey we are discussing the right to conscientious objection since 7 years. Especially last years practice has brought us new knowledge. For us the most important thing is the CO's complete confession and explanation of his conviction when confronted with state and army. Furthermore it is very important to build groups of supporters who carry out campaigns. To avoid the maltreatment of COs at any time and for any reason international support groups are vital. The international support is especially important to avoid the increase of pressure on our friends. On behalf of my friends I therefore wish to thank all those who did and do support us and I hope that our relations will remain.