International Initiative
Freedom for Ocalan Peace in Kurdistan
P.O. Box 100511, D-50445 Koeln
Telephone: +49 221 130 15 59
Fax: +49 221 139 30 71
E-Mail: info@freedom-for-ocalan.com
Url: www.freedom-for-ocalan.com
Cologne, 30 May 2005
INTERNATIONAL INITAITIVE BRIEFINGS:
Against all reason: Turkey tries to play
for time in Ocalan case
In the past, Turkey has always tried to play for time when facing
judgements that were critical of it, but has never been able to
avoid them. When it has tried to impose its will in international
law through political actions, employing the same methods as it
uses domestically, it has not worked. In the European Human Rights
Court (ECHR)s judgement of the case of Mr Öcalan we can
see the same behaviour and the same results.
For example, no one in Turkey questioned the high price of the
DSP-ANAP-MHP coalition governments decision to drag out the
payment of compensation after the 1998 ECHR judgement in the Loizou
case (which related to Cyprus). As might be recalled, though he
did not agree with the decision to award £ Cyp.320,000 ($US
500,000 in those days), Turkeys Permanent Representative to
the Council of Europe, Mr Numan Hazar, later, in 2003, had to write
a cheque for $m1.5 for the General Secretary of the Council, Mr
Walter Schwimmer. This was the only way to resolve a case which
put Turkeys membership of the Council of Europe at risk. It
looks as if Turkey is trying to do the same for the judgement in
the Öcalan case. But it should realise that it may end up as
the loser once again. Because even if the judgement by the ECHR
appears to be ambiguous, it is in fact quite clear and binding.
It said that because Turkey did not try Öcalan before an impartial
and independent tribunal, he did not get a fair trial.
As a result, the March 2003 judgement of the ECHR lower court has
been confirmed by the ECHR Grand Chamber on the 12 May 2005. But
because the judgement is difficult to understand, it creates problems
and leads to misinterpretation.
I was present at the announcement of the Courts judgement
and although I discussed it with the experts there I cannot say
that I understand it completely, but then neither do the experts.
This is why yesterday I rang the officials at the ECHR and discussed
it with them. I asked one of the senior officials why the Court
gave a judgement which is open to misinterpretation, how they envisage
it being carried out, and whether a retrial would really be insisted
on. The answer was in fact quite clear:
1. Judgements of the ECHR, despite some interpretations, are binding.
Article 46 of the Convention says Parties to the Convention,
commit themselves to the definite judgements of the Court where
they are the parties to the case.
2. This judgement is different from other judgements regarding violation
of Article 6 of the Convention in that it recommends a re-trial.
Hence this judgement sets a precedent.
3. The ECHR recommends retrial as a proper means to remedy the unfair
trial in the Öcalan case but it leaves the judgement to be
implemented by the Council of Ministers due to the peculiarity and
sensitivity of this case.
4. At the same time the Council of Ministers, as a political body,
will decide how to implement the judgement after consultations with
the Government of Turkey.
In other words, the ECHR has given a political judgement
that also shows the limits of the ECHR itself. It is the first time
that the Grand Chamber of the ECHR has made a judgement which seeks
to remedy the injustice persons are subjected to and in general
to prevent the repetition of such violations in this way. This is
why it is most probable that the Council of Ministers will abide
by the judgement. This is the expectation of the European Union
as well. The Commissioner for Expansion, Mr Olli Rehn has said Turkey
is required to comply with the ECHR judgement because it is a member
of the European Council and a candidate for the European Union.
The Grand Chamber of the ECHR, as is usual, has sent the judgement
to the Council of Ministers, which will have the issue on its agenda
at its 933rd meeting between 5 and 6 July 2005 and will presumably
give a decision after hearing the view of the Turkish delegation.
Until this date Mr Öcalans lawyers will be continuing
with their work. But the AKP government cannot avoid resolving this
issue whether or not it wants to.
This article was published under the title Council of Ministers
has the last word in the pro-Kurdish daily Ozgur Politika
on 19 May 2005.
Translated and edited by Peace in Kurdistan Campaign
|