 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
IV. FOUR CASE STUDIES
1. THE HUMAN RIGHTS FOUNDATION OF TURKEY
Turkish scientists have become victims of Turkey's pervasive human rights violations. Turkish legislation is used against scientists who peacefully express their opinions and attempt to carry out their professional obligations.
The cases detailed in this section concern:
- representatives of the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, including its physicians, for conducting human rights documentation and treating torture survivors;
- Seyfettin Kizilkan, a physician, persecuted for his outspoken promotion of democratic principles and for the treatment of individuals suspected of being PKK guerrillas;
- Haluk Gerger, a political scientist, imprisoned and fined for his opposition to the conflict in the Southeast and his advocacy of Kurdish rights; and
-
Ismail Besikci, a sociologist, imprisoned early in his career as he attempted to document the historical and cultural identity of the Kurds.
These cases demonstrate how Turkey's long-standing conflict with its Kurdish minority has affected all sectors of society by branding all who oppose state ideology as terrorists and treating them as such under the law.
THE HUMAN RIGHTS FOUNDATION OF TURKEY
 A judge presides over one of the trials against the HRFT |
Attacks against organizations that monitor human rights violations can be explained, in part, by the view expressed by Huriye Hanim, Security Director of Diyarbakir. During an interview with an AAAS-sponsored delegation in November 1996, Mr. Hanim alleged that the Human Rights Association was a working branch of the PKK and their reports were propaganda pushed by the PKK. This sentiment seems to extend to any individual who publicizes Turkey's poor human rights record. Turkish authorities have refused to let an Amnesty International researcher into the country, and in 1995 detained an Amnesty International delegate under incommunicado detention for two days before expelling him from the country.[1]
The US Department of State reports that officials of various government agencies have continued to harass, intimidate, indict, and imprison human rights monitors, journalists, and lawyers for ideas they have expressed in public forums."[2] This includes the documentation of torture and other human rights violations. "Government agents have harassed human rights monitors, as well as lawyers and doctors involved in documenting human rights violations."[3]
The Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, whose torture treatment and rehabilitation activities were targeted by government officials for the first time in May 1996, has faced repeated government attacks for its human rights documentation efforts.
In 1989, members of the Turkish Human Rights Association founded the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (hereinafter the Foundation). The Human Rights Association has monitored human rights violations since its inception in 1986, and therefore recognized a need to bring physicians into the practice of torture treatment.[4] In the wake of the 1980 military coup, many of the Foundation's founding members had either directly or indirectly been affected by the prevalence of torture in Turkey. Following the coup, thousands of Turkish citizens were imprisoned. Many were tortured. Those sentenced to long prison terms are only now being released.
In order to be reincorporated into Turkish society these individuals require professional medical and psychological assistance. To meet these needs, the Foundation established four centers for the treatment and rehabilitation of torture survivors. They are located in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, and Adana. A fifth center in Diyarbakir was closed by authorities just four days after its opening in June 1998. The center was allowed to reopen on 30 July after providing local authorities with additional documentation.
Through the assistance of international organizations that refined such treatment, the Foundation became the first organization in Turkey to provide proven effective medical treatment for torture survivors. The Foundation also became an alternative source for survivors of torture to obtain medical reports documenting their injuries. Previously, torture survivors were forced to rely on official, state-employed medical personnel for such reports. Medical personnel performing examinations for the state were and continue to be threatened and coerced to provide fraudulent medical reports indicating that torture did not take place.[5] Although the Foundation's medical reports are often ignored by Turkish courts, such documentation is crucial for victims who may find redress at the European Human Rights Court, or who seek to document what has happened to them.
From the beginning, Foundation members have made the documentation of human rights violations a major component of their mandate. The Foundation maintains a documentation center in Ankara where information on human rights violations in Turkey is gathered from the Human Rights Association, the press, and through their casework. A compilation of this information is published annually, while two to five page reports are disseminated daily around the world and to various embassies in Ankara.
The Human Rights Foundation of Turkey estimates that ninety percent of their patients seeking treatment for injuries they sustained under torture were detained for political reasons.[6] When the center in Adana opened, the number of patients from the Southeast increased. In 1996, the Foundation treated 576 people in its rehabilitation centers in Adana, Ankara, Istanbul, and Izmir.
Of the 576 people, thirteen were under fifteen years of age, and forty-seven between the ages of sixteen and eighteen; 291 of the Human Rights Foundation's applicants were tortured in 1996; of that total, 196 had been tortured in security centers. The other incidents of torture took place in police stations, gendarmerie stations, and prisons and other places.[7]
Foundation doctors have found that the physical torture experienced by political detainees is more severe than that experienced by criminal detainees. According to the Foundation, the general prison population is made up of seventy percent criminal detainees and thirty percent political prisoners. However, the Foundation's patient population comprises ninety percent former political detainees and only ten percent released criminals.
The Foundation's documentation work has repeatedly placed its representatives at odds with the Turkish government. Prior to 1996, the Foundation's documentation work alone led to numerous prosecutions of its executive directors and board members. Yavuz Onen, president of the Foundation and president and general secretary of the Union of Chambers of Engineers of Balkan Countries, and Fevzi Argun, the Foundation's research director, were charged with violation of the "law to fight terrorism" on 29 November 1994. The charges stemmed from the publication of the Foundation's report File of Torture 1980-1994, which inter alia documented the cases of 420 people who were reported to have died in detention. The report was banned on 13 December 1994 by the Diyarbakir State Security Court. Onen and Argun were charged with producing propaganda and disturbing national unity, because of a reference to the "Kurdish Question" in the report. They were acquitted on 11 January 1995.
 Defense lawyers prepare before HRFT trial |
While the Foundation's documentation work has been beset by constant state interference, until May 1996 the Foundation's centers for the treatment and rehabilitation of torture survivors maintained good relations with state authorities. Government officials attended the openings of the Foundation's torture treatment centers, including the 1991 opening of the Istanbul center, which was attended by then-Minister of Health Yildrim Aktuna. In addition, in 1993, Aktuna participated in a conference organized by the Foundation, and attended the 1995 opening of the Foundation's Adana center, which was also attended by the then-Minister of Human Rights and the governor of Adana.
In an atmosphere of increased sensitivity to criticism of Turkey's human rights record as the government prepared to host the United Nations Habitat II Conference, the government, in April 1996, stepped up pressure against the Foundation's torture treatment centers. Several government ministries began investigations based on allegations made by the Foreign Ministry that the Foundation did not undertake rehabilitation work at its centers, but actually engaged in political activities and fabricated cases of human rights violations.[10] The Foreign Ministry targeted the Foundation because they were the source of documentation used by critics of Turkey's human rights record.
The investigations resulted in the unprecedented interference by the Turkish government in the work of the Foundation's torture treatment centers. Investigations were conducted by five state agencies, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Justice, the Directorate of Foundations, and the State Security Court, into all four of the Foundation's centers. The involvement of the State Security Court, which deals with "defendants accused of crimes such as terrorism, drug smuggling, membership in illegal organizations, and espousing or disseminating ideas prohibited by law as "damaging the indivisibility of the state,"[11] demonstrated the degree to which the state considered the Foundation a threat. When representatives of the Foundation were asked to appear before the State Security Court as part of an ongoing investigation, they were told that they had been producing negative propaganda against the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
While cases were investigated in Izmir and Ankara, they were not brought to trial. However, in May 1996 a case was opened against the Foundation's Adana center. Representatives of the Foundation, Tufan Kose, a doctor, and Mustafa Cincilik, a lawyer, were charged under Articles 526 and 530 of the Turkish Penal Code for "operating an unlicensed health center," and "negligence in denouncing a crime."[12] In November 1996, a case was opened against the Foundation's Istanbul representative under similar charges. The Foundation's Istanbul representative was acquitted due to lack of evidence. Yet the Adana case proceeded. While government officials characterized the case as minor, it received an inordinate amount of attention from central authorities. [13]
This was a dangerous incursion by the government into professional medical ethics. Particularly disturbing to medical professionals is the court's demand that the Adana center turn over all of its files, including confidential patient records and the names of individuals who have collaborated with the center in its medical work. The defendants refused to follow the court's order, citing physician-patient confidentiality as one of their arguments. In their defense, they presented a dossier of statements from international medical professionals about how torture treatment centers operate, as well as a document, indicating that the files would not be provided to the court because to do so would breach physician-patient confidentiality. In addition, a World Medical Association representative presented a statement to the court reiterating that, "confidential medical information of this nature should only be handed over with the specific consent of the patient concerned. Without specific consent, doctors should not hand over such information."[14] The Foundation also made reference to the International Code of Medical Ethics (World Medical Association 1949, 1968, and 1983), indicating that "a physician shall preserve absolute confidentiality on all he knows about his patient even if his patient has died."[15]
Numerous international observers representing a variety of health and human rights organizations attended the trials in Adana, along with local supporters from various organizations in Turkey. The author observed six of the Foundation's trials, including a trial in July 1996 that was attended by the AAAS-sponsored delegation. Also attending the trial were Dr. Ian Field, Secretary General of the World Medical Association, Inc.; Jorgen Funder, Managing Director of the Danish Medical Association; members of parliament from Denmark and Sweden; representatives from centers for the treatment of torture survivors in Chile, the US, and Denmark; as well as representatives from human rights organizations in Germany, Italy, and France. In addition, the issue was raised during the 1996 Stockholm meeting of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe. This case received significant international attention, because the real question before the court was Turkey's willingness to protect medical ethical standards when they conflict with the government's political agenda. "If this professional silence is broken, the torture victims may become endangered, and the confidentiality, which is the basis of any rehabilitation work with torture victims, will be removed."[16]
The trial against the Foundation's Adana center was in session eight times in the span of eight months. Finally, on 2 May 1997, Mustafa Cincilik was acquitted of the charge of operating an unlicensed health clinic. However, Tufan Kose, the center's physician, was fined 12,000,525TL (approximately US$100) for negligence in denouncing a crime. The verdict against Tufan Kose will be appealed to the Supreme Court.
The charge against Tufan Kose ironically refers to the crime of torture. The state asserts that it is a crime to treat a torture survivor without informing the state that torture has occurred and handing over the individual's medical files. Providing such information to the government authorities of a state that is responsible for inflicting torture clearly jeopardizes the security of patients and impedes their rehabilitation. Medical ethical standards and the Foundation's commitment to human rights preclude it from complying with this statute. The Foundation's legal argument stems from the fact that current legislation is not adequate to deal with its unique position in Turkish society and does not comply with Turkey's obligations under United Nations and European conventions against torture.[17]
Furthermore, the Foundation's position is unique among centers that treat victims of torture. While the majority of torture treatment centers around the world treat victims who have been tortured in other countries, in Turkey most applicants for treatment for torture are Turkish citizens. They live under extremely tense psychological conditions and fear re-imprisonment and additional torture. Indeed, while the Foundation's hearings were proceeding, new patients complained that while they were being tortured, their torturers mockingly told them that they could go to the Foundation to be "fixed."
According to the Foundation's doctors, most applicants apply for treatment about one week after their release. They apply hesitantly, fearing that their application will be used against them. The Foundation fears that the Ministry's request for patient files will keep those in need of treatment from seeking it from the Foundation. They therefore insist that the state respect three fundamental values central to the conduct of their work:
1) patient files must be sacrosanct;
2) patients' names and addresses must be confidential; and
3) participating physicians must remain anonymous.
The crisis arises when these values conflict with the state's agenda. According to Foundation and Medical Association representatives, the treatment and rehabilitation of torture victims should not fall under the authority of the state. They challenge the right of the state to regulate the treatment and rehabilitation of torture survivors.
During the trials, Foundation representatives did not invoke the statute of limitations, which became applicable to their case as of December 1996. They believed that this case would provide the legal precedent necessary to permit institutions treating torture survivors to work within the ethical standards necessary for such treatment. The Court failed to provide such protection.
 Tufan Kose with the HRFT Executive Director at a press conference after a trial in Adana |
The Adana case is only one of a number of strategies the government has used to interfere with the Foundation's work. The Directorate of Foundations has informed the Foundation that they must request a decree from the government in order to collaborate and cooperate with international organizations. This means that the Foundation must seek the government's permission to work with the United Nations or the European Council even though the Foundation is independent.
In addition, on 17 June 1998, just three days after the opening of the Diyarbakir torture treatment center, the inauguration of which was attended by both local and national officials as well as international guests, Foundation representatives were informed that the center's opening was illegal. Shortly afterwards, fifteen policemen entered the building to close down the center. The pretext for the closure was said to be lack of documentation provided by the General Directorate of Foundations in the application submitted to the Diyarbakir Regional Directorate. The General Directorate of Foundations is the official body charged with authorizing the establishment and maintaining inspections of Turkish foundations.
The center was allowed to reopen on 30 July 1998. The establishment of the Diyarbakir center has special significance. Diyarbakir is one of the cities in closest proximity to the areas of armed conflict in the southeast of Turkey, and it is where many refugees from evacuated villages have settled.
The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment has underscored the crucial need for torture treatment facilities in Turkey to operate without governmental interference and with guarantees that medical ethical standards will be respected.
The Turkish public has become desensitized to incidents of police abuse. Beatings of university students and others during demonstrations are regularly televised. However, a highly publicized incident involving the torture of children in Manisa elicited public outrage. In early January 1997, sixteen school children, mostly teenagers, were detained on charges of membership in a radical leftist illegal armed opposition group. During their eleven-day detention the children were tortured. A parliamentarian from the region, who went to the police station to inquire about the children, found them lying on the floor naked and blindfolded. Despite the lack of evidence other than the students' confessions, which were extracted under torture, six students were sentenced to twelve and a half years' imprisonment, one student was sentenced to three years, nine months, and four students to four and a half years. The other five were acquitted.
Ten police officers, including two superintendents from Manisa, were charged with torturing the children. Despite overwhelming evidence, the court did not order the police charged in the case to appear in court so their accusers could identify them.[18] In March 1998, the Manisa Penal Court acquitted the officers, claiming that the torture of the teenagers had not been established; the youngsters, however, still face charges.[19]
According to the US Department of State's Turkey Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1996, there is a "climate of impunity reflected in the relatively small number of convictions [of police officers prosecuted for killings and torture]... No real improvement can occur while law enforcement officers who resort to torture remain unpunished or receive minor sentences." According to the International Helsinki Federation, several police officers were prosecuted for torture, killings, and ill-treatment in 1997, but none were sentenced.[20]
Turkish officials continually deny the prevalence of torture. In an interview with a AAAS-sponsored joint delegation to Turkey in July 1996, Altan Hacioglu, former Human Rights Minister, stated that, "no country would admit to systematic use of torture." He added that, "torture is often due to lack of democracy, culture, and institutions of law and order."
The Turkish government's interference with the work of the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey is in violation of international human rights standards enumerated in international instruments to which Turkey is legally bound as a State Party. Demands that physicians report the names of survivors of torture seeking treatment represents a serious breach of internationally accepted standards of medical ethics that protect physician-patient confidentiality. Turkey has an obligation to recognize the rights enumerated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. These rights include:
- The right to freedom from torture or from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
- the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion;
- the right to freedom of expression; and
- the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association.
Turkey also has ratified the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), signed on 25 January 1988, ratified on 2 August 1988. Articles 21 and 22 allow for inter-state communications and individual communications respectively. Under Article 14 of the Convention, Turkey is obligated to ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible.
In addition, the confidentiality of the physician-patient relationship is codified in the World Medical Association's 1948 Geneva Declaration, which states:
I [the physician] shall respect the secrets which are confided in me.
Torture survivors require unique conditions for successful treatment, including absolute trust in their care provider. The Court's decision in the case against the Foundation's doctor interferes with the physician-patient relationship and impedes the provision of adequate care to torture survivors. It is a callous dismissal of internationally recognized medical ethical standards requiring physician-patient confidentiality and the provision of treatment without prejudice. Without assurances that these principles will be respected, the treatment of torture survivors in Turkey is problematic.
[1] Amnesty International, Amnesty International Report 1996, (Amnesty International, 1996). Return to Text
[2] US Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1997. Return to Text
[3] US Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1997. Return to Text
[4] The Turkish Human Rights Association was founded in 1986 by 98 individuals ranging from journalists, physicians, and lawyers, to family members and friends of individuals who had disappeared, or been tortured, or imprisoned following the 1980 military coup. Interview with the author, Hosnu Ondul, Secretary General of the Turkish Human Rights Foundation, Ankara, Turkey, July 1996. Return to Text
[5] Physicians for Human Rights, Torture in Turkey. Return to Text
[6] Representative of Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, conversation with the author, Istanbul, Turkey, November 1996. Return to Text
[7] 1997 Annual International Helsinki Federation. Return to Text
[8] Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, statement issued in January 1996. Return to Text
[9] Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, statement issued in January 1996. Return to Text
[10] The government's agenda can be traced to a letter from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that was sent to various state agencies, including the Ministries of Health and Justice, the National Intelligence Organization Undersecretariat, and the National Security Council Secretariat on 21 December 1995. Return to Text
[11] US Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1997. Return to Text
[12] Adana Pubic Prosecution Chief Office, Indictment to the Adana Penal Court of Peace Presidency, 21 March 1996. Return to Text
[13] Nuzhet, Kandemir, letter to Sen. Rod Grams, 30 May 1996. Return to Text
[14] "World Medical Association Protests About Trial of Turkish Doctor," Statement, 12 September 1996. Return to Text
[15] Amnesty International, Ethical Codes. Return to Text
[16] International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims, Press Release, 14 May 1996. Return to Text
[17] Yavuz Onen, conversation with the author, Ankara, Turkey, July 1996. Return to Text
[18] Human Rights Watch, Human Rights Watch World Report 1998. Return to Text
[19] Neil Hicks, Delegation Has Mixed Impression. Return to Text
[20] Neil Hicks, Delegation Has Mixed Impression. Return to Text
