MARCADO SOBRE EL EXTERIOR DEL DESFIBRILADOR O DE PARTES DEL

9.10 As noted in an Amnesty International public statement of 9 December 2005: “Conscientious objection is not recognized in Turkish law…In Turkey it is compulsory for all men between the ages of 19 and 40 to do military service for 15 months. Amnesty International is concerned that the right to conscientious objection is not legally recognized by the authorities, and provisions do not exist for an alternative civilian service for conscientious objectors… In recent years in Turkey there have been a small number of conscientious objectors who have publicly stated their refusal to carry out military service. They are usually subject to criminal prosecution.” [12f]

9.11 The War Resisters International 2005 document noted that:

“The right to conscientious objection is not legally recognized. Although Article 24.1 of the 1982 Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of conscience, the

Constitution does not widen this to include the right to conscientious objection to military service. In 1991, the Turkish Constitutional Court explicitly ruled that the freedom of conscience mentioned in Article 24 does not include the right to conscientious objection to military service.” [53a] (Section on Conscientious

objection)

9.12 The War Resisters International 2005 document further noted:

“Since the 1990s, there are a small number of COs who publicly state that they refuse to perform military service for non-religious, pacifist reasons. The Turkish language actually makes a distinction between conscientious objectors (vicdani retci) and draft evaders (asker kacagi)… Between 1995 and 2004 approx. 40 men have openly declared themselves as conscientious objectors, mostly by making a public statement or giving media interviews about their reasons for refusing military service. COs may be punished under Article 63 of the Turkish Military Penal Code for avoiding military service. COs who attract media attention or publish articles about their refusal to perform military service may also be punished to between six months’ and two years’ imprisonment under Article 318 of the Turkish Criminal Code for ‘alienating the people from the armed forces’. In 2004, a new Criminal Code was introduced (Law No 5237). Under the previous Criminal Code, ‘alienating people from the armed forces’ was punishable under Article 155 with a similar term of imprisonment…In recent years, it appears that the Turkish authorities have refrained from harsh

punishment of COs. This may have been caused by the fact that previous trials of COs attracted considerable (international) attention and the Turkish

authorities may wish to avoid further attention for the issue of conscientious objection. However, as long as there are no legal provisions for their right to conscientious objection, the legal position of CO’s remains vulnerable and they may still be subject to criminal prosecution. In 2004 there were five known cases of COs.” [53a] (Section on Conscientious objection)

9.13 As reported by the Turkish Daily News on 25 January 2006:

“The European Court of Human Rights ruled yesterday that Turkey had violated the rights of a Turkish citizen who was the first conscientious objector in the country to openly declare his refusal to perform compulsory military service for reasons of conscience. In the matter of the complaint filed by Osman Murat Ülke, the Strasbourg-based court decided that Turkey had violated Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the prohibition of inhumane or degrading treatment and ruled that Turkey pay 11,000 euros in financial compensation to the complainant.” [23l]

9.14 As mentioned in a press release of the European Court of Human Rights published on 24 January 2006 on the website of the Council of Europe (COE): “The Court noted that, despite the large number of times the applicant had been prosecuted and convicted, the punishment had not exempted him from the obligation to do his military service. He had already been sentenced eight times to terms of imprisonment for refusing to wear uniform. On each occasion, on his release from prison after serving his sentence, he had been escorted back to his regiment, where, upon his refusal to perform military service or put on

uniform, he was once again convicted and transferred to prison. Moreover, he had to live the rest of his life with the risk of being sent to prison if he persisted in refusing to perform compulsory military service.” [29a]

9.15 The ECHR continued:

“The Court noted in that connection that there was no specific provision in Turkish law governing penalties for those who refused to wear uniform on conscientious or religious grounds. It seemed that the relevant applicable rules were provisions of the military penal code which made any refusal to obey the orders of a superior an offence. That legal framework was evidently not

sufficient to provide an appropriate means of dealing with situations arising from the refusal to perform military service on account of one’s beliefs. Because of the unsuitable nature of the general legislation applied to his situation the

applicant had run, and still ran, the risk of an interminable series of prosecutions and criminal convictions.” [29a]

See also Section 8:35 Discrimination in Armed Forces

9.16 According to the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs General official report on military service July 2002 sources within military jurisprudence and the Turkish Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, decided in the second half of 2001 that Turkish citizenship would no longer be withdrawn from Turks living abroad before the age of 38. This would allow conscripts the opportunity to report to the Turkish Embassy in their country of residence before reaching this age to apply for an extension with retroactive effect. Withdrawal of citizenship may only be applied in the case of individuals who indicate to the Turkish Embassy in the country in question their point blank refusal to perform military service. This is because in such cases it is unlikely that the individuals concerned would apply for an extension before the age of 38. [2d] (section 6.6)

9.17 Under Article 8 of Turkish Nationality Law No. 403 (1964), Turkish citizenship may be restored even if the individual concerned is not residing in Turkey at that point in time. [26a] (p3) The Netherlands report July 2002 states that “An application for the restoration of Turkish citizenship can be granted if the applicant states that he is still going to perform military service. Turkish citizenship can still be recovered after the age of 40. The age of 40 only signals the end of military service age for individuals who have already performed military service.” [2d] [section 6.6]

Posting after completion of basic training

9.18 The Netherlands report 2001 stated that “Every conscript’s unit for posting after his basic training is determined by computer by the Directorate for the Recruitment of Conscripts in the Ministry of Defence. The place of subsequent posting depends upon the basic training undergone, the place of registration and possible criminal record.” [2b] (p19) “Anyone who has been convicted of theft

is therefore very unlikely to be placed in a unit responsible for managing an arms depot. Among others, spokesmen for the Turkish human rights association IHD and various military sources say that they do not believe that a record of past criminal offences, whether or not of a political nature, results in

an extra-harsh posting by way of additional punishment…. Spokesmen for the IHD also consider it unlikely that conscripts are screened on the basis of ethnic origin or religious or political convictions for the purpose of deciding on subsequent postings.” [2b] (p21)

9.19 The War Resisters International report noted that:

“For years, the Turkish armed forces have been involved in heavy fighting with the PKK in South Eastern Turkey. In 1999 a ceasefire was agreed between the Turkish government and the PKK, but the situation has remained tense ever since. All conscripts may be sent to serve in South Eastern Turkey as postings of conscripts are usually decided at random by computer. There is a sizeable group of conscripts of Kurdish origin who refuse to perform military service because they do not want to fight against their own people. Many Kurdish draft evaders have, in fact, left Turkey and applied for asylum abroad.”

[53a] (Section on Draft evasion)

Return to contents Go to list of sources

10

J

See also Annex D “Administration of justice” and Annex E for a comprehensive description of the Court system in Turkey