‘Right to protest is a fundamental human right’

* Photo: Hayri Tunç / Gazete Fersude

Click to read the article in Turkish

The Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales (BHRC) and ARTICLE 19: Global Campaign for Freedom of Expression have presented an expert opinion to court as part of the case where Saturday Mothers/People have been standing trial since late March 2021.

In the "Expert Opinion on International Human Rights Law and the Right to Protest", the BHRC and ARTICLE 19 have underlined, "There are serious concerns that, in the present case, the various interferences with the Defendants' right to engage in a peaceful assembly have been motivated by a desire to suppress the message of their protest, contrary to both Articles 11 and 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)."

The expert opinion has stressed that "the state cannot restrict Article 11 free assembly or expression rights in order to silence, discourage or punish participants for their individual or collective (critical) views which they are seeking to express peacefully in a public form."

The opinion of the organizations has been presented to the İstanbul 21st Criminal Court of First Instance, where the trial is held, as per the Article 67/6 of the Law no. 5271 on Criminal Procedure.

CLICK - 'We were subjected to violence, the state should be on trial'

A lawsuit was filed against 46 people who were detained during the police attack targeting the 700th gathering of Saturday Mothers/ People, who have been demanding justice for their enforced disappeared relatives at Galatasaray Square in İstanbul. Since the police intervention in the 700th week on August 25, 2018, they have been prevented from gathering there.

As part of this recent lawsuit, the defendants have been charged with "unarmed participation in unlawful demonstrations and marches and refusal to disperse despite warning" and they now face a possible sentence for violating the Law on Meetings and Demonstrations.

The next hearing will be held tomorrow (November 24).

Emphasis on 'human rights'

The expert opinion of the BHRC and ARTICLE 19 has underlined that "Turkey should comply with human rights obligations" and noted:

"In the human rights systems addressed in this expert opinion, the 'right to protest' involves the exercise of numerous fundamental human rights, chief among them the right to freedom of peaceful assembly (which is therefore the focus of this opinion), as well as the right to freedom of association, the right to freedom of expression, the right to political participation and, in certain cases where protesters are subject to forcible dispersal and/or action by law enforcement authorities, the rights to life and to freedom from arbitrary arrest, detention and inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment."

'Political speech is entitled to high protection'

The opinion has also emphasized the importance of the protests' aim and message in the following words:

There appears to be a clear basis for characterising the message of the 700th week protest as 'political' in nature, given that the protest was intended to draw attention and object to the alleged involvement of Turkish authorities in forced disappearances and their failure to provide information on the fate of the disappeared persons, as well as to hold accountable those responsible. As set out above, political speech is entitled to a heightened level of protection.

'A desire to suppress the message of protest'

"There are serious concerns that, in the present case, the various interferences with the Defendants' right to engage in a peaceful assembly have been motivated by a desire to suppress the message of their protest,119 contrary to both Articles 11 and 18 of the ECHR.

"These concerns arise, in part, from the apparent absence of any other robust justification for the interferences.

"Further, the public statement of the Interior Minister the day following the Defendants' arrest and detention is an example of evidence supporting this concern. If such a motivation did contribute to the authorities' conduct, this would plainly be contrary to the requirement that any interference with the right to freedom of peaceful assembly be 'content-neutral':

"It is not legitimate to ban an assembly based on the (peaceful) substantive message that the assembly intends to communicate."

'State should protect protesters'

"The indiscriminate use of tear gas and rubber bullets cannot be justified," the expert opinion has said, briefly adding:

In this context, the authors note that Turkey's obligations under Article 11 of the ECHR and Article 21 of the ICCPR entail a positive duty to protect individuals seeking to exercise their right to freedom of peaceful assembly. In this case, that positive duty would extend to investigating accusations that excessive and disproportionate force was used in dispersing the 700th week protest and arresting the Defendants and holding accountable any individuals who are found to have acted unlawfully in banning and policing the protest.

Click here for the full opinion in English / Turkish

Lawsuit against 46 rights defenders

The following people face a lawsuit over their participation in the 700th week: Koray Çağlayan, Koray Kesik, Leman Yurtsever, Levent Gökçek, Lezgin Özalp, Maside Ocak, Mehmet Günel, Muhammed Emin Ekinci, Ayça Çevik, Besna Koç, Cafer Balcı, Can Danyal Aktaş, Cihan Oral Gülünay, Cüneyt Yılmaz, Deniz Koç, Ercan Süslü, Ezgi Çevik, Faruk Eren, Fecri Çalboğa, Ferhat Ergen, Gamze Elvan, Hakan Koç, Hasan Akbaba, Hasan Karakoç, Jiyan Tosun, Kenan Yıldızerler, Murat Akbaş, Murat Koptaş, Onur Yanardağ, Osman Akın, Özer Oymak, Özge Elvan, Ramazan Bayram, Rüşa Sabur, Sadettin Köse, Adil Can Ocak, Ahmet Karaca, Ahmet Süleyman Benli, Ali Ocak, Ali Yiğit Karaca, Atakan Taşbilek, Ataman Doğa Kıroğlu, Saime Sebla Arcan, Sinan Arslan, Ulaş Bedri Çelik, Volkan Uyar.

It is also decided that the case files of the MPs who were there to attend the demonstration be separated from others as they have legislative immunity.

(AS/SD)