Precedent Ruling by ECtHR for Conviction of 'Membership of a Terrorist Organization'

Click to read the article in Turkish

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has announced its judgement on Şerafettin Parmak and Mehmet Bakır, who were convicted of "membership of a terrorist organization" by a court which considered an organization to be a terrorist organization on the allegation that it "used moral coercion in its publications" despite not resorting to violence.

The ECtHR has concluded that the conviction in question has violated the principle of "No punishment and crime without law" guaranteed by the Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Convicting Turkey for this violation, the ECtHR has ruled that Turkey shall pay two applicants 17,500 Euro in non-pecuniary damages and 1,591 Euro in pecuniary damages and for court expenses.

'Terrorism' defined as psychological violence with moral coercion

Parmak and Bakır were taken into custody as part of an investigation launched against them for having distributed leaflets in the name of "Northern Kurdistan/Turkey Bolshevik Party (BPKK/T)" in İzmir in 2002.

In their defenses, they denied any links with the organization and indicated that the file did not contain any evidence proving that the organization was involved in any acts of violence, therefore, it could not be considered a "terrorist organization". Moreover, they stated that the flyers in question did not contain any remarks that could be deemed as criminal evidence and, thus, they had to be considered within freedom of expression.

However, the local court did not take their statements of defense into consideration and, in 2016, it ruled that Şerafettin Parmak and Mehmet Bakır should be each sentenced to 2 years, 6 months in prison on charge of "being members of an illegal terrorist organization."

In its justified ruling, the court indicated that "the ultimate aim of the BPKK/T was to conduct an armed revolution in Turkey" and as the reason for this evaluation, the court referred to the law amendment dated 2003, where "actual violence or the intent to use such violence was central to the definition of the offense" of terrorism.

Giving the verdict based on this definition, the court "found the statutory requirement of 'force and violence' to be satisfied in their case because the manifesto and the texts which they had disseminated were of a nature so objectionable as to amount to moral coercion of the public."

It was only 6 years later that he could go to Berlin

As the justification for the conviction, the local court also claimed that the manifesto of the organization and its flyers were found in the searches conducted in the house of Şerafettin Parmak.

Parmak and Bakır were released from prison in January 2003. The court imposed an international travel ban on them after their release.

Mehmet Bakır objected to the ban for seven times on the ground that he lived in Berlin, Germany. Their objections were either rejected or left unanswered. His international travel ban was finally lifted in June 2009, when the execution of the sentence was completed.

'Terrorism and violence broadly defined'

Both Şerafettin Parmak and Mehmet Bakır appealed to the ECtHR, arguing that the principle of "No punishment and crime without law" as guaranteed by the Article 7 of the ECHR was violated.

In their appeal to the ECtHR, they also indicated that "terrorism and violence were so broadly defined to include 'moral coercion'." Mehmet Bakır also claimed that his "right to respect for private and family life" as per the Article 8 of the ECHR was violated by his international travel ban.

Accordingly, the ECtHR has found the arguments in the application justified and convicted Turkey based on both the Articles 7 and 8. Turkey will pay Şerafettin Parmak 7,500 Euro in non-pecuniary damages and 831 Euro for court expenses and pay Mehmet Bakır 760 Euro in pecuniary and 9,750 Euro in non-pecuniary damages. (AS/SD)