 |
Turkey |
Dr. Alp Ayan
Problem
Turkish psychiatrist and human rights defender sentenced to prison
last month - has to appear in court in another case.
Background
The Social Democratic member of the European Parliament, Mr Torben
Lund, will attend the court hearing in the case against the psychiatrist
and human rights defender, Dr Alp Ayan on 3 March 2004. Dr Ayan
has to appear at the Izmir Heavy Penal Court. He is charged with
insulting the state and its officers according to article 159 in
the Turkish penal code. The "crime" he is accused of is
to criticise the government of Turkey for torture.
Dr Ayan is working as a psychiatrist for the Human Rights Foundation
of Turkey (HRFT) a partner organisation of the International Rehabilitation
Council for Torture Victims (IRCT). The IRCT Ambassador, Dr Inge
Genefke, and the IRCT Media Co-ordinator, Mr Poul Struve Nielsen,
will accompany Mr Torben Lund to the court hearing.
The harassment of health professionals working for the rehabilitation
of the torture victims is going from bad to worse, and the cases
against Dr. Ayan illustrate how human rights defenders are under
pressure in Turkey.
Dr. Genefke testified on Monday 23 February before the Congressional
Human Rights Caucus in the US Congress in Washington, D.C. In
her testimony, she said that no improvement has been made in the
prevention of torture and that the situation is worse than ever.
The Caucus appreciated the testimony and Dr. Genefke is meeting
the US ambassador in Turkey, Mr. Eric Edelman, upon request from
the US State Department.
The IRCT is deeply concerned about the sentencing last month
of Dr Ayan and other staff members of the HRFT, Izmir. On 13 February
2004, after a four-year trial, Dr Alp Ayan was sentenced to 18
months and one day in prison, and Mrs Günseli Kaya, together
with the other 28 defendants, to 18 months in prison. Another
defendant, Mr Adnan Akin was sentenced to three years in prison.
The rest of the defendants (37) were acquitted. The defendants
are planning to appeal the convictions.
The sentences were based on events at a funeral, which took place
on 30 September 1999. The defendants were charged with "attacking
the gendarmes with stones and bottles" and "resisting
and opposing through violent means" pursuant to Articles
32/1 and 32/3 of the Law 2911 on Meetings and Demonstrations.
According to testimonies, the police had set up barricades at
the village entrance and violently attacked the group to prevent
them from attending the funeral. The court failed to examine video
footage documenting that the defendants did not attack the police.
At least 69 individuals were arrested, beaten and detained, and
14 individuals were remanded, including Dr Alp Ayan and Mrs Günseli
Kaya who then spent four months in detention.
Reliable and bona fide reports have been published in Turkey
and abroad documenting systematic torture in Turkey. The case
against Dr Ayan serves as evidence that Turkey violates human
rights through torture and through preventing the freedom of speech.
Further court hearings in a trial against nine Executive Board
members of the HRFT have been adjourned to 9 March 2004. The aim
is to suspend the board members from duty. If the nine Executive
Board members are found guilty of "having collected contributions
without obtaining permission" and "co-operation with
international organisations without permission", the HRFT
would be likely to be shut down.
The cases against Dr Ayan and the many other cases against human
rights defenders in Turkey would probably never take place in
any member state of the European Union. Turkey's Prime Minister,
Mr Erdogan, promised "zero tolerance" towards torture
after his party's election victory in 2002. Nevertheless, there
is still impunity for the torturers. In 2003, the HRFT treated
924 victims of torture. This figure is roughly the same as in
previous years.
Most of the cases have been postponed time and time again and
sent from one court instance to another. On the United Nations
Human Rights Day, 10 December 2003, Dr Alp Ayan appeared before
the court, and this case was adjourned to 3 March after only 20
seconds.
|