1- VIOLATION OF ANIMAL RIGHTS
Many cats were killed with rat poison in Gaziantep
Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu, deputy for the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), announced that approximately 12-13 cats were killed with rat poison in Gaziantep. He stated that some cats were rescued at the last minute. After this incident, people criticized government inaction with regards toan animal rights law.
2- VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE: (Turkish Constitution Articles15(2) and 17(1); ECHR Art.2; UDHR Art.3; ICCPR Art.6; CFR Art.2)
A person killed a delivery personbecausehis cargo arrivedlate
In Çekmeköy District of Istanbul, Tayfun Ş., accompanied by his three friends,beat adelivery person to death because his cargo arrived late. Mehmet Ali İbin, the delivery person, died soon after he had a cerebral hemorrhage and was taken to intensive care. After the incident, Tayfun Ş. was released by the magistrate.
3- VIOLATION OF THE PROHIBITION OF TORTURE: (ECHR Art. 3)
The scope of the regulation that support torturerswas expanded
According a regulation issued in 2008,ifpersonnel working on counter terrorism are tried due to crimes committed by them in the course of their work, State pays the fees of up to three lawyers chosen by one of them. Recently, the scope of the regulation was expanded, and the amended regulation was published on October 13.
New regulation broadened the definition of the term “personnel” working on counter terrorism, which includes wide range of people such as a medical doctor who reported against a torture victim and a civil administrator who gave the order of torture. In other words, any kind of event described as “fight against terrorism” by the government can be included in this scope. For the application of this new regulation, the personnel not only need to be the suspect or defendant in the trial, but also could be thecomplainant, intervening party, or victim. Therefore, the fee of the lawyer determined by one of the personnel would be covered by taxes paid by the people.
In an environment where the torture has already been normalized by the security forces and the judiciary, this new regulation raised concerns about whether it could support those who commit State-organized crimes as well as the commission of the crime itself.
4- VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY: (Turkish Constitution Art. 19; ECHR Art.5; UDHR Art. 3)
A doctor was arrested during pandemic period
Dr. Erkan Tufan, a public health specialist at Kocaeli University, was arrested on the grounds that a witness claimed that he had stayed in the “HizmetMovement’s” houses while he was a student.
Dr. Tufanjust got married one month ago and was actively working as a doctor during pandemic period. Just right after Prosecutor saw Dr. Tufan. hesaid: “You look like a terrorist”. Therefore, the prosecutor showed that he could not be part of an impartial trial. The arrest of the doctor who was working under very difficult conditions during the pandemic and who was not suspected of running away raised great concern.
A citizen,who expressedhis ideas in astreet interview was taken into custody
On a channel called “Kendine Muhabir” (The Self Reporter), which broadcasts street interviews on social media, a citizen criticized the government and President Erdogan and said that Turkey’s current form of government is similar to that of Hitler’s Germany.” After the interview spread on social media, a criminal investigation was initiated against himand he was taken into custody.
The citizen was released from custody; however, he was banned fromtravelling abroad as well as was obligedto provide his signature in the police station once a week. On the night of October 23, he was detained again after hestated, in an interview withanother channel “İlave TV”, that he was standing behind what he had said.
In the case of Kılıçdaroğlu v. Turkey, the ECtHR held that there had been aviolation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the ECHR
On 1 March 2012, then Prime Minister, Mr. Erdoğan, had brought two civil actions for damages against KemalKılıçdaroğlu, claiming that his personal and professional honour and reputation had been tarnished due to Mr. Kılıçdaraoğlu’s two speeches in the Parliament. On 23 October 2012 the Ankara District Court ordered Kılıçdaroğluto pay 5,000 Turkish liras.Kılıçdaroğlu’s appeal on points of law was rejected and his individual application to the Constitutional Court resulted in a ruling that his right to freedom of expression had not been violated. Kılıçdaroğlu brought the case to the European Court of Human Rights on 28 March 2018.
The ECtHR held that there had been a violation of Article 10 of the ECHR. Accordingly, Turkey will pay 13,000 euros fine to Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. The decision was taken with 6 votes to 1. The only dissenting vote belongs to Turkish judge Saadet Yüksel.