Author: Chavushian

NO POLITICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ARMENIA AND KAZAKHSTAN

PanARMENIAN.Net
01.06.2006 18:05 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian and Kazakh FMs Vartan Oskanian and
Kasimzhomarat Tokayev met in Astana. They discussed regional and
international problems. The parties were content with the level of
political relations between Armenia and Kazakhstan. Mutual interest in
development and strengthening of economic relations was noted. This
is promoted by the Armenian-Kazakh Inter-Governmental Commission,
as well as the legal framework and absence of political differences
between the two countries. Oskanian noted the need for development
of bilateral trade relations and holding cultural events.

During the meeting matters referring to the CIS, CSTO and EurAsEC
were discussed. Special attention was paid to energy and transport
issues. Tokayev presented the position of Kazakhstan’s participation
in some programs, specifically in the Caspian basin.

Taking into account that Kazakhstan will assume OSCE Presidency in
2009, Oskanian acquainted the Kazakh FM with latest developments in
the Nagorno Karabakh settlement. The Armenian FM invited his Kazakh
counterpart to visit Armenia at any convenient time.

Oskanian also met with Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev. The
Armenian FM also made a statement at a meeting with students of the
Diplomatic Institute.

June 2 Oskanian will met with members of the Armenian community and
will return to Armenia, reports the Armenian MFA Press Service.

HADITHA – SOME PERSPECTIVE
By Warner Todd Huston

NewsBusters
June 1 2006

The media spins up for an attack swarm against the US military…

By now I am sure you have heard of this incident between US Marines
and Iraqi civilians in Haditha? It absolutely must be foremost in
our minds that all the facts are not in. Still, the MSM are falling
all over themselves saying that, when one of their own was killed by
an IED and several more were injured, a squad of Marines lost their
collective minds and murdered some two dozen Iraqi civilians.

If this really happened it is a horrible incident. It just should
never have happened. And, further, those who did this deed will be
tried and punished appropriately if found guilty. It is a black mark
on the Marines and the USA. The criminality of this incident must
not be diminished.

But, even if true, it is just one of some very few such incidents in
this war. However, while regrettable, shameful even, it just cannot
be said that this incident is indicative of a general US policy in
Iraq. Nor can it be said to represent any kind of policy of the US
military historically.

We need some perspective here that is lacking with what we are getting
from the instant, faux media outrage storm that is building.

We need to look at the totality of our conduct in Iraq instead of
focusing on one or two incidents. And we also need to understand the
nature of war, the general youth of the soldiers we send into them,
and the history of other such outrages and their frequency in other
wars to properly assess this incident and put it in its proper context.

It must be recognized that, for the great preponderance of our military
personnel, their conduct is and always has been exemplary.

We do not have day after day of such outrages being reported not have
we in the past. In fact, we only have Abu Ghraib and Haditha to point
to as such breaches of discipline and conduct to date in Iraq.

Certainly there have been other lesser such breaches, to be sure, but
these two have grabbed the most attention. As a direct policy, though,
our military has gone out of its way to try and make “collateral
damage” as little as possible, more so than any other force in history.

While awaiting the investigation of this particular incident, we need
to remember that our troops have been in Iraq every hour of every day
for over three years. And in all that time, with the many thousands
of troops we have there, very few such incidents have occurred. It
is often difficult for our troops to tell the good guys from the bad
in a situation such as Iraq where insurgents might so easily pass
unnoticed among the common people walking the streets. This makes
for a soldiery that is constantly on edge, wondering when that next
passerby might conceal a bomb under his garments or worrying that the
next truck ride they take could end in a fiery explosion from an IED.

The tension is ever present.

The personal reactions of our men aside, one can also not legitimately
say that winking and nodding at such conduct is institutional US
military policy nor can we go further and say it is any kind of direct
policy to abuse and torture Iraqi civilians.

The conduct of our troops has sometimes been bad in past wars,
to be sure. During the Civil War the US Army mistreated Southern
civilians by the thousands, their property destroyed wantonly, many
imprisoned with but the least suspicion. In the Philippines during
the Spanish American war we treated the Moros horribly, torture
was sometimes used against them. There is a story of American troops
raping a concentration camp victim in WWII. In both Korea and Vietnam,
civilians were sometimes badly mistreated, even killed, by American
troops suspicious of their loyalty to the enemy. There are many,
many recent stories of soldiers mistreating woman of the countries
in which they were stationed, as well.

But all this can be said of soldiers of other countries, in other wars,
in other eras. But for Americans, such incidents are rarely perpetrated
by more than a small group of soldiers, or even single soldier, proving
that it is hardly possible to considered such conduct military policy.

Additionally, since the dawning of the 20th century, the US military
has professionalized itself until it is one of the few armed forces
that so polices its own, ferrets out the guilty, and prosecutes them.

We treat these incidents with far more gravity than any other force
in history, even up to today.

By contrast, we can see more incidents from other countries than we
could ever read through of whole armies acting like maddened animals
with the governments those armies represent approving of their
conduct. The Rape of NanKing in the 1930s where Japanese soldiers
killed thousands of civilians, many who were raped first before being
hacked to death with swords is an example the likes of which one can
find few parallels in American history. Today the situation in the
Sudan can also be seen as such an example of a government sponsoring
the type of mass murder not to be seen from American troops. Not to
mention the murder factories created by the Nazis in WWII, or even
Saddam Hussein of the 80s and 90s. Who remembers the how badly the
Armenians were treated by the Ottoman Turks when the Turks massacred
upwards to 400,000 in the early part of last century? We can even
go so far back as to remember the many Scots that were murdered by
English invaders in quelling Scotland for the British Empire, or what
happened in India perpetrated by the English, for that matter. Even
the French have a few things to be ashamed of from WWII, Vietnam and
the Ivory Coast today.

In any case, there is no need to belabor the point to show that
government sponsored massacres in huge dimensions are commonplace in
man’s harsh history from the earliest days right up to the present.

But, the United States has but one incident of government-sponsored
abuse and that was in the horrible way in which we treated our own
indigenous peoples in the 1800s. The point is, saving for one horrible
policy, it has not been a general American policy to mistreat civilians
in time of war, especially civilians of other countries. We just don’t
have that history and do not constantly ignore abuse as is the habit
of so many other military forces and governments the world over.

American policymakers have always been highly cognizant of treating
foreign civilians with respect. It has not been a general US policy to
mistreat anyone. Yes incidents have happened as they have with every
other army in all times in history but it just cannot be legitimately
said that it is somehow a common US policy to mistreat our hosts when
comparing our conduct to that of the rest of the world.

As they say, “Context is king.”

One more thing must be remembered and taken into account when
considering such incidents. We are sending thousands of young men,
and now women, too, into situations where only the most mature and
level headed person could easily endure and forever keep their cool.

Many of these troops are in their 20’s and have not had the time to
grow mature in years or outlook. One cannot expect many thousands
of 20 year-olds to conduct themselves like mature 40 year-olds all
the time when placed in the harrowing and taxing situations in which
they are placed. Sometimes these young people are going to make some
bad decisions. Sometimes things will go awry. It is simply bound to
happen. They are just humans after all.

The duty of the Armed forces is to train these men to understand the
situations they are going to face. They are to explain to the troops
how to handle themselves and what is expected of them. If a soldier
should violate that duty, that trust, he will be punished appropriately
and should be made aware of his fate should he so badly fail.

Yes, we should hold these incidents as horrible occasions, as a
breach of the faith we place in those particular men that perpetrated
them. But to transfer the guilt of a few to the whole of our armed
forces as the left and the MSM wish to do? Well, that violates our
own duty to support our troops as well as simple common sense.

ARMENIA AMBASSADOR TO IRAN PROPOSED TEHRAN TO BRING MILITARY FORCE FROM HIS COUNTRY TO STOP ACTIONS IN SOUTH AZERBAIJAN

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
June 1 2006

Armenia ambassador to Iran Gegam Garibjanian holding secret talks
with government of Iran proposed bringing of military force from his
country to stop the actions in South Azerbaijan.

World Azerbaijanis Congress and South Azerbaijan National Movement
Support Committee member Sirus Azadi has informed. Azadi has stated
that there is no doubt to understanding between the sides. “Special
destination forces might be taken from Armenia to stop the actions
in South Azerbaijan.”

AZERBAIJANI PM RECEIVES CIS DMS’ BOARD DELEGATION

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
May 31 2006

Azerbaijan’s Prime Minister Arthur Rasizadeh today received the
delegation of the Board of Defense Ministers of the Commonwealth of
Independent States (CIS).

The meeting brought together representatives of the Defense Ministries
of Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan,
Russia and Ukraine as well as representatives of the CIS Executive
Committee and Defense Ministers Board Secretariat. The Cabinet of
Ministers told APA that in the short meeting, the Minister talked
about the socio-political situation in Azerbaijan. He also introduced
Azerbaijan’s stance on the Nagorno Garabagh conflict and stressed
that Armenia is taking an unconstructive stance regarding this issue.

Mr.Rasizadeh answered the questions given by the visitors later on.

Boston Globe, MA
May 28 2006

NEW VOICE FOR KIDS: Belmont singer, songwriter, and music teacher
Noune Karapetian has gone back to her Armenian roots to make a CD of
traditional Armenian children’s songs and some of her originals. A
piano and voice teacher for 14 years, Karapetian graduated from
Komitas Conservatory in Armenia, majoring in voice, and then studied
child psychology for two years at the Pedagogical Institute in
Armenia. She was a finalist in the Metropolitan Opera National
Council Auditions in New England. “A lot of what I do comes from a
child’s perspective,” she said. She will perform at the Arsenal
Center for the Arts in Watertown on June 25 at 3 p.m. Visit
for more details.

Washington Times
May 27 2006

Embassy Row
By James Morrison
May 26, 2006

Genocide ‘victim’

The State Department yesterday confirmed that the U.S. ambassador
to Armenia has been dismissed and has resigned from the foreign
service, saying only that he “served at the pleasure of the president
and secretary” of state.
Ambassador John Evans, who is returning after only two years of
what is usually a three-year assignment, has been at the center of a
geopolitical firestorm since he bucked official U.S. policy last year
by referring to the “genocide” of 1.5 million Armenians in 1915 under
the Ottoman Turkish Empire.
Armenian-American organizations yesterday expressed outrage and
opened an e-mail and letter-writing campaign to Congress, where Mr.
Evans has significant support in the House.
“The U.S. ambassador to Armenia is being recalled for honestly
and accurately describing the Armenian Genocide as a clear case of
genocide,” the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) said
yesterday.
The committee, on its Web site (), called for
congressional hearings and questioned whether pressure from the
Turkish government had any role in the dismissal.
Word of the action began circulating on Capitol Hill on
Wednesday, when the White House notified the Senate that President
Bush intended to nominate Richard Hoagland to replace Mr. Evans. Mr.
Hoagland is currently ambassador to Tajikistan.
Rep. Edward J. Markey on Wednesday sent a letter to Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice signed by 60 House members, asking her to
explain the decision.
“I am seriously concerned at the early departure of Ambassador
Evans,” the Massachusetts Democrat said. “I hope this sudden action
by the State Department is not related to comments made by Mr. Evans
about the Armenian Genocide.”
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack yesterday responded to
a reporter who asked about the dismissal, saying, “Look, we, all
appointed officials – me, everybody who goes through Senate
confirmation – serve at the pleasure of the president and the
secretary.”
He added that Mr. Evans “should be congratulated for his long
career and distinguished service” for 35 years.
U.S. policy has been to refrain from using the word “genocide” to
describe the killings of Armenians during World War I to avoid
angering Turkey, a key ally and NATO member.
Mr. Bush recently called it “one of the great tragedies of history,”
although President Reagan called it genocide in a 1981 proclamation
on the Holocaust.
“Like the genocide of the Armenians before it … the lessons of
the Holocaust must never be forgotten,” Mr. Reagan said.
Mr. Evans first crossed the line in a Feb. 24, 2005, speech to
ANCA.
“I will today call it the Armenian Genocide,” he said. “I think
we, the U.S. government, owe you, our fellow citizens, a more frank
and honest way of discussing this problem. The Armenian Genocide was
the first genocide of the 20th century.”
Four days later, he issued a clarification, calling his remarks
“inappropriate” and noting that U.S. policy had not changed.

BLACK BOXES OF CRASHED A-320 TO BE DECODED IN MOSCOW

Yerevan, May 25. ArmInfo. The black boxes of Armavia’s crashed A-320
will be decoded in Moscow, says the press secretary of the chief
department of civil aviation of Armenia Gayane Davtyan.

First the boxes will be taken to Paris where Armenian, Russian and
French experts will examine their state, will open them, will remove
the chips and will send them to Moscow for decoding. Armenian experts
have already left for Moscow. The delegation includes the deputy head
of the CDCA Armen Petrossyan, CDCA security inspector Gagik Galstyan
and an Armavia representative.

Davtyan says that until the experts examine the boxes it is untimely
and groundless to speak about their state.

FRADKOV: FAMILIES OF RUSSIANS KILLED IN A-320 AIR CRASH TO GET FINANCIAL AID

ITAR-TASS, Russia
May 25 2006

MOSCOW, May 25 (Itar-Tass) — Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov
decreed to pay the one-time financial aid to the families of Russian
citizens killed in the crash of an Armenian airplane A-320 near
Sochi. They will get 100,000 roubles for each air crash victim, the
Russian governmental press service said. The prime minister ordered
to assign the necessary sum from the governmental reserve fund in 2006.

The Ministry of Health and Social Development and the Transport
Ministry should submit in the Finance Ministry the lists of the
families of the Russians killed in the crash of the airplane A-320.

The Krasnodar territorial administration is instructed to pay the
one-time material aid.

The airplane A-320 crashed near Sochi on May 3, 2006.

NKR CONSTITUTION TO BE CONSTITUTION OF INDEPENDENT AND DEMOCRATIC STATE

Yerkir
25.05.2006 12:44

YEREVAN (YERKIR) – The NKR Constitution Committee is discussing
the two initial chapters of the Constitution, these being the
bases of constitutional order and fundamental rights, freedoms and
responsibilities of an individual and citizen.

It means that the day of adoption of the Organic Law will come soon,
NKR Prosecutor General, head of the working group for the development
of NKR Constitution Armen Zalinyan said.

“NKR has lived without Constitution for 15 years. No single newly
formed state can adopt the Constitution within a short term. Experience
of state building is necessary for it.

NKR had to wage imposed war and then overcome the postwar hardships
in legal, socio-economic and cultural sectors. In the course of 15
years we have gained certain experience of state building, what is
a sufficient basis for the adoption of the Constitution,” Zalinyan
remarked.

“The NKR Constitution will be adopted at a national referendum. I
am convinced that our people will take active part in it, since the
adoption of the Constitution will be one more step towards formation
and consolidation of our republic,” he emphasized, Azat Artsakh
newspaper reports.

“HUMAN RIGHTS REFORMS SLOWED” AI SAYS

BÝA, Turkey
May 24 2006

Torture and ill-treatment continued to be reported, with those detained
for ordinary crimes particularly at risk. Law enforcement officers
continued to use excessive force in the policing of demonstrations;
four demonstrators were shot dead in November”.

BÝA (London) – “During 2005 some of the world’s most powerful
governments were successfully challenged, their hypocrisy exposed
by the media, their arguments rejected by courts of law, their
repressive tactics resisted by human rights activists. After five
years of backlash against human rights in the “war on terror”, the
tide appeared to be turning” says international rights organization
Amnesty International (AI) in its 2006 Report.

“Nevertheless, the lives of millions of people worldwide were
devastated by the denial of fundamental rights” AI exposes and adds:
“Human security was threatened by war and attacks by armed groups
as well as by hunger, disease and natural disasters. Freedoms were
curtailed by repression, discrimination and social exclusion”.

Documenting human rights abuses in 150 countries around the world
the report also Gives considerable space to the situation in Turkey.

Below is the Turkey Section of the report.

TURKEY

REPUBLIC OF TURKEY

Head of state: Ahmet Necdet Sezer

Head of government: Recep Tayyip Erdogan

Death penalty: abolitionist for all crimes

International Criminal Court: not signed UN Women’s Convention and
its Optional Protocol: ratified

The Council of Ministers of the European Union (EU) formally opened
negotiations for Turkey’s membership of the EU.

Practical implementation of reforms intended to bring Turkish law
into line with international standards slowed in 2005. The law
provided for continuing restrictions on the exercise of fundamental
rights. Those expressing peaceful dissent on certain issues faced
criminal prosecution and sanctions after the introduction of the new
Turkish Penal Code.

Torture and ill-treatment continued to be reported, with those detained
for ordinary crimes particularly at risk. Law enforcement officers
continued to use excessive force in the policing of demonstrations;
four demonstrators were shot dead in November.

Investigations of such incidents were inadequate and law enforcement
officers responsible for violations were rarely brought to justice.

Human rights deteriorated in the eastern and south-eastern provinces
in the context of a rise in armed clashes between the Turkish security
services and the armed opposition Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).

Background

In June, the new Turkish Penal Code (TPC), Code of Criminal Procedure
and Law on the Enforcement of Sentences (LES) entered into force. The
laws contained positive aspects, with the TPC offering greater
protection from violence to women.

However, the TPC in particular also included restrictions to the right
to freedom of expression. Human rights defenders in Turkey also raised
objections to the punishment regime for prisoners envisaged by the LES.

A revised draft of the Anti-Terror Law was being discussed by a
parliamentary sub-commission at the end of the year; human rights
groups had commented critically on earlier drafts. In September Turkey
signed the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In October
the Council of Ministers of the EU formally opened negotiations for
Turkey’s membership of the EU.

Freedom of expression

A wide range of laws containing fundamental restrictions on freedom
of expression remained in force. These resulted in the prosecution
of individuals for the peaceful expression of opinions in many areas
of public life.

The pattern of prosecutions and judgments also often demonstrated
prosecutors’ and judges’ lack of knowledge of international human
rights law. In some cases comments by senior government officials
demonstrated an intolerance of dissenting opinion or open debate and
seemed to sanction prosecution.

Article 301, on the denigration of Turkishness, the Republic, and the
foundation and institutions of the state, was introduced in June and
replaced Article 159 of the old penal code. Article 159 and Article
301 were frequently applied arbitrarily to target a wide range of
critical opinion. Journalists, writers, publishers, human rights
defenders and academics were prosecuted under this law.

Among the many prosecuted were journalist Hrant Dink, novelist Orhan
Pamuk, Deputy Chair of the Mazlum Der human rights organization Sehmus
Ulek, and academics Bask¹n Oran and ±brahim Kabo¬lu . An international
academic conference on perceptions of the historical fate of the
Armenians in the late Ottoman period, to be held in May at Bosphorus
University in Istanbul was postponed after comments made by the
Minister of Justice, Cemil Cicek, which fundamentally challenged the
notion of academic freedom by portraying the initiative as treacherous.

The conference eventually took place at Bilgi University in
September. However, in December legal proceedings under TPC Articles
301 and 288 were initiated against five journalists who reported on
attempts to prevent the conference. A further restriction on freedom
of expression remained in the broad restrictions on the use of minority
languages in public life.

Frequent prosecutions for speaking or uttering single words in
Kurdish continued to be brought under Article 81 of theLaw on
Political Parties. In May the Court of Appeal ordered the closure
of the teachers’ union, Egitim-Sen, on the grounds that a clause in
its statute defending the right to “mother tongue education” violated
Articles 3 and 42 of the Constitution which emphasize that no language
other than Turkish may be taught as a mother tongue.

Egitim-Sen later revoked the relevant article of its statute in order
to avoid closure.

* In October the prosecutor initiated a case to closedown permanently
the Diyarbakir Kurdish Assocation (Kurd-Der) on various counts,
including the decision to adopt a “non-Turkish” spelling of the word
Kurdish in the association’s name and statute, and provisions in
the association’s statute defending the right to Kurdish language
education. The association had previously been warned to adjust the
disputed elements in its statute and name. Provisions in the Press
Law restricting press coverage of cases under judicial process were
used in an arbitrary and overly restrictive way to hinder independent
investigation and public comment by journalists on human rights
violations. These provisions were also used to hinder human rights
defenders. Legal proceedings were begun against the Chairperson
of the Diyarbak¹r branch of the Human Rights Association (HRA),
Selahattin Demirtas, and Mihdi Perincek, HRA Regional Representative,
in connection with a report they co-authored with others on the
killing of Ahmet Kaymaz and Ugur Kaymaz (see below).

The indictment alleged that the report violated Article 19 of the
Press Law, undermining the prosecutor’s preparatory investigation into
the killings, despite the fact that the authors had no access to the
contents of files on the case which, by court order and for reasons of
security, were unavailable for inspection. The first hearing against
the two began in July.

Torture and ill-treatment

Torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement officials continued
to be reported, with detainees allegedly being beaten; stripped
naked and threatened with death; deprived of food, water and sleep
during detention; and beaten during arrest or in places of unofficial
detention. Reports of torture or ill-treatment of individuals detained
for political offences decreased. However, people detained on suspicion
of committing ordinary crimes such as theft or for public disorder
offences were particularly at risk of ill-treatment.

Reports suggested that there were still many cases of law enforcement
officials completely failing to follow lawful detention and
investigative procedures and of prosecutors failing to ascertain
that law enforcement officials had complied with procedures. Police
also regularly used disproportionate force against demonstrators,
particularly targeting leftists, supporters of the pro-Kurdish
party DEHAP, students and trade unionists (see Killings in disputed
circumstances below). Often those alleging ill treatment, particularly
during demonstrations, were charged with resisting arrest while their
injuries were explained away as having occurred as police attempted
to restrain them.

* In October in Ordu, five teenagers aged between 15and 18 were
detained at the opening of a new shopping centre. The five reported
being beaten, verbally abused, and threatened and having their
testicles squeezed while being taken into custody and while in custody
at the Ordu Central Police Station. They were later released.

Two reported that they were stripped and threatened with rape. Three
were not recorded as having been in police detention. One was
subsequently charged with violently resisting arrest.

Beyond the alleged ill-treatment, which was documented in medical
reports and photographs, other irregularities in the handling of
the detained teenagers by the police and prosecutor demonstrated a
failure to follow legal procedures at any point from the moment of
detention onwards

* In March, in the Sarachane area of Istanbul, demonstrators gathering
to celebrate International Women’s Day were violently dispersed
by police, beaten with truncheons and sprayed with pepper gas at
close range.

Three women were reportedly hospitalized. The scenes drew international
condemnation. In December 54 police officers were charged with using
excessive force; senior officers were not charged, but three received a
“reprimand” for the incident.

Impunity

Investigations into torture and ill treatment continued to be marked by
deeply flawed procedures and supported suggestions of an unwillingness
on the part of the judiciary to bring perpetrators of human rights
violations to justice. An overwhelming climate of impunity persisted.

* In April, four police officers accused of the torture and rape with
a truncheon of two teenagers, Nazime Ceren Salmanoglu and Fatma Deniz
Polattas, in 1999 were acquitted.

More than six years after the judicial process had begun and after
the case had been delayed more than 30 times, a court in Iskenderun
acquitted the officers due to “insufficient evidence”. Lawyers for
the young women announced that they would appeal against the decision.

The two women had been sentenced to long prison terms on the basis of
“confessions” allegedly obtained under torture.

* Fifteen years after the death of university student Birtan Altinbas,
the trial of four police officers accused of killing him continued
in the Ankara Heavy Penal Court No. 2.

Birtan Altinbas died on 15 January 1991 following six days in
police custody, during which he was interrogated on suspicion of
being a member of an illegal organization. The case, which received
international condemnation and was widely reported in the Turkish
press, demonstrated many aspects of the flawed judicial process.

* The trial of four police officers charged with killing Ahmet
Kaymaz and his 12-year-old son Ugur Kaymaz on 21 November 2004 in
the K¹z¹ltepe district of Mardin began in February. The four officers
on trial were not under arrest and were still on active duty. It was
significant that senior officers responsible for the police operation
during which the two individuals were killed were excluded from the
investigation and not charged, supporting the view that in cases of
this kind prosecutors rarely examined the chain of command.

Fair trial concerns

The continuing inequality between prosecution and defence and the
influence of the executive on the appointment of judges and prosecutors
prevented the full independence of the judiciary. While from 1 June
detainees enjoyed the right to legal counsel and statements made in
the absence of lawyers were not admissible as evidence in court,
few prosecutors in the new Heavy Penal Courts (which replaced the
State Security Courts in 2004) attempted to review ongoing cases
where statements were originally made without the presence of legal
counsel and where defendants alleged that their testimony had been
extracted under torture.

Little effort was made to collect evidence in favour of the defendant
and most demands of the defence to have witnesses testify were not met.

Imprisonment for conscientious objection

Conscientious objection was not recognized and no civilian alternative
to military service was available.

* In August, Sivas Military Court sentenced conscientious objector
Mehmet Tarhan to four years’ imprisonment on charges of “disobeying
orders” and refusing to perform military service. He was a prisoner
of conscience.

Killings in disputed circumstances

On 9 November in the Semdinli district of Hakkâri, a bookshop was
bombed, killing one man and injuring others. Three men were charged
in connection with the incident. The alleged bomber was subsequently
revealed to be a former PKK guerrilla turned informant and his
alleged accomplices were two members of the security services, with
identity cards indicating that they were plain-clothes gendarmerie
intelligence officers.

Subsequently, as the prosecutor carried out a scene-of-crime
investigation, the assembled crowd was fired upon from a car, resulting
in the death of one civilian and injury of others. The prosecutor’s
crime scene investigation was postponed. A gendarmerie specialist
sergeant was charged with disproportionate use of force resulting
in death.

AI called upon the government to establish an independent commission
of inquiry to investigate all dimensions of these incidents including
allegations of direct official involvement. During subsequent protests
at the events in Semdinli, three people in the Yuksekova district of
Hakkâri and one person in Mersin were shot dead by police.

During 2005 approximately 50 people were shot dead by the security
forces, over half of them in the south-eastern and eastern provinces.

Many may have been victims of extra judicial executions or the use
of excessive force. “Failure to obey a warning to stop” was a common
explanation provided by the security forces for these deaths.

At least two individuals were alleged to have been assassinated by the
PKK. On 17 February, Kemal Sahin, who split from the PKK to found an
organization allied with the Patriotic Democratic Party of Kurdistan,
was killed near Suleimaniyeh in northern Iraq. On 6 July, Hikmet Fidan,
former DEHAP deputy chair, was killed in Diyarbakir.

An organization calling itself the Kurdistan Freedom Falcons claimed
responsibility for a bomb attack in July on a bus in the Aegean town
of Ku§adas¹ that killed five civilians.

266 Amnesty International Report 2006 TUR

Violence against women

Positive provisions in the new TPC offered an improved level of
protection for women against violence in the family. The new Law on
Municipalities required municipalities to provide shelters for women
in towns with populations of more than 50,000 individuals.

Implementation of this law will require adequate funding for the
establishment of shelters from central government and full co-operation
with women’s organizations in civil society. Further efforts were
needed to ensure that law enforcement officials, prosecutors and the
medical profession were fully versed in the still little-known Law
on the Protection of the Family.

Official human rights mechanisms

Official human rights monitoring mechanisms attached to the Prime
Ministry failed to function adequately and had insufficient powers to
report on and investigate violations. The work of the Prime Ministry
Human Rights Advisory Board, encompassing civil society organizations,
was obstructed and the Board became effectively inactive. Moreover,
in November, former Chair Ibrahim Kaboglu, and Baskin Oran, a board
member, were prosecuted for the contents of a report on the question of
minorities in Turkey commissioned by the Board and authored by Baskin
Oran. The Provincial and Human Rights Boards, set up by the Human
Rights Presidency and also attached to the Prime Ministry, failed
to conduct adequate investigations of human rights violations. Draft
legislation on the creation of an ombudsman failed to advance.

–Boundary_(ID_Di15xj2AuOctfthdfDhTDQ)–