FORUM 18 NEWS SERVICE, Oslo, Norway
The right to believe, to worship and witness
The right to change one’s belief or religion
The right to join together and express one’s belief
========================================== ======
Wednesday 22 November 2006
TURKEY: POPE BENEDICT XVI’S VISIT AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to Turkey spotlights religious freedom, notes
Otmar Oehring of the German Catholic charity Missio
< lturen/themen/menschenrechte>.
Some are optimistic that the new Foundations Law will resolve property
problems for the organisations allowed to non-Muslim communities, but this
has yet to be seen. Astonishingly, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of
Foreign Affairs Abdullah Gul may not meet Pope Benedict. Officials fear
that the Pope may discuss the problems facing Catholics and other
religious minorities, including Muslim minorities. In this personal
commentary for Forum 18 News Service <;, Dr Oehring
maintains that - despite hopeful signs such as several Protestant churches
gaining association status - there has been little overall progress this
year in religious freedom. For example, minorities such as the Syrian
Orthodox do not have the legal right to undertake activities essential for
a functioning peaceful religious community.
TURKEY: POPE BENEDICT XVI'S VISIT AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
By Otmar Oehring, head of the human rights office of Missio
<;
Rarely can religious freedom in Turkey have been more in the spotlight
than in the time surrounding the first visit to Turkey as pope by Benedict
XVI. His visit - due from 28 November to 1 December - comes shortly after
the latest European Union (EU) accession report, which again criticised
Turkey for lack of progress on religious freedom, though in mild tones
that surprised some commentators. Domestically, the papal visit comes just
after President Ahmet Necdet Sezer's approval of a new Foundations Law,
approved by parliament on 8 November. Some optimistically argue that the
Foundations Law will resolve property problems for the organisations
allowed to some non-Muslim ethnic/religious communities. Whether this will
be the case has yet to be seen.
The impending papal visit is complicated by Benedict's recent remarks on
Islam during a speech in Germany in September, where he quoted harsh
medieval criticism of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. As recently as 14
November, Professor Ali Bardakoglu, head of the government's Diyanet
(Presidency of Religious Affairs), himself made hostile remarks about Pope
Benedict and said how hurt Turks were by the pope's remarks in Germany.
Turkey's Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, will be out of the country
during the visit. But, astonishingly, the Deputy Prime Minister and
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr Abdullah Gul, is still considering whether
or not to meet Pope Benedict. It appears that senior officials fear they
would be forced to respond, if the Pope hands over a memorandum on the
problems facing the Catholic Church and other religious minorities -
including Muslim minorities - in Turkey (see F18News 26 July 2006
< e_id=817>).
The general mood – including among officials and the media – is that for
the Pope even to raise any problems would be wrong as, in their view,
Turkey’s religious minorities do not have problems. They claim that
minorities have the possibility to worship and that to complain over their
lack of recognised legal status does not reflect Turkish reality.
Therefore, they oppose any discussion at all of these issues.
At a meeting in Venice in mid-November, organised by the international
Catholic movement Pax Romana, the chief advisor to Prime Minister Erdogan
said openly that there is no point looking back to the past over the way
religious minorities have been treated, as mistakes lie on both sides.
Instead, he insisted, everyone should look to what Turkey will be like in
fifteen or twenty years. He claimed that the future will be bright, with
no problems for religious minorities. However, he did not identify which
problems still exist and how he thinks they will be overcome. There seemed
to be no wish on his part to discuss the current reality.
The controversial Article 301 of the Penal Code, which punishes
“anti-Turkish statements”, has been used against numerous writers and
journalists. But its recent use to prosecute members of religious
minorities marks a new turn. Compass Direct reported that two Protestants
were charged in October under this article in Silivri, near Istanbul,
after being accused of “illegal missionary activities”. Interpreting
non-Muslim missionary activity as “anti-Turkish” is alarming. Amid
worldwide criticism of Article 301, Prime Minister Erdogan has said that
by-laws would be produced to explain the aims of the article and what
“Turkishness” actually means. However, this appears to be merely an
attempt to avoid a real answer. Rumours circulate in Turkey that this
article will be abolished, but no-one knows if this will happen.
Even were Article 301 to be abolished, there are other articles in the
Penal Code which could be used by nationalist prosecutors and judges to
punish what they regard as “crimes against Turkishness”.
The one positive point in the new Foundations Law is that it will require
the return of properties confiscated from community foundations. Yet a
serious obstacle to this is that many of these properties have been sold
to third parties. Discussion of the Foundation Law has been going on for
many years (see F18News 13 December 2005
< e_id=704>), so it should have
been possible by now to resolve the problem of cases where return is
impossible.
Some religious communities with many such foundations, such as the
Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Armenian Patriarchate, have argued that
this law – if it gains Presidential approval – will allow them finally to
get back some of their properties. But they also point to the law’s
failure to resolve the issue of confiscated properties sold to third
parties.
Discussion on this aspect of the Foundations Law has focused on whether
religious communities unable to recover their properties should be
compensated financially, but the reaction to such suggestions has been
harsh. Earlier this year, parliamentary deputies argued in the parliament
that this would be a “waste of money”, complaining that “trillions and
trillions” of (old) Turkish lira would have to go to Christians and Jews
in compensation for property taken earlier. At the same time, Turkish
newspapers have worried that not paying compensation for property sold to
third parties would lead to hundreds of court cases, with many likely to
end up in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. So a solution
to this problem is at present blocked.
The new Law does not address a key complaint: the impossibility for
religious communities to run their own theological training
establishments. This featured in the European Commission’s Proposal for
the Accession Partnership 2005 (see F18News 13 December 2005
< e_id=704>). The Ecumenical
Patriarchate has long hoped for progress on reopening its seminary on the
island of Heybeliada (Halki in Greek) in the Sea of Marmara – closed down
in 1971 along with the Armenian seminary – but progress has been elusive.
In mid-October, parliament discussed a proposal to reform the law on
private schools. The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) introduced
changes that would have enabled non-Muslim religious minorities that
currently cannot run their own schools – such as the Syrians and Chaldeans
– to introduce them on a par with existing Greek Orthodox and Armenian
schools. The main opposition party, the traditionally secularist
Republican People’s Party (CHP), fiercely attacked the proposal, arguing
that it would represent a sell-out of Turkey.
Crucially for the Alevi Muslims, the second largest religious community in
Turkey, neither the Foundations Law nor the possible new law on private
schools would benefit them. Neither the Alevis – nor the Protestants or
Catholics – have community foundations. Nor would the Foundations Law give
legal status to any religious community, whether Muslim or not (see F18News
12 October 2005 < 670>).
The EU report
< _documents/2006/Nov/tr_sec_1390_en.pdf>
– released on 8 November – was blunt that religious minorities still face
problems, but the section on religious freedom was far shorter than in
previous years and was not very precise over what these problems exactly
are. The short section devoted to religious freedom is not long enough to
explain the real problems. It is possible this was done deliberately:
perhaps EU officials did not want to make Turkey appear in too negative a
light. A reader of this section of the report would need an informed
knowledge of the situation to understand what the EU is saying in the
Turkish context. The informed reader would regard it as a fairly mild
summary of the many problems that exist, but the uninformed reader would
mistakenly conclude from the EU report that the situation was not too bad.
The response in Turkey to the EU report was that it was not as bad as many
had expected. Liberals and some journalists said they expected some
condemnation and pointed out that it had been fairly mildly presented.
Pro-government activists say that despite accusations in earlier reports,
this one was not so bad.
These reactions come against a backdrop of hostility to such normal
religious activity as the peaceful sharing of non-Islamic beliefs, which
may have been a factor in the February 2006 murder of Fr Andrea Santoro
(see F18News 9 February 2006
< e_id=724>). The complexity of
Turkish social attitudes to religious freedom is rarely understood and
addressed (see F18News 19 January 2006
< e_id=716>).
As for the impending papal visit, it is important to bear in mind that the
Turkish public will not be present in large numbers at any speaking event.
Any views they might have of the visit – and of the Pope’s addresses and
comments during it – will be formed by how the local media covers the
visit.
Pope Benedict’s visit may have no impact on religious freedom in Turkey,
though this may depend on what he says at his meeting with the diplomatic
corps in the Holy See’s Nunciature in Ankara. When he visits the state’s
Diyanet – which controls Islam in this proclaimed secular state – he will
most probably be almost alone and the Vatican is unlikely to release
details of the meeting.
As head of the Diyanet under an Islamist-leaning government, Professor
Bardakoglu has more influence than he could expect to have under a
secularist government. If the Pope complains about the way Christians and
other minority faiths are treated, Bardakoglu will probably deny that
Christians have any problems. At the same time, he is likely to argue
(correctly) that non-Islamic faiths are outside the remit of his office,
which is responsible only for Sunni state Islam.
The forthcoming visit has also seen a minor spat between the Ecumenical
Patriarchate and the government, with officials attacking the Patriarchate
for insisting that journalists covering the trip seek accreditation from it
as well. Officials declared bluntly that the patriarchate is a Turkish
institution and regarded its demands as “impertinence”. However, both
sides sought to close down the issue.
Despite the murder of Fr Santoro, some improvements have occurred in the
overall religious freedom situation. There is more freedom of speech and
openness about the old taboos – even over whether the mass killing of
Armenians in the late Ottoman period constituted genocide. This year, four
Protestant churches gained a substitute legal status as religious
associations – Derneks – but not as religious communities. (This was under
a legal provision that applicants for association status, which are not
rejected automatically, receive this status after a set period.) Only one
Protestant church gained association status in 2005.
A breakthrough occurred in September 2006, when the Altintepe Protestant
Church in Istanbul became the first church building since the founding of
the Turkish Republic in 1923 to be ratified as a new place of worship.
This followed a four year bureaucratic and legal battle. The church had
been functioning since 2003 under another legal identity, as a Vakif
(Foundation), but the law has since been changed closing the Vakif option
for others.
A total of five Turkish Protestant churches are now recognised as Derneks
or associations, as well as one international church in Antalya. But, as
Compass Direct has noted, due to restrictions in planning and local
authority laws more than 20 legal cases are in the Turkish courts
requesting recognition of Protestant places of worship. Several cases are
also being taken to the European Court of Human Rights.
Association or Dernek status appears to be a pragmatic solution – at least
for the Protestants – to the problem of their lack of any legal status at
all (see F18News 12 December 2005
< e_id=670>).
But religious communities such as the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the
Armenian Apostolic Church – whose existence in the land of Turkey
pre-dates the arrival of the Turks and Islam – are unlikely to want to
accept such a lowly legal status.
Lack of legal recognition of religious communities as religious
communities forces one to the conclusion that there has been little
overall progress this year in the religious freedom situation (see F18News
26 July 2006 < 817>).
Islam remains a branch of the state and no other religious community –
including Muslim minorities – has or can get legal status as a religious
community (see F18News 12 October 2005
< e_id=670>).This problem of
non-recognition means that religious communities do not have the legal
right to take the internal spiritual and financial decisions necessary for
the normal functioning of a peaceful religious community. Without legal
status as a religious community, religious communities cannot buy, use,
sell or remodel property. They remain unable to maintain educational
establishments to train religious personnel, including priests, ministers
or rabbis. Despite the impossibility of training their own personnel
within Turkey, they do not have the right to bring in personnel from
abroad. Personnel from outside Turkey have come in under ad hoc
arrangements, which could be revoked at any time.
De facto, religious communities can undertake some activities, but this is
not enshrined in any law. For example, the two main Syrian Orthodox
monasteries, in Turkey’s south-east, run monastic schools for boys, where
they are trained in the liturgical language, in catechism and in singing
for the liturgy. This is essential for the celebration of the Orthodox
liturgy. Some boys go on to become catechists and choir leaders.
Officially the schools are merely boarding houses, but the state knows
what they are doing although, technically, this is illegal.
However, the problem remains as to how Syrian Orthodox girls can be
educated, especially as the Syrian population in south-eastern Turkey
faces such pressure from local Muslim Kurds and Turks. Syrian Orthodox
girls in school are routinely threatened with rape or kidnap. The Syrians
remain at the mercy of attackers and it is unclear who they are.
There has been no change to the recording of religious affiliation on
identity cards – a major problem which lays religious minorities open to
social ostracism or hostility (see F18News 26 July 2006
< e_id=817>).
A recent poll by TESEV, an Istanbul-based think-tank, found that Turks did
not believe that Islam is gaining in influence. Although some question
whether this is true – and the growth in the number of women wearing
Islamic headscarves on the streets of Ankara and Istanbul might be an
indication that the influence of Islam could be growing – I believe that
nationalism, not Islamic sentiment or any resurgence of Islam lies behind
the restrictions on minority faiths. (END)
– Dr Otmar Oehring, head of the human rights office of Missio
< lturen/themen/menschenrechte>, a
Catholic charity based in Germany, contributed this comment to Forum 18
News Service. Commentaries are personal views and do not necessarily
represent the views of F18News or Forum 18.
For further overviews by Dr Oehring of religious freedom in Turkey, and of
the need for fundamental reform of the Constitution, see
< =68>.
For commentaries by the Anglican Chaplain in Istanbul on the roots of
Turkey’s attitude to religious freedom see
< _id=716>, and on Turkish
society’s reaction to the murder of Roman Catholic priest Fr Andrea
Santoro, see < 724>.
For a personal commentary on religious freedom under Islam, see
< _id=227>
A printer-friendly map of Turkey is available at
< s/atlas/index.html?Parent=mideast&Rootmap=turk ey>
Adobe Acrobat PDF and printer-friendly views of this article are available
at < 875>.
(END)
© Forum 18 News Service. All rights reserved. ISSN 1504-2855
You may reproduce or quote this article provided that credit is given to
F18News
Past and current Forum 18 information can be found at
www.missio-aachen.de>