TURKEY: DISPLACED VILLAGERS CRITICIZE

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ANKARA 000516 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/06/2017 TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL OSCE TU SUBJECT: TURKEY: DISPLACED VILLAGERS CRITICIZE GOVERNMENT'S COMPENSATION PROGRAM REF: ANKARA 461 Classified By: Classified by Political Counselor Janice G. Weiner for r easons 1.4(b),(d) 1.(C) Summary: The GOT may be enforcing a Turkish law to compensate villagers who were forcibly displaced during the GOT's counter-terrorism campaign in the 1990's unevenly and at times unjustly. Kurdish contacts from southeastern Turkey agree that the current system has failed to provide adequate compensation for displaced villagers. They report that following the European Court of Human Rights approval of the compensation system in the 2006 "Icyer" case, the GOT began systematically to reduce settlement offers. A December 2006 Human Rights Watch Report that analyzes the settlement process supports these claims. Ministry of Interior officials dismissed the report, said the current system is being administered fairly and efficiently, and appeared unwilling to take seriously the charges raised by displaced residents. Unless the GOT is willing to establish a more transparent process, and create a more effective appeals process, southeastern residents' perception that the compensation is merely a superficial attempt by the government to meet EU accession requirements is likely to continue. End summary. -------------- Under Pressure, GOT Enacts Law to Compensate Displaced Villagers -------------- 2.(U) During armed conflict between the Turkish security forces and the PKK between 1984 and 1999, massive internal displacement took place in the eastern and southeastern regions of Turkey. The Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV) comprehensively studied the issue and concluded that the main causes of the displacement were: --people leaving their villages because of the collapse of animal husbandry and agriculture as a result of the ban on the use of pastures and as a result of PKK pressure, intensifying military operations and armed clashes; --the PKK's eviction from villages and hamlets those who agreed to become "village guards", locally-recruited civilians armed and paid by the GOT to oppose the PKK; and --the security forces' eviction of villagers who refused to become village guards or who were thought to be aiding the PKK. Turkey's Interior Ministry reported that 358,335 people were displaced from 945 villages and 2,021 hamlets during the period. International organizations and domestic and foreign NGOs estimate between one and four million; the truth likely lies somewhere near the bottom end of that estimate, but is almost impossible to calculate accurately. 3.(U) The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled in 1996 that the GOT was partly at fault for the displacement because its security forces had unlawfully destroyed houses and the local judiciary had assisted in a cover-up. In November 2002, the UN's internal displacement special representative recommended that "displaced villagers should be compensated." In May 2003, the EU revised its Accession Partnership with Turkey to require the speedy return of IDPs. Under international pressure, the GOT passed legislation in July 2004, to allow IDPs to apply to a local "damage assessment commission" that would determine a settlement fee based on detailed compensation schedules governing factors such as the length of the applicant's displacement and the value of land and crops lost. 4.(U) Amid numerous cases pending against Turkey at the ECHR, FM Gul presented evidence to the Court that, under the Compensation Law, commissions had awarded displaced families an average of $33,500 each during 2005. In the January 2006 case of plaintiff Aydin Icyer, the ECHR ruled that the Compensation Law was an effective remedy "capable of providing adequate redress for the grievances of those denied access to their possessions and place of residence." The ANKARA 00000516 002 OF 003 Court ordered Icyer to exhaust his domestic remedies under the Compensation Law. -------------- -------------- Compensation Program Criticized by Southeastern Kurds -------------- -------------- 5.(C) Contacts from Turkey's southeast have expressed great disappointment with GOT efforts to implement the law. Kurdish attorney and human rights activist Rojbin Tugan (please protect),who serves as the only non-government member on a 7-person damage assessment commission in Hakkari province, told us that the nominally independent commissions are in fact politically beholden to Ankara. Independent experts who analyze each case and recommend a settlement figure to the commissions must value crops at what Tugan views as "disproportionately low" rates, established by Ankara bureaucrats unfamiliar with the local market. In many cases the commission had then revised downward the expert's recommended figure by up to 30 percent. Complainants, hopeless and desperate to take whatever is offered, normally accept the commission's offer. Tugan thus far has been unsuccessful in opposing "these illegal actions." Tugan has case documentation but is reluctant to pass on during a tense period when she is receiving numerous threats (reftel). 6.(C) Esat Canan, a Kurdish CHP MP from Hakkari, told us that he believes the GOT established the compensation process merely to end a growing number of cases that villagers were filing in the ECHR. Following the Icyer decision, damage assessment commissions started to issue much lower assessments. Canan explained that in Hakkari Province, assessment commissions had processed only one-third of the applications and were offering amounts that were roughly one percent of the value of what a villager lost. Serafettin Elci, a respected Kurdish politician who was Minister of Public Works from 1978-1979 in the then-Ecevit Government, and who recently formed the Participatory Democracy Party (KADEP),told us that it is common belief among Kurds in southeastern Turkey that the Compensation Law system has utterly failed to provide adequate compensation for losses suffered. -------------- HRW Report Criticism of Compensation System -------------- 7.(U) Human Rights Watch's December 2006 report, "Unjust, Restrictive, and Inconsistent: the Impact of Turkey's Compensation Law" sharply criticizes the compensation system. Echoing Canan's claims, the report charges that, following the Icyer decision, damage assessment commissions started to issue much lower assessments, and even sought to revise the assessments that had already been made. The report cites over 40 cases where the commissions set aside offers made before the Icyer decision and then made new, lower offers. The report stated that the cases FM Gul presented to the ECHR "were not signs of a reliably fair system, but elements in a cynical agenda to prevent the ECHR from issuing further judgments." 8.(U) The report details techniques commissions have used to "prune" settlement figures: valuing houses based on public works rates instead of the much higher, legally mandated, compulsory purchase rates; refusing to pay for livestock destroyed in the course of the displacement even though the law requires it; computing assessments based on the assertion that villagers could return to their homes in 1999, even though several applicants are still unable, for security reasons, to return; and refusing to accept claims for unregistered lands in cases where the State itself failed to complete the registration process. The absence of any effective appeals procedures leaves villagers no realistic alternative but to accept the unreasonably low judgments, the report concluded. HRW noted that it was not able to complete its assessment because the GOT arrested and deported its researcher for alleged visa irregularities. 9.(U) HRW concludes that the current "capricious" system cannot be salvaged. It views the commissions' valuations as more likely to stoke a sense of grievance in the local population than heal wounds. HRW proposes a "standard sum ANKARA 00000516 003 OF 003 solution" that would provide compensation calculated on a scale per year of displacement, with a legal mechanism for opting out of the program. The report also encourages the ECHR and Council of Europe to investigate the impact of the Icyer judgment. -------------- GOT: Compensation System Working Smoothly -------------- 10.(C) GOT officials told us that the report's claims were vastly exaggerated. Interior Ministry Secretary General Mustafa Toprak had not read the report but denied allegations of a coordinated or systematic plan to reduce settlement offers following the Icyer decision. The number of commissions has been increased in the last year, commissions have accelerated their work, and claims are being paid by the state regardless of whether the province has sufficient funds. Any problems with the system, he stated, are due to citizens and attorneys who submit false claims. Toprak said a Turkish version of ambulance chasing is occurring -- attorneys who are paid a percentage of settlements are encouraging people to file claims even if they were not displaced due to PKK-related violence. MOI Department Head for Foreign Relations Ercan Arslantas told us the MOI is giving high priority to the compensation program and that HRW overstated the problems. In Arslantas's view, although it is difficult to administer such a massive program without errors, approximately 90 percent of the cases are fair and error free. He said there was no need for outside monitoring by Human Rights Watch or other organizations. 11.(C) Comment: Official views of the program's success are clearly at odds with the views of displaced villagers and their attorneys. Interior Ministry officials with whom we spoke seemed unwilling to take seriously the charges raised by Human Rights Watch or residents from southeastern Turkey. The GOT needs to create a more transparent process by allowing independent monitoring of the compensation program and establish an effective appeals process if it hopes to change southeastern residents' current perception that the compensation is merely a superficial attempt by the government to meet EU accession requirements. End comment. Visit Ankara's Classified Web Site at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/ankara/ WILSON