TURKEY: ACADEMIC CONVICTED FOR INSULTING ATATURK

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 000211

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/04/2017
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL OSCE TU
SUBJECT: TURKEY: ACADEMIC CONVICTED FOR INSULTING ATATURK

REF: A. ANKARA 151

B. ANKARA 59

C. 07 ANKARA 2731

D. 07 ANKARA 2958

ANKARA 00000211 001.2 OF 002


Classified By: Political Counselor Janice Weiner for reasons 1.4(b),(d)

1.(SBU) Summary: An Izmir court dealt a blow to freedom of
expression in Turkey on January 29 by convicting Gazi
University professor Atilla Yayla of insulting Turkey's
founding father Ataturk at a 2006 Izmir conference. Yayla's
attorney told us the professor merely presented a critical
analysis of the Republic under Ataturk's single-party rule
(1925-1945); Yayla's reported reference to Ataturk as "this
man" -- the only phrase the prosecutor could latch onto --
led to his prosecution. Yayla plans to appeal the court's
15-month "suspended" sentence. While human rights contacts
believe the verdict highlights obstacles erected by a
nationalistic judiciary, they add it also has sparked
much-needed societal debate on the topic of freedom of
expression. End summary.

--------------
Professor Convicted of Insulting Ataturk
--------------

2. (SBU) An Izmir court January 29 convicted Atilla Yayla, a
professor at Ankara's Gazi University and head of the
Association for Liberal Thinking, of insulting the legacy of
the Turkish Republic's founding father, Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk. The court sentenced Yayla to 15 months in prison
pursuant to Law No. 5816, which prohibits "crimes committed
against Ataturk" and subjects individuals who publicly
"insult or curse the memory" to a prison term of up to three
years. The court suspended the sentence, provided Yayla does
not re-offend within two years, a common technique akin to
probation.


3. (SBU) Yayla was convicted for remarks during his academic
presentation at a 2006 Izmir conference on Turkey's
development, sponsored by the ruling Justice and Development
Party's (AKP's) youth wing. Comparing the Republic's
single-party rule (1925-1945) to its multi-party period (1945
- present),Yayla concluded Turkey was more "backward" during
the former. Yayla also predicted European visitors, viewing
the omnipresent pictures and statues of Ataturk, will
increasingly question the values of a country with a cult of
Ataturk.


4. (SBU) The Izmir prosecutor launched the case based on
local newspaper coverage of conference alone, according to
Erkem; there was no audio or video recording of the
conference to confirm Yayla's comments. Erkem unsuccessfully
argued in court that Yayla had no intention to insult Ataturk
with his critical academic evaluation. "Academics must be
free to think, to search and share findings," she stated.
Former Court of Appeals Chief Judge Sami Selcuk and several
other prominent attorneys submitted amicus briefs to the
court arguing Yayla's presentation had not violated any law.

--------------
Defense Plans to Appeal Verdict
--------------

5. (SBU) Erkem criticized the court's "suspended sentence" as
a technique commonly used to stifle free speech while
allowing the judiciary to maintain that prison sentences have
not been imposed. She plans to appeal shortly, after the
court releases its detailed verdict. The Court of Appeals'
prior decisions in similar cases, including upholding Hrant
Dink's conviction under Penal Code Article 301 (criminalizing
insulting "Turkishness"),leave little hope of a reversal,
she told us. If the appellate court upholds the decision,
Erkem will file in the European Court of Human Rights.

-------------- --
Yayla Plans to Return to Turkey Despite Threats
-------------- --

6. (SBU) Gazi University fired Yayla after the prosecutor
opened the investigation. Erkem told us most Gazi students
are fiercely nationalist and supported his dismissal.
Several anonymous death threats were slipped under his office
door, Erkem noted; the university found no culprits. Only a
small group of Yayla's students supported him by organizing

ANKARA 00000211 002.2 OF 002


demonstrations and marching through campus with their mouths
taped. Though the University was forced to reinstate Yayla
after Erkem successfully challenged his dismissal in an
administrative court, Yayla left Turkey to teach in England.
Erkem said Yayla plans to return to his position at Gazi this
summer, and is likely to accept the state's offer to provide
him with police protection.

--------------
A Long Way To Go On Freedom Of Expression
--------------

7. (C) Human Rights Agenda Association President Orhan
Cengiz told us Turkey's nationalist judiciary (refs C, D)
constitutes the country's main impediment to free expression.
Prosecutors and judges persistently oppose attorneys working
to protect individual freedoms, according to Cengiz. He
recounted that Erkem had been charged with "interfering with
the judicial process" by reading a legal petition to the
press in a 2003 case of alleged child abuse at Izmir's Buca
prison. Erkem had learned of the problem, recorded
photographic and oral evidence of mistreatment, and then
submitted it to Izmir prosecutors. When the prosecutors
failed to act, she petitioned the Minister of Justice, and
read her petition to the press. Although the Justice
Ministry ultimately brought a case, the guards alleged to
have committed the abuse were acquitted. Erkem remains on
trial.


8. (C) European Commission human rights officer Sema Kilicer
agreed the judiciary's mentality limits freedom of expression
in Turkey. While Penal Code Article 301 has become
emblematic, at least 12 articles or paragraphs must be
changed for Turkey to comply with EU requirements, she
explained. Prosecutors can use these other laws, as they
have in recent attempts to block the popular website YouTube
because of clips deemed insulting to Ataturk (ref A).
"Turkish Daily News" columnist Burak Bekdil, himself
convicted under Article 301, believes the problem lies not
only in the judiciary but with the governing Justice and
Development Party (AKP). Bekdil told us AKP's constant
promises and lack of action on Article 301 demonstrate it
does not genuinely support liberal notions of free
expression.


9. (C) Comment: The Yayla verdict is indicative of how far
Turkey has yet to go before internalizing Western notions of
freedom of expression. Even if the government takes the
important, though difficult, step of amending Article 301
(ref B),a nationalist judiciary will likely continue to
circumvent any new provision by using other laws to limit
speech. Though Erkem resents the prosecutions brought
against her, Yayla, and other human rights defenders, she is
the first to recognize that their cases are sparking
much-needed debate on these previously taboo topics. End
comment.

Visit Ankara's Classified Web Site at
http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/Portal:Turk ey

WILSON