GHM/MRG-G - Press Release - 16/11/2000 - [The Balkan Human Rights Web Pages]

During the OSCE Implementation Review Meeting in Warsaw, on 24 October 2000, the Turkish Delegation, in response to appeals that the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (OSCE HCNM) reviews Turkey’s minority rights situation –made inter alia by GHM- said that “As for proposed contacts between Turkey and the High Commissioner on National Minorities, we adhere to our position on this issue which was outlined at the Permanent Council meeting held on 12 October in Vienna.” Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM) and Minority Rights Group - Greece (MRG-G) looked into the matter and discovered that, on that day, the PC was reviewing the exchange of correspondence between Turkey and the OSCE HCNM, with the former refusing a visit by the latter to Turkey to review the country’s minority rights commitments. The correspondence that led to the first ever refusal of an OSCE state party to cooperate with the HCNM, follows. GHM and MRG-G urge the international community to put pressure on Turkey to change its decision and cooperate with the OSCE HCNM.

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

High Commissioner on National Minorities

H.E Ambassador Jutta Stefan-Bastl

Dear Madam Chairperson

One of the most positive developments in the OSCE-area is a return to normalcy of large parts of South-Eastern Turkey, where previously there had been fierce fighting. The state of emergency has come to an end in several provinces of that region.

I therefore felt that is was an appropriate moment for me to seek contact with the Government of Turkey. I informed the members of the Permanent Council of my intention to do so on May 4^th of this year, and found support for this from various states, while no state disagreed.

On June 6^th I wrote a letter to Foreign Minister Cem, asking for a meeting with him and the Minister for Human Rights. In order to avoid any misunderstanding, I emphasized in my letter that, in accordance with article 5b of my mandate, I would not try to get involved in those aspects of the situation of minorities which are related to organized acts of terrorism.

I was of course aware of the interpretative statements made by the Turkish Government at the Copenhagen and Moscow meetings of the Human Dimension and on the occasion of the 1992 Helsinki Decisions of the CSCE, which stressed that “according to the Turkish constitutional system the word ‘minorities’ encompasses only groups of persons defined and recognized as such on the basis of multilateral and bilateral instruments to which Turkey is a party”. On the other hand, the 1992 interpretative statement regarding the Helsinki Decision (including the Decision to create the institution of the HCNM) continued as follows: “this is without prejudice to the constitutional principle that all citizens are equal before the law, enjoy the same rights and have the same obligations without discrimination, regardless of their sex, religion, race or ethnic religion”. With this in mind, I suggested to Minister Cem that our exchange of views would concentrate on this subject.

In this letter of reply of 14 June 2000 Minister Cem wrote “I do not agree with the stated intention in your letter to conduct a mission in Turkey”.

The position taken by the Government of Turkey is not compatible with OSCE principles. In this respect I refer to the Document of the Moscow conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE in 1991, in which the participating states categorically and irrevocably declare that “the commitments undertaken in the field of the human dimension of the CSCE are matters of direct and legitimate concern to all participating states and do not belong exclusively to the internal affairs of the state concerned”.

The position taken by the Government of Turkey is also not compatible with article 3 of the mandate of the HCNM, which leaves it to the judgment of the High Commissioner whether he has to get involved in a specific situation in an OSCE state. Indeed, if it would be left to any government unilaterally to determine whether or not a situation exists which falls within the mandate of the HCNM, the effectiveness of the institution of the HCNM would be seriously undermined and the broader OSCE principle of “co-operative security” would be set back. In this respect it also has to be recalled that the Stockholm CSCE Ministerial Council Meeting of 1992 – with no participating state making any reservation – encouraged the High Commissioner to visit any participating state. Furthermore, the ministers undertook to provide the High Commissioner with relevant information at their disposal on national minorities. On the basis of my mandate and of the Stockholm decision, a practice has been developed of frequent visits by the High Commissioner to a great number of states participating in the OSCE, with regular direct contacts at the highest level of government. Since I assumed office, I have had meetings with some 15 governments regarding specific situations in their countries. No government has ever refused to receive me.

Against this background, I wrote to Foreign Minister Cem a second letter, trying to remove possible misunderstandings about the aims of my visit. To my regret, I received again a negative reaction.

Article 26a of the mandate of the HCNM directs him i.a. to communicate in person with governments of participating states. However, apart from his willingness to discuss the situation in Central Asia in a meeting with him outside Turkey, the letter of Foreign Minister Cem amounts to a refusal to communicate with me on the subject of the equality of all citizens before the law in Turkey.

In case of such a refusal article 28 of my mandate directs me to inform the CSO (now the Permanent Council). In order to inform you fully regarding the arguments of both sides on this issue, I attach herewith the correspondence in this matter between Minister Cem and I.

Regarding the concern expressed by Minister Cem in his second letter that I did not respect confidentially in our correspondence, I wish to re-emphasize that I had earlier informed the Permanent Council about my intention to seek such a dialogue with the Turkish Government. I therefore did not see the necessity to remain silent on the progress of these efforts in contacts with representatives of other states. In this connection, I wish to stress, as is evident from the attached correspondence, that so far I have merely sought a meeting with Minister Cem to begin a very specific and limited dialogue. At the same time, I have to underline that throughout my mandate I have always respected confidentiality when information of a confidential matter was provided to me by OSCE states and that I do of course intend to continue to do so.

I remain hopeful that ways can still be found to have a dialogue with the Turkish Government. The proposal I have made for such and exchange of views takes into account the interpretative statement made by the government of Turkey regarding the OSCE Helsinki Decisions. As Minister Cem has recognized himself in his second letter, I have only a limited objective. I want to have an exchange of views on the implementation of the constitutional principles in Turkey that all citizens are equal before the law and enjoy the same rights and obligations regardless of race or ethnic origin. That makes it even more difficult for me to understand the refusal for a dialogue on this issue. Even more so because article 39 of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, to which the government of Turkey attaches decisive importance, also contains important provisions regarding equal treatment of all Turkish nationals.

May I ask you to circulate this letter, together with the attached exchange of correspondence, to all members of the Permanent Council.

Please permit me first to express my concern at the fact that the copies of our letters exchanged in June this year have been made available to some other members of the OSCE. As stipulated in the mandate of the OSCE High Commissioner for National Minorities and as you have also rightly referred to in your letter of 27 July 2000, confidentiality and quiet diplomacy should be the basic working methods.

As an important instrument of conflict prevention, we value the place of the High Commissioner for National Minorities within the OSCE structures. We have been following your work very closely.

In this connection, I should like to reiterate that there is no situation in Turkey that falls within the framework of your mandate. Having carefully reviewed our communications on this matter since early June and taking into consideration the points made in your letter, I understand that your objective does not go beyond being informed on the implementation of the constitutional principle in Turkey that all citizens are equal before the law and enjoy the same rights and obligations regardless of race or ethnic origin.

The status of minorities in Turkey has been defined by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne. Accordingly, there are only non-Moslem minorities in Turkey. This fact was registered through an interpretative statement made on the occasion of the adoption of the mandate of the OSCE High Commissioner for National Minorities. The said interpretative statement is binding regarding Turkey.

Following your suggestion, I will be pleased to have an exchange of views on Central Asia during the next OSCE ministerial meeting.

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

High Commissioner on National Minorities

His Excellency Mr. Ismael CEM

Dear Mr. Minister

Please permit me to write to you again regarding my request to have a meeting with you and your colleague, the Minister for Human Rights, Mr. Rustu Kazim Yucelen. I am taking the liberty to do this because your letter of June 14 to me has led me to conclude that misunderstanding have arisen about the nature and aims of my visit.

In your letter you object to the fact that my visit would take place on the basis of paragraph 11a of my mandate, which forms part of a section of my mandate called “early warning”. However, paragraph 11a itself only speaks about the collecting of information by the High Commissioner. It is also clear from the context of this section that collecting information does not in any way oblige the High Commissioner to issue an early warning later. In fact, during the seven and a half years I have occupied this post, I have issued an early warning only once.

Regarding the remark in your letter that there is no situation in Turkey which may be described as a tension in the sense of the mandate of the High Commissioner on National Minorities, I hope you will allow me to refer to the fact that I have had meeting with the governments of 15 OSCE states since I took office in 1993. Sometimes the governments and myself did not hold identical views on specific situations, but at the same time none of them ever objected to a visit on my part, because they were aware that paragraph 3 of my mandate – a paragraph which was not the subject of any interpretative statement when my mandate was adopted by the Helsinki Summit in 1992 – leaves it to the High Commissioner to exercise his judgment as to whether a situation falling in his mandate exists. To this end, the mandate envisages in paragraph 11c visits by the High Commissioner to enable direct contacts with i.a. government leaders in order precisely to clarify positions of policy and law. Such visits have become an ordinary part of my work.

Perhaps there is also a misunderstanding about my working methods. Apart from sticking carefully to my mandate, I also have a clear preference for quiet diplomacy. When on mission I try to avoid press conferences and public statements and even any publicity about my visit, as much as possible. The sole reason for my request to you and your colleague is that, after studying carefully the various interpretative statements of Turkey regarding minority issues, I feel the need to receive further clarification from your government regarding the implementation of the constitutional principle that all citizens are equal before the law, enjoy the same rights and have the same obligations regardless i.e. of race or ethnic origin.

It is against this background, Mr. Minister, that I take the liberty to ask you to reconsider your decision and to declare your willingness to discuss the implementation of the constitutional principle I quoted before. To be clear, aside from Minister Yucelen and yourself, it is not my intention to have other contacts while in Turkey.

Permit me finally to thank you, Mr. Minister, for your willingness to have exchange of views with me on the situation in Central Asia.

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Thank you for your letter of 6^th June 2000, which I received on my return to Turkey from several visits abroad.

I regret that I was unable to attend the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Seminar held in Antalya from 12-13 April this year, due to my engagements. But I understand the Seminar has been a success in creating an opportunity for a useful exchange of views among the Parliamentarians on issues relating to minorities in different parts of the OSCE region.

I do not agree with the stated intention in your letter to consider a mission in Turkey. Paragraph 11 of your mandate, as you have rightly referred to, comes under the title of “early warning”. Furthermore the visits of High Commissioner to Participating States are intended to address a tension involving national minorities (paragraphs 11c and 17). There is no situation in Turkey warranting early warning or which may be described as tension in the sense of the mandate of the High Commissioner on National Minorities.

You will recall that on the occasion of the adoption of the 1992 Helsinki Decisions of the OSCE, which, inter alia, included the mandate of the High Commissioner on National Minorities, the Turkish Delegation made an interpretative statement. This was to the effect that according to the Turkish legal system the word “minorities” encompasses only groups of persons defined and recognized as such on the basis of multilateral or bilateral instruments to which Turkey is a signatory party. Similar interpretative statements were also recorded at the Copenhagen and Moscow Meetings on the Human Dimension and on the occasion of the adoption of the OSCE Budapest Document 1994. It should be noted that the status of minorities in Turkey has been defined by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne according to which there are only non-muslim minorities in Turkey. No special status or privilege has ever been granted to any other person or group of persons, constitutionally or otherwise. No muslim Turkish citizen can be defined as belonging to any sort of minority. All Turkish citizens enjoy equal rights guaranteed by the constitution and actively participate in Turkey’s political, social and economic life regardless of their race or ethnic origin.

Our Government is intent on introducing new changes to our human rights legislation. However our aim is not to alter our minority concept based on the International Treaty of Lausanne as well as centuries old social and cultural traditions, but to further improve democracy and human rights without discrimination as to ethnic origin or creed.

For all of the reasons stated above, it is the conclusion of my Government that there is not a conflict or early warning situation which necessitates a visit to Turkey by the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities.

Finally, Mr. High Commissioner, I would like to assure you of our continued support. Taking into account your interest in Central Asia, I will be delighted to meet with you personally at an opportune time, perhaps on the occasion of a future OSCE meeting.

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

High Commissioner on National Minorities

The Hague, 6 June 2000

Of the Republic of Turkey

In pursuance of article 11a of my mandate, I am frequently visiting states participating in OSCE in order to collect information regarding minorities’ issues. I would hope very much to carry out a similar mission in Turkey. In order to avoid any misunderstandings, I want to add that, in doing so, I would of course respect article 5c of my mandate. It is not my intention to get involved in those aspects of the situation of the minorities which are related to organized terrorism. My mission would concentrate on collecting information regarding the implementation of the constitutional principle of your country that all citizens are equal before the law, enjoy the same rights and have the same obligations without discrimination, regardless i.a. race or ethnic origin.

It is against this background, Mr. Minister, that I would highly appreciate a meeting with you and your colleague, the Minister for Human Rights, Mr. Rustu Kazim Yucelen. I would also hope to have the opportunity to learn about the views of Turkey regarding the role of the OSCE in Central Asia.

O


	*
THE BALKAN HUMAN RIGHTS WEB PAGES
[Home Page] [Countries] [Organizations] [Special Issues] [Publications] [Links] [Profile] [Communication]