Democracy and Education (And An Evermore Divided Turkey)

PHOTO from Vatan

The parliament took up the proposed education law (see past post for background) yesterday just hours after 20,000 demonstrators gathered in Ankara's Tandogan Square to protest what opposition groups view as a unilateral attempt by the ruling AKP to overhaul the education system.

The law the AKP is trying to pass is publicly referred to as "4+4+4" because it seeks to make 12-year education mandatory for all children. Yet that is not the full story. Under the current system, public education is mandatory for the first eight years, after which students may opt to attend imam-hatip, or religious high schools that teach a mixture of standard education and theology, and which are subject to different standards -- and, naturally -- a different ideological/pedagogical atmosphere. The proposed law, which has been amended since my last post, also includes provisions that would pave the way for children to opt to attend imam-hatip  as early as 10 years of age, as well as enter special vocational schools. The original law had included a measure that would allow children to opt into "open education," or home schooling, as early as 10 years of age. That provision has since been amended under pressure from women's another groups that introducing open education at such an early age would lead to an increase in child labor and young girls being kept from school to work at home -- a problem in conservative communities that activist groups have long sought to remedy.

The proposed system seeks to effectively divide education into three tiers -- first, middle, and high school. The government also plans to introduce a year before primary education akin to what in the United States is known as "pre-school," and which AKP politicians have haled as a major selling point of the new law. Under the proposal, children would also be able to join private religious education courses, often held during the summer, after their fourth year in school.

For AKP policymakers, the new system is to be celebrated not only as a means to further the quality of public education but also "democracy" -- a word much heralded by AKP politicians, but which for all intents and purposes, seems simply to mean rule by the majority, and a majority as the ruling party interprets it (for more on this, see this past post he AKP's sparring with TUSIAD, the leading business association in Turkey which has puts itself squarely in opposition to the new arrangements).

Much at the heart of the AKP's framing the issue is the fact that the current system is largely the product of the 1997 "postmodern coup" that toppled the country's former Islamist-led coalition, in which the AKP has its roots. Under military tutelage in the years after the coup, the government sought to guard secularism against what the generals saw as the rising tide of political Islam and the current education system was a major concern, in particular the increasing popularity of imam-hatip. The system prior to the coup allowed parents to place their children in imam-hatip at the age of 10, a policy to which the AKP is returning. It also forbade children to take private religious courses (for example, during summer vacation) before completing five years in school.

Though the reform process at the time was far from democratic and involved a major abuse of power by the military, as well as persecution of numerous educators and students haling from conservative Muslim backgrounds, the new policy did yield some positive results, including an increase in the enrollment rate of girls in the first eight years of public education (from 34% to 65%). While the coup-driven education reform of the late 1990s should in no way be celebrated, the AKP should at the least explain how its new policy will not seek to imperil the success of the past decade in this regard. Yet rather than explaining how the new system (or devising one alternative to that proposed) might build on increased enrollment rates while adopting a more sensitive approach to religion, the party has instead simply decried opponents of the law to be against "democracy."

Polarization over the new law reached a new high two weeks ago when the parliamentary commission responsible for education policy ramrodded the proposal through the commission amidst fistfights between the ruling party and the opposition. Knowing that debate could delay the law's passage through the commission, the AKP blockaded opposition party members' attendance in attempt to forestall efforts to frustrate passage to the parliament's general assembly.

Soon after the brawl, the opposition CHP petitioned to annul the commission's vote, arguing that procedural rules had been violated. Yet parliament speaker Cemil Cicek seems to have no intention of returning the law to commission, and the party's plans at this point are to pass the law in the general assembly by the end of the week.

The protests yesterday reveal just how divided Turkey is becoming. Speaking at Tandogan, CHP leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu said the law is not "4+4+4," but "8/2." Kilicdaroglu was referring to the two different standards of education children would be receiving after the first eight years (and, in reality, after the age of 10 given the planned introduction of vocational schools and imam-hatip at so young an age). Yet there is another element to the leader's words worth exploring.

Though some of the AKP's policies have aimed to strip national education of some of the more distressing nationalist/ideological aspects of public education (for example, military-designed national security education courses and celebrations of national youth day, which liberals have long considered quasi-fascist), the fact that the government's most recent effort seems to setup a system parallel to that of national education (that is, imam-hatip and vocational education), there is real concern that the secular/conservative divide could grow deeper.Further, there is the very real possibility that a large number of Turks (future voting citizens) as early as age 10 could receive an education that is sub-par when compared to their counterparts that finish 12 years of public eduction. While these students might be more likely to constitute the "pious generation" Erdogan envisioned a few weeks before the education debate started in full, it is highly unlikely that they would demonstrate the same level of political efficacy and sophistication as their more educated counterparts.

Among the groups protesting the new legislation at Tandogan is Egitem-Sen, the left-leaning teachers' union, as well as the Rightful Women's Platform and the Federation of Turkish Women's Associations. The Confederation of Public Sector Workers (KESK), of which Egitem-Sen is a part, is also present. Egitem-Sen has called for two days of teachers' strikes to demonstrate against the proposed law, and is the chief organizer of the demonstrations alongside the CHP.

Ankara's governor, who is a member of the AKP, has questioned the legality of the assembly, and though he has yet to break up the gathering, he has threatened to do so. The municipality has removed banners and placards put up in the environs -- a move CHP parliamentarian and women's rights defender Binnaz Toprak described as a violation of freedom of expression. And so it seems there is potential for the fighting in parliament to soon bleed onto the streets -- a country divided indeed, and with neither liberal nor consensual democracy anywhere in sight at the moment. For more coverage in English of yesterday's protests, click here.

Religious Education and 4+4+4

PHOTO from Birgun

Fast approaching the anniversary of the Feb. 28 process, or the 1997 "postmodern coup" that brought about the fall of the Islamist Refah government and a slate of reforms to defend secularism against what was perceived by some as the encroaching threat posed by political Islam, the government has announced plans to restructure Turkish education.

Reforms include provisions that would allow school children to receive education at religious (imam-hatip) high schools after completing four years of primary education or pursue distance learning (essentially "home school") courses. At the moment, students are required to complete eight years of education before being allowed to complete the final four years at imam-hatip, which combine traditional and religious education. Under the new law, education would be structured into three four-year segments: four years primary (ilk), four years middle (orta), and four years high school (lise), and hence the 4+4+4. The government is arguing the new law is an improvement since all 12 years will be mandatory even if it is to be completed at home.

The problems with the law should be apparent, and late this week earned the denunciation of the Turkish Businessmen and Industrialists' Association (TUSIAD) and prominent opinion leader and entrepreneur Guler Sabanci. In rural areas, particularly in the east and southeast where children, particularly girls, already do not go to school, the law would greatly diminish educational standards. Parents in these areas are often not well-educated themselves (this is an understatement), and would not be capable of providing a quality education. Further, child labor is a tremendous problem (see past post) and girls are frequently kept at home (for more on this, see past post; see also the above advertisement from a 2010 campaign launched by Milliyet urging fathers to send their daughters to school).

The proposed law also allows for provision that would reduce the age of apprenticeship to 11, though it is still unclear to me as to how an apprenticeship works. (Is it pursued concurrent with other curriculum? Does it allow one to withdraw from school entirely? Would this possibly trigger more child labor?) The apprenticeship is also chief among TUSIAD's concerns (for more, click here).

On Wednesday, the parliament sub-commission for education took up the bill after a debate by a wider debate by a larger commission. Though the AKP has been sensitive to criticisms coming from groups such as TUSIAD and has expressed some willingness to compromise, it is unclear just how many of the proposed provisions could be made law. The sub-commission is scheduled to take the draft up once more on Feb. 28 after some tweaking from party officials. For an account in English, click here.

Cumhuriyet columnist Utku Cakirozer frames the recent move within the context of the Feb. 28 process. Cakirozer refers to measures put into play soon after the coup that required all students to attend eight years of primary education (from five to eight) before dropping out or enrolling in imam-hatip. The generals also restricted Koran courses. Students were not allowed to enroll in Koran courses until after their fifth year of school, and courses were subject to inspection by the Directorate of Religious Affairs, or Diyanet. Penalties, including prison sentences for parents who did not send their children to schools or sent their children to Koran courses before they were old enough. In addition, operators of illegal Koran courses were also subject to penalties.

Gradually, the AKP government has whittled away at what some might read as particularly intrusive restrictions, particularly on religious education. In 2003, prison sentences were replaced with fines; in 2004, parliament reduced the sentence for running an illegal Koran course from three years to one and ended and authorities ceased closing down illegal courses; in 2005, the Diyanet ceased inspecting Koran courses; and after last June's elections, the minimum age for Koran courses was eliminated. According to Cakirozer, the goal is now to do away with the eight-year rule for uninterrupted education.


As it inevitably does, the headscarf also falls into the debate. As Cakirozer points out, young girls wearing the headscarf (as young as fifth grade) will now be allowed to do so at imam-hatip, effectively ending the ban. I care more about the fact that these children will simply not receive the same quality of education as I do about an effective end to the ban after that age (the ban was one of the reasons driving the government to do this to begin with), but it is important to note that is also important for many critics of the new law (for another example, see this coverage from Hurriyet).

Other columnists and opinion leaders see the law as a broad-based effort to increase the influence of Islamist education, particularly imam-hatip and Koran courses. For an example, see Egitim-Is head Veli Demir's comments in Melih Asik's column in Milliyet.


UPDATE I (2/27) -- Nicole Pope's column in Today's Zaman offers a solid English-language analysis summing up the threat the proposed law poses to Turkish education.

Potentials and Pitfalls: Moving Forward with Constitutional Reform

The constitutional reform package is expected to be discussed in the General Assembly on Monday. Earlier this week, the parliament's constitutional commission approved all the articles in the package, following a few missteps by the AKP that occurred when the party introduced the proposal to parliament after visiting opposition political parties and listening to some input from government institutions and civil society groups. [For the package as it stood March 30 (revisions have been made since), click here.] [For background, see March 26 and March 7 posts.]

The CHP and the MHP have both opposed the package, while the Kurdish BDP has tried to use its leverage to make the package more comprehensive. Opposition from the CHP argues the package is little but an attempt by the AKP to consolidate its power, threatening the separation of powers so that it can assure its own dominance in electoral politics, and for some, realize an anti-secularist agenda. The MHP has stood by its position that the constitution should be amended, but that the process should follow the next set of parliamentary elections, currently slated for July 2011. In the interim, the MHP has proposed a compromise commission in which future amendments might be discussed. Some figures in the judiciary, most notably Supreme Court of Appeals Chairman Hasan Gerceker, as well as establishment judicial organizations such as Judges and Prosecutors Association (YARSAV), have been quite vocal in their opposition, not hesitating to register their objections publicly. [A bit of a sidenote, but revealing of some of the animosity at play here, is a recent lawsuit filed by Constitutional Court President Hasim Kilic after former Supreme Court of Appeals Chief Prosecutor Sabih Kanadoğlu referred to Kilic as a "goat."]

Liberals and reformers have widely supported the reform package as a small step in the right direction, though there is plenty of criticism that the package should go further and a fair amount of concern that the AKP is, at least in part, acting its own interests so as to protect itself from a future closure case. Some reformers have argued that the piecemeal reform process currently underway, especially given the perception that the government is acting in its own self-interests, is a waste of valuable political capital, and that the whole constitution should be amended. There are certainly both short and long-term interests at work here for the government, and of course, the short-term interest of saving itself from a possible closure case and giving government-friendly procescutors more control in the Ergenekon investigation is at the forefront of much of the criticism. The AKP government is particularly vulnerable to some of the arguments since the reform package was introduced soon after its standoff with the judiciary and military in February and rumors of a possible closure case. When the government did not include lowering the current 10 percent threshold parties must meet to enter parliament, it did little to endear itself with skeptics. Yet, despite the imperfection of reform efforts at hand and interests involved, there are plenty who are willing to go along with the AKP's efforts to see the proposed reforms into law.

Starting Monday, the package will be subject to a first round of discussions in parliament to be followed by a second. At the end of the second round, which is not expected until mid-May, a plenary vote will be held on each proposed amendment, followed by a vote on the reform package as a whole. The AKP currently controls 3/5 of the parliament, and should it get 3/5 of the vote on all of the amendments and the package vote (330 votes), the package will land on the desk of President Gul. At this point, President Gul will have 15 days to examine the amendments and send them to a popular referendum. Under newly passed law reducing the time frame in which a referendum can be held following such a move, a period of 60 days will pass wherein the CHP, should it get the support of 110 MPs (CHP holds 97 seats), may be able to appeal to the Constitutional Court to annul or stay some of the amendments in the package. However, such a move by the party would not cancel the referendum. Though there is still some question as to whether the CHP could do this, former President Sezer recently gave the government a bit of a victory when he weighed in that the CHP must wait for the referendum before making such an application. The referendum would not occur until, at the earliest, late July, meaning that there will be plenty of time for any number of developments in the interim. In short, we are in for a long, and likely tumultuous, next few months.

A bit of a stir occurred soon after the package was introduced to parliament when CHP leader Deniz Baykal requested that President Gul break the package into parts should it end up on his desk with 3/5 of parliamentarians support, but short of the 2/3 required for the amendments therein to come law. The CHP does not want to see the articles pertaining to the appointment of judges to the Constitutional Court and officials to the Supreme Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) become law, but again, these are at the heart of the reform process and are the principal articles drafted by the short-term interests most acknowledge to be the impetus behind the whole reform effort. While Gul has this authority, it is unlikely that he will make such a move. As to the possiblity of a similar "compromise" between the CHP and the AKP, the chances of a deal being brokered are slim to none. Curiously, Baykal has recently added more conditions to the "compromise" offer, asking that the key articles be dropped from consideration until the next parliamentary elections and making his offer all the less palatable. Some experts have argued that there is merit in breaking the referendum into parts, that all would likely pass refeerndum, and that such a happening would certainly add more legitimacy to the process (for example, see Ayse Karabat's reportage on a recent panel held by the Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research (SETA)).

As to process, there is also concern about civil society not being more involved in the process, though the government did change some elements in the package -- most notably, those pertaining to rights/protections for women and children -- after hearing from some groups. The civil society end-of-things -- far from peace, love, and granola -- has not been without disturbances. A demonstration organized by the Platform for a Civil and Democratic Constitution ended with tear gas and clashes with police when things went awry last Saturday. The demonstration drew representatives and members of the BDP, the Socialist Democracy Party (SDP) along with the Human Rights Association (İHD), the Confederation of Trade Unions of Public Employees (KESK), Young Civilians, the Turkish Medical Association, the Peace and Democracy Movement and the '78'ers' Initiative.

Two pieces worth a read are Atilla Yayla's recent op/ed in Today's Zaman, and Bilgi University Professor Ilter Turan's analysis in a publication of the German Marshall Fund's On Turkey series. Yayla looks at constitutional reform efforts as a re-setting of the balances between democratic and bureacratic power, the latter of which has been dominant in Turkey's constitutional history. Turan's analysis is more holistic, and while drawing the same point, presents a balanced, concise analysis of the constitutional reform package and the process at hand.

Hurdles to Dealing with Domestic Violence

From Bianet:

The report on Education regarding Co-operation between Institutions has been published as part of the Hürriyet ('Freedom') Campaign against Domestic Violence.

The report was prepared by the coordinator of the campaign, Neşe Hacısalihoğlu, and is based on data collected in 33 provinces and five counties between 9 September and 29 October 2009.

The Hürriyet Campaign against Domestic Violence was part of the 'Freedom is our Right' Train Project which travelled all over the country. Representatives of the governorship, municipalities, Social Services and Child Protection Institution (SHÇEK), the police, the gendarmerie, the National Education Department, the Health Department, universities, the Registration Office, the Social Welfare and Solidarity Foundation, bar associations and non-governmental organizations took part in the training program carried out in cooperation of several institutions.

The report reveals concrete data on difficulty experienced with police forces, the SHÇEK, at family courts, with bar associations, at health institutions, at schools and public education, with the social welfare and solidarity foundation, with the Registration Office, with municipalities and non-governmental organizations.

The report analyses problems experienced by the employees of these institutions and suggests feasible solutions.

The litany of problems Bianet extracts from the report is overwhelming, giving just some idea as to how difficult domestic violence is to effectively address. Impunity abounds, bureacracy and courts can exacerbate already grave situations (see criticisms of the Law on Family Protection), and a serious lack of services persists.

Human Rights Association Releases Prison Report

From Today's Zaman:

The chairman of the Human Rights Association (İHD), Öztürk Türkdoğan, has criticized the high number of arrests made as part of judicial investigations in Turkey, which he said has become a form of punishment in itself.

Speaking at a press conference on Monday where he discussed the İHD’s “Report on Violations in Prisons 2009,” Türkdoğan called on the Justice Ministry to amend Article 100 of the Code on Criminal Procedure (CMK) to make it more difficult for people to be arrested when an investigation is being conducted into them.

More than half of those imprisoned in Turkey have simply been arrested and are either awaiting trial or are waiting for a verdict on their cases. Currently there are 118,929 people in prison in Turkey, 60,598 of whom have not yet been sentenced, according to the Justice Ministry’s statistics. “This is a clear indicator of how anti-democratic and unjust the regime of arrests is and how it is used as a type of punishment. The ratio of people under arrest among the prison population is not as high in any other country. Inmates are sleeping in shifts in Turkey. There two to three times more people in prisons than the facilities are capable of holding. This situation causes many cases of human rights violations.

The situation is even worse in juvenile prisons, where there are currently 2,789 inmates. Less than 10 percent are serving prison sentences, the rest have simply been arrested and are awaiting trial. “Turkey continuously violates the Declaration of the Rights of the Child,” the human rights activist asserted.

The report, which was prepared based on information received by the İHD and cases mentioned in the press, suggests that 24 inmates died in prisons last year. “Forty-nine more people were not released despite their serious health problems,” said Türkdoğan. He said if the president continues to use his pardoning power based on reports prepared by the Council of Forensic Medicine (ATK), more people will die while in prison.

Türkdoğan further argued that prison conditions deteriorated in 2009 compared to previous year. “Torture and mistreatment as well as violations of the right to nourishment and medical attention have increased,” he said.

For Bianet's summary of the report, click here. I have tried to find the IHD report, but have had no success.

"Fight!"

PHOTO from video footage shot by CNN Turk (More CNN Turk video of the confrontation can be accessed through the Hurriyet Daily News by clicking here)

In my absence from regular blogging last week as a result of dealing with a serious bout of food poisoning, I missed posting coverage of the fistfight that broke out in Parliament last week following the perceived insulting of Prime Minister Erdogan. The clash took place between AKP and MHP parliamentarians, and left one AKP MP hospitalized after he had a stroke. From Hürriyet:

MHP deputy Osman Durmuş sarcastically said, “How do you [the hospital] not let the wife of a prime minister who is regarded as prophet come into the hospital?”

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan mentioned in a televised interview Sunday that his wife had been denied entry to a military hospital, the Gülhane Military Medical Academy, or GATA, three years ago when she tried to visit actor Nejat Uygur while wearing a headscarf.

Erdoğan said his wife Emine Erdoğan wanted to visit Uygur in the hospital and that Uygur’s wife had said they would be honored by the visit. Uygur’s wife then informed hospital officials of the intended visit but the latter said GATA could not allow Erdoğan to enter because of her headscarf.

During the parliamentary session late Tuesday, MHP deputy Durmuş sarcastically said: “It is the [nasty] white collar doctors [who didn’t allow her to enter the hospital]. How do you not let the wife of a prime minister who is regarded as prophet come into the hospital?”

Durmuş’s words drew a fierce reaction from AKP deputies, including Erdoğan, leading to a fistfight between AKP and MHP deputies. Some deputies were slightly injured while one deputy was hospitalized.

Taking the floor for the second time, Durmuş recalled one of the AKP member’s earlier remarks describing Erdoğan as the second prophet.

On the floor, Erdoğan said: “First of all, our friends don’t know that the chain of prophecy ended with our last prophet [Mohammed]. And, you also lacked intelligence as to defend those who didn’t let her enter GATA. Nobody who attributes such an adjective to me can keep their place in our party. You cannot insult my wife. This is crude and immoral."

. . . .

Durmuş's comment referred to a remark made by Ismail Hakkı Eser in November 2008. In a speech, the AKP’s Aydın provincial council member said, “Erdoğan is like the second prophet for us.”

On Wednesday, Eser resigned from the party.

AKP Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc followed the series up with a visit to acting CHP parliamentary speaker Guldal Mumcu's room, criticizing Mumcu for not keeping better control of the session. Mumcu and the CHP then complained about executive meddling in parliamentary affairs. Erdogan followed the incident up with accusations that the MHP and the CHP are one in the same. The MHP worked with the AKP in February 2008 to pass a constitutional amendment paving the way for women to wear the headscarf in universities in a limited fashion. That amendment was later annulled by the Constitutional Court, but speaks to MHP's efforts to make inroads among the conservative voters that have been attracted to the AKP over the issue.

In another interesting development, the Turkish Armed Forces' Chief of General Staff Ilker Basbug has said that he regrets Ms. Erdogan was denied entrance to the military hopsital, calling the incident "unfortunate." Today's Zaman columnist Fatma Disli Zibak considers whether Basbug has softened his position on the headscarf issue.

And, for another take, Nicole Pope wonders how children can be tried as adults for offenses she considers similar to those modelled by MPs.

While politicians behave like kindergartners in Parliament and get away with it, it is somewhat ironic -- and tragic -- that real children, the ones you would expect to get into scraps, are being tried as adults in courts around the country on terrorism charges for taking part in protests.

Stone throwers are not the only teenagers targeted by the judiciary. Three minors face jail sentences in Bursa after being charged with “insulting the prime minister” by referring to him as “lightbulb Erdoğan.” The court based its decision on a definition of the word “lightbulb” provided by Google, and deemed it insulting.

There is a link between the unedifying sight of grown-up men charging at each other, broadcast across the country, and the detention of young people. Such scenes carry consequences: they ratchet up the tension and increase polarization in society. Perhaps an R rating for bad language and the use of violence should apply to political discussions.

Is it surprising that teenagers, with the idealism and enthusiasm that characterizes the young, should express their views in ways that are sometimes extreme and misguided when confrontation is the norm in the political arena?

UPDATE I (2/9)-- The three students facing jail sentences for the "lightbulb" statements to which Pope alludes hale from Bursa, where another student sentenced last year for making the same remark. Citing Google, the Bursa court in that case ruled the student was not in his rights since the remarks constituted an insult and could not be considered legitimate political speech. Though not children, members of parliament have immunity from such charges, or from breaking into fistfights, which is not an altogether extraordinary event in Turkey's Grand National Assembly.

UPDATE II (2/11) -- Arinc has apologized for some of the comments he made to Mumcu after saying earlier he would apologize if she wanted him to, though he would stand by the correctness of his criticism. Also, President Gul, while on a state visit in India, urged the media not to cover controversies occuring between politicians so as to not increase the social tension they produce.

Children and the Weapons of War

Another child was killed after finding an undetonated explosive device. Bianet reports that "eleven people, nine of them children, were killed by military explosives in 2008, 16 people were injured, 13 of them children. In 2009, two children and one adult were killed, seven children and 3 adults were injured." Another child was killed by an explosive found near the same gendarmerie station in Bingol province.

Child Labor Persists in Turkey, Deepens Gender Divide

The International Labor Organization (ILO) published its annual report on child labor last month. From Bianet:

According to the report, Turkey is the third among the sixteen countries studied in terms of the hours that child labourers work. Only following Mali and Senegal, girls in Turkey aged 5-14 work around 30 hours a week, while boys work over 25 hours.

The average for the sixteen countries is 20.2 hours for girls and 19.2 hours for boys.

According to 2006 data published by Bianet, around one million children in Turkey are working.

Child labor in Turkey has long been considered a problem (click here for an article from Today's Zaman), and the report is significant in drawing specific attention to the gender divide in childhood education. While Turkey is a member of the Organization for Economic Cooperative Development (OECD), the eastern regions of the country lag far behind the much more developed west. While attempts have been made in recent years to address persistent poverty in Turkey's eastern regions, especially the Kurdish southeast, more could be done from a human rights angle in terms of ensuring that children be sent to school, especially young girls. Conditional cash transfers have proved moderately effective in addressing social problems associated systemic poverty, and hopefully the policy suggestions of the ILO will lend policymakers additional guidance.

A report published in Turkey on 11 June, produced by the Educatino Reform Initiative (ERG), there are 220,000 children aged 6 to 13 who are not registered for education in Turkey. Of these, 130,000 are girls, and 90,000 boys. Around 100,000 of the children not being educated are from central Anatolia and the southeast of the country. In addition, there are children who are not even registered as born, and have thus not been counted.

If a household is attached to a social security institution through work, this increases the probability of a child attending middle school (years 6-8) by 15 percent. However, around 54 percent of urban families have no steady income. This rate is at 84 percent in Gaziantep and 91 percent in Diyarbakır, in the southeast of the country.

At higher levels of schooling, the number of girls drop. While there are 96 girls to every 100 boys in primary 1, there are only 91 girls in 8th grade.

According to the child labour report of the Turkey Statistical Institute (TÜİK), six percent of Turkey's 6-17-year-old population is working. 66 percent of these are boys, and 34 percent girls. 41 percent work in agriculture, 28 in industyr, 23 in trade and 9 percent in the service industry.

The TÜİK report also warns that forcing children to work obstructs their education and calls for an integration of all children into the education system. (TK/AG)

DTP MP Sevahir Bayındır from Şırnak (in the southeast) recently proposed a parliamentary investigative commission be set up in response to the report. According to Bayındır,

As long as children are pushed out of education, child labour will continue. Because there are no up-to-date data showing that child labour in Turkey is decreasing, there is no wide-ranging data on child labour. There need to be policies and programmes created to solve the problem, and there needs to be research to obtain indepth information.

Child labour needs to be treated as a social problem, and mechanisms to collect data and monitor child labour need to be created urgently. The worst kinds of child labour need to be abolished, and an investigative committee needs to be formed in order to solve the problems of children working under the worst conditions in industry and agriculture.

Rural-urban migration, related adaptation problems and the industrialisation of agriculture have all put child labour onto the agenda. Families let their children work in the streets in order to raise their income. The underlying reasons for child labour are poverty, migration, traditional family structures, lack of education, unemployment, demand for cheap labour, insufficient work regulations and lack of implementation of existing regulations.

The ILO report can be downloaded here.

Güvenç Case Settled at ECHR

From Bianet:

Oktay Güveç was under fifteen years old when he was arrested for alleged PKK membership and tried in a State Security Court. He was kept in prison with adults for more than five years and tried with the threat of the death penalty for 18months.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has decreed that Turkey violated the ban on torture, his right to freedom and security and his right to a fair trial. It has sentenced Turkey to paying Güveç 45,000 Euros compensation and 4,150 Euros legal costs. The court said that the time in prison damaged Güveç psychologically.

Referring to international agreements, the ECHR said that children should only be detained as a last resort and that their trial should be resolved in the shortest time possible. The fact that Güveç was tried in a State Security Court rather than a children’s court, so the ECHR, represented a violation of the right to a fair trial.

This is by no means the only case in Turkey. Currently children accused of “membership in an illegal organisation” after taking part in protests in Diyarbakır, Adana and other provinces are being tried in Special Authority Heavy Penal Courts (set up after the State Security Courts were dissolved) instead of children’s courts.

Changes in the Law on Terrorism in 2006 have made it possible to try children aged 15-18 in these courts.

Recently, two children were sentenced to 21 years imprisonment in Adana after taking part in pro-Kurdish Newroz events in Gaziantep.

Güvenç was arrested in September 1995, and put on trial the next year. For a press release and a link to the judgement issued by the ECHR, click here. His case has been in Turkish courts for over a decade. Since this time, Turkey has eliminated the death penalty. However, torture continues, as do questionable detentions and a number of other abuses by security forces.

Güvnç's arrest is also a violation of his rights as a child. Despite significant progress made since 1995, children's rights continue to be violated largely thanks to Turkey's 2006 amendments to its Anti-Terrorism Law. Turkey is a state-party to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which its continued prosecution of children contravenes. Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which applies to everyone under 18, states should aim to establish laws, procedures, authorities and institutions specifically applicable to children accused of infringing the penal law. The UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice ("The Beijing Rules"), adopted by the UN General Assembly in November 1985, stipulate in particular that proceedings for children should be conducive to the best interests of the child and shall be conducted in an atmosphere of understanding allowing them to participate and to express themselves freely, and that the well-being of the child should be the guiding factor in the consideration of the case. In a high-profile case earlier last year, choir children were tried as adults in Diyarbakir province for singing Kurdish anthems at a concert in California. The case is a good illustration of just how the Anti-Terrorism law is used.

For more information, see the Child Information Network in Turkey.

Prosecutor Demands Steep Sentences for Child Protestors

From TDZ:

A prosecutor has demanded 23 years in prison for six elementary school students aged between 13 and 14 for participating in illegal demonstrations and throwing stones and Molotov cocktails at the police two weekends ago, during protests of the prime minister’s visit to the predominantly Kurdish Southeast.

The indictment, prepared by the Diyarbakır Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, claimed that the demonstrations were organized by the terrorist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) through Web sites and calls broadcast on Roj TV, a PKK-affiliated station.

. . . .

The indictment says suspect Ş.B. chanted illegal slogans and acted with a group that attacked security forces with sticks and stones. Suspect E.B. is being accused of unfurling an illegal poster and of throwing Molotov cocktails at the police, acts the prosecutor says are recorded on security footage.

Suspects V.D. and Ş.A. stand accused of keeping watch for a group that burned car tires in the illegal demonstrations, while Ö.S. and M.A. are accused of joining a group that set up a barricade and threw rocks at the police.

The minors could be sentenced to up to 23 years in prison under various articles of Turkey's Anti-Terrorism Law, including "spreading the cause of a terrorist organization," "committing a crime on behalf of a terrorist organization without holding membership," "resisting police dispersion attempts with weapons or instruments" and "vandalizing public property."

The Higher Criminal Court for Juveniles will hear the trial in the next few days. The minors are under arrest, pending trial.

For an earlier incident of the Diyarbakır Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office seeking steep sentences for minors, see the attempt made this summer to prosecute members of a children's choir for singing allegedly pro-PKK anthems while attending a concert in the United States. Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which applies to everyone under 18, states should aim to establish laws, procedures, authorities and institutions specifically applicable to children accused of infringing the penal law. The UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice ("The Beijing Rules"), adopted by the UN General Assembly in November 1985, stipulate in particular that proceedings for children should be conducive to the best interests of the child and shall be conducted in an atmosphere of understanding allowing them to participate and to express themselves freely, and that the well-being of the child should be the guiding factor in the consideration of the case.

Sex, the State, and Discrimination Against Women and Children

The sentencing of a 16-year old girl for the rape of a 13-year old boy after the two children engaged in a sexual relationship that resulted in the girl's pregnancy raises important questions about children's rights in Turkey and discrimination against women and children. Despite significant revisions to the Penal Code in 2004, sexual relations between children aged 15 to 18 years is still a crime and children can be treated as adults in judicial proceedings. This is a violation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children, to which Turkey is a state-party. Under the convention, all children under 18 should be considered as such under Turkish law. In addition to the judicial proceedings against the 16-year old child, criticism also includes coverage of the case by the Turkish media. From BIA-Net:

Acting irresponsibly, the media turns a sexual relation between two children into a rape by a woman of a boy.

Radikal: Prison sentence for the woman who raped a man.

Star: A woman was sentenced for raping a man

Akşam: First time in Turkey, a woman is sentenced for raping.

The media reality: What do you understand from these headlines? The newspapers attached importance to the fact that a woman was sentenced for the crime of rape. They sound like they are happy about this “first”. The judiciary must have made an important decision.

The reality: Two kids of ages 13 and 16 had a sexual relationship. The girl got pregnant. When the parents of the boy, who is younger than the girl, made a complaint, the Court of Boyabat sentenced the girl for the crime for the sexual exploitation of children. The case is appealed.

The news of the reality: The judiciary violated the children rights. Those for defending rights had objected in 2005 to the age discriminations in the new penal code and said that this would cause problems. According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children, everyone under eighteen is a child. The experts had emphasized that even the games that help form the sexual identities of the children were considered as crime in the new penal code.

Most recently, the topic was brought to the attention of the public when a German boy was arrested in Antalya for sexually harassing an English girl was taken to the court. Seda Akça, a lawyer and a defender of rights, had stated that sexual relations between hildren should not have included in the penal code. These children need to be taken out of the penal system, to be supported and protected.

The justice system discriminate. The court stated in the justification of its decision that hiding the pregnancy was indicative of guilty psychology. In other words, she had to be guilty since she hid her pregnancy.

The news of the media reality: The media is a rights violator. Even though the names of the children were not printed, the name of the school they went was published and therefore their identities were revealed. This is against the media law. This news was aired by Ankara News Agency.

The media is male-dominated and ignorant of the children rights. According to them, children become man and woman when they are in a sexual relation. The “rapist” girl was made a woman and the boy a “raped boy”. In fact, in some newspapers, it was a woman who raped a boy.

Conclusion: It is the responsibility of the journalists and the judiciary personnel to learn about the children rights, to be able to approach these issues from the perspective of the children and to implement these principles.

Charges Against Choir Boys Dropped

The Diyarbakır court trying the three boys for spreading terrorist propaganda dropped the charges yesterday. The boys were being tried as adults, and if convicted, faced a prison sentence of five years.

From Gareth Jenkins:

Perhaps most bewildering is that the Turkish authorities do not appear to understand that the often draconian suppression of Kurdish language and culture can be counterproductive; inviting ridicule and opprobrium abroad and serving as a gift for organizations such as the PKK, which use it as a recruiting tool and a justification for their campaigns of violence. There can be no doubt that the judicial persecution of children for singing a song has made a greater contribution to PKK propaganda than the song itself could have ever done.

But, for the moment at least, there is no indication of a change in official attitudes. On June 19, the Turkish media reported that the Turkish General Staff (TGS), which has traditionally regarded the preservation of a homogenous national culture as being a security issue, had initiated a campaign to purge the Turkish used in military establishments of foreign loanwords such as “brunch,” “fast food” and “restaurant.” Posters have been pinned up in military camps exhorting everyone to “Speak our beautiful Turkish” and calling for an end to the use of the letters “q,” “w” and “x”. (Radikal, June 19) It is unlikely to be a coincidence that these letters are found in the Kurdish alphabet but not in the Turkish one. Quite how far the TGS will take its own advice currently remains unclear, as it frequently encourages Turks seeking reliable information to visit its official website, www.tsk.mil.tr.

Childrens' Choir Accused of Terrorism

PHOTO FROM MideastYouth.com






From Der Spiegel:

Three teenaged members of a boys' choir will go on trial today in Turkey for "making propaganda for a terrorist organization" -- namely the Kurdish separatist group, the PKK -- after singing a Kurdish song at a music festival in San Francisco late last year.

In October 2007 the boys sang a Kurdish-language march called "Ey Raqip" ("Hey Enemy") at the San Francisco World Music Festival. They performed a number of other songs, too, but the prosecutor in Turkey argues that "Ey Raqip" is a PKK anthem.

The indictment also says flags displayed at the festival belonged to the PKK. The defense says the flags were Kurdish but not specifically associated with the rebel group.

Six other members of the choir who are under 15 will be prosecuted under the same charges at a Children's Court in Diyarbakir, the city in southeastern Turkey where the choir is based. The three older boys -- aged 15 to 17 -- will be tried as adults.

'Promoting Separatism'

The head of the Diyarbakir Yenisehir Council Children's Choir, Duygu Özge Bayar, has said "Ey Raqip" was requested by the audience in San Francisco. "We shared our culture there, at the festival," he said in a statement. "We sang various songs showing the styles of Diyarbakir … If performing these songs is separatism, then we are guilty of promoting separatism."

The boys' defense lawyer, Baran Pamuk, argues that the song was written 68 years ago, before the PKK was founded, by an Iranian-Kurdish poet called Dildar. But the prosecution says the song is now an anthem by the PKK.

Amnesty International has taken a position on the case, declaring that the song's performance "cannot be regarded as a threat to public order" and that the boys would be considered "prisoners of conscience" if convicted and thrown in jail.

The charges against the older boys carry a maximum sentence of five years behind bars.

See here for the public statement made by Amnesty International.