US embassy cable - 04ANKARA3594

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ANKARA 003594 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/25/2014 
TAGS: PGOV, PREL, PHUM, TU 
SUBJECT: GOT ABOLISHES STATE SECURITY COURTS 
 
REF: ANKARA 2425 
 
Classified by Polcouns John Kunstadter; reasons 1.4 b and d. 
 
1. (C) Summary: Parliament passed legislation June 17 closing 
the State Security Courts (SSCs), special courts designed to 
try "crimes against the State."  The courts had been widely 
criticized, including by the EU, for pro-prosecution bias.  A 
number of human rights attorneys argue that the legislation 
amounts to a mere name change, because new courts will be 
created that will have special powers similar to those of the 
SSCs.  However, an MP closely involved with the issue 
maintains that the new courts will be less authoritarian than 
the SSCs and closer to regular penal courts.  A number of GOT 
contacts claim that past reforms had already limited the 
powers of the SSCs, and say that by closing the SSCs the GOT 
is removing a label associated with Turkey's past.  While 
closing the SSCs may help burnish Turkey's image in the 
run-up to the December EU Summit, it does not address the 
fundamental flaws of the Turkish judicial system.  End 
Summary. 
 
--------------------------- 
Controversial Courts Closed 
--------------------------- 
 
2. (U) The legislation adopted by Parliament revokes the law 
governing the SSCs, established by constitutional mandate 
after the 1980 military coup to prosecute "crimes against the 
State," and transfers the SSC caseload to the Heavy Penal 
Court system.  Parliament in May revoked the constitutional 
article requiring the State to establish the SSCs (reftel). 
SSCs have been used to prosecute a wide array of criminal 
acts, ranging from violent terrorist attacks to speech deemed 
insulting to the State or its institutions.  SSCs have 
handled Turkey's most sensitive and high-profile trials, 
including those involving captured PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan 
and Kurdish separatist and former MP Leyla Zana.  The courts 
have long been criticized by human rights activists and 
outside observers, including the EU, for a pro-prosecution 
bias.  The European Court of Human Rights has frequently 
overturned SSC convictions on the grounds that the defendants 
were denied the right to a fair trial. 
 
------------------------------------------ 
Attorneys Argue Law is Mere Name Change... 
------------------------------------------ 
 
3. (C) Under the new law, the SSC caseload will be shifted to 
the Heavy Penal Court system, where new courts will be 
created specializing in various crimes against the State, 
such as terrorism, separatism, and treason.  Several 
attorneys associated with the human rights community averred 
to us that the legislation is not a genuine reform, but a 
sham that preserves the SSC system under a new label.  They 
argue that the law designates special powers for the new 
penal courts that will re-create the pro-prosecution bias of 
the SSCs.  Senal Sarihan, an attorney active in a number of 
human rights and women's groups, pointed out that the law 
gives the chief judge broad authority to remove a defense 
attorney or his client from the courtroom for "disturbing the 
order of the court," an authority she claims is 
unconstitutional.  The law also authorizes the courts to ban 
press coverage or public statements that "disturb the order 
and discipline of the court."  In cases with 200 or more 
defendants, the courts can bar some defendants from attending 
some hearings on the grounds that their presence is not 
required.  Yusuf Alatas, attorney and Human Rights 
Association vice president, said such special powers send a 
message to judges and prosecutors that these courts are 
special bodies designed to protect the State, and therefore 
do not need to respect the right to a defense.  "When you 
make special arrangements like this, judges and prosecutors 
start believing they are above their peers in other courts, 
and they behave differently," Alatas said. 
 
-------------------------------- 
...But MP Says Improvements Made 
-------------------------------- 
 
4. (U) However, Halil Ozyolcu, acting chairman of the 
parliamentary Justice Committee, averred to us that the 
legislation marks a significant improvement in the judicial 
system.  While the initial draft of the bill would have 
transferred the SSCs' powers nearly intact to newly created 
"organized crime" courts, the Committee made important 
revisions to the legislation after pundits and human rights 
activists raised objections.  As a result, Ozyolcu said, the 
law brings about the following changes: 
 
-- SSCs placed a 30-day limit on the time allotted for 
attorneys to prepare a defense; the new courts will determine 
a "reasonable time period" on a case-by-case basis; 
 
-- The bonus pay that had been provided exclusively to SSC 
judges and prosecutors has been eliminated from the judicial 
system; 
 
-- SSC judges were authorized to approve arrest warrants 
filed by SSC prosecutors; now all prosecutors must go to 
separate, civil courts to have arrest warrants approved; 
 
-- SSCs were funded by special provision directly from the 
Justice Ministry; now all courts will be funded through the 
regular judiciary budget. 
 
5. (U) In addition, SSC judges and prosecutors will be 
reassigned to other courts throughout the system, breaking up 
teams that had, in some cases, developed an "authoritarian 
mentality," Ozyolcu said. 
 
---------------------------------------- 
GOT Officials: SSCs Had "Bad Reputation" 
---------------------------------------- 
 
6. (U) A number of GOT contacts concede that the legislation 
is essentially a name change, but argue that past reforms had 
already rendered the SSCs virtually identical to the Heavy 
Penal Courts.  By abolishing the SSCs, they maintain, the GOT 
is removing a label associated with Turkey's past.  "The 
(SSCs) had a bad reputation, so we've closed them to call 
attention to the reforms," said Asligul Ugdul, political 
affairs director at the GOT's EU Secretariat General.  Recent 
reforms of the SSC system include removing military judges 
from SSC panels and reducing the maximum pre-trial detention 
period in SSC cases. 
 
-------------------------------- 
Authoritarian Laws Remain Intact 
-------------------------------- 
 
7. (C) Sedat Aslantas, attorney and Human Rights Association 
secretary general, averred to us that genuine judicial reform 
 
SIPDIS 
would require major revisions to some of the draconian laws 
designed to protect the "sacred State."  Under the 
authoritarian language of the Turkish Penal Code and 
Anti-Terrorism Law, prosecutors have wide latitude to charge 
people with crimes against the State for written or spoken 
comments considered critical of government or State 
officials, or sympathetic to terrorist organizations.  A 
large portion of SSC defendants have been charged with 
non-violent expression; many, for example, have stood accused 
of separatist acts for using the term "sayin" (esteemed) in 
reference to Ocalan.  The use of the Kurdish language, 
regardless of the content, has led to numerous SSC 
prosecutions.  In addition, a number of legal articles, 
including Article 5 of the Anti-Terror Law, mandate longer 
sentences for crimes against the State.  As a consequence, 
many defendants convicted for controversial speech do more 
time in jail than violent criminals.  Unfortunately, Aslantas 
said, closing the SSCs will not address these problems. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
8. (C) The judiciary, like many Turkish institutions, is 
plagued by a deeply rooted flaw that fuels all other 
problems: it is designed to protect the State from the 
individual, not the other way around.  A true reorientation 
would require a broad overhaul of Turkish law and the 
emergence of a new generation of judges and prosecutors with 
a different mentality.  The GOT could not bring about such 
radical change before the December EU Summit, even if it 
wanted to.  It is engaged in an all-out effort to rack up 
reform triumphs in time for inclusion in the EU Commission 
Regular Report, due September 29.  This legislation will 
likely earn a brief, positive reference in that report, but 
will have minimal impact on the quality of justice in Turkish 
courtrooms. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EDELMAN