Examining an appeal against her arrest, a court has decided to release pop singer Gülşen to house arrest for “provoking the public to hatred, hostility or degrading” over a joke about Turkey’s religious schools. What does the penal code that is referred to tell us? Can it be a reason for one’s arrest? Are there double standards in its implementation?
Last week Turkish pop star Gülşen, was jailed pending trial on charges of “provoking the public to hatred, hostility or degrading” after she made a joke about religious schools in Turkey.
On Monday, the Istanbul criminal court released Gülşen on the condition of “not leaving the residence” after her lawyers appealed her arrest.
Charges against the singer have not been dropped, however, and the prosecutor will write an indictment asking the judge to launch hearings. The charges are related to a video circulating on social media from a Gulsen concert in April, when she joked about one of the musicians over religious schools.
The Turkish Penal Code (TCK) article entitled “Provoking the Public to Hatred, Hostility or Degrading” once again became a talking point after the incident.
What does this concept tell us? Can it be a reason for one’s arrest? What are the conditions for being put on trial for this offense? Are there double standards in its implementation?
Çiğdem Akbulut, the chair of the Progressive Lawyers Association (ÇHD) İstanbul Branch gives her account to Ayça Söylemez from Bianet.
The “TCK 216” has been increasingly used as a reason for detentions and convictions recently. What conditions are actually (legally) required for a crime according to this article occur, and what actions constitute the elements of this crime?
The purpose of the all three types of crime defined in this article is to protect social peace.” Arrangements intended to prevent a certain part of the people to another from harboring hatred, anger and hostility towards another and from taking action with these feelings…
When we look at the legal conditions, the statement subject of the allegation should be “intentional.” In other words, in order to the element that we call “provocation” to exist, the statement must be made for the purpose of provoking a part of the people against another.
And the words spoken for this purpose must pose a clear, immediate and “real” danger against the people who are targeted. It is necessary to look at when the words were said, in what environment they were said, and to whom/to whom they were said. It has to be questioned whether it really caused an outrage.
Does the practice in Turkey comply with these conditions? How do you evaluate the current practice and criticisms of double standards?
While arrests shouldn’t be made for neither of the three types of crimes according to the penal enforcement system because of the upper penalty limits, we mostly see arrests in practice. For sure, it is evident that this disproportionate measure is applied against the dissidents of the government in a way that violates this group’s freedom of expressions and personal security.
Last year, Boğaziçi students had been arrested pending trial for months for this crime because they put the photograph of Kaaba on the ground. However, July 15 Martyrs and Veterans Platform Chair Erol Bulut, who recently said, “We will cut off their tongues, fire bullets at their brains” about Sezen Aksu was prosecuted neither for TCK 216 nor any other offense and these words were deemed freedom of expression.
Almost every day, there is hate speech towards the LGBTI+ individuals in the country, and it’s mostly state officials and clerics who say these words. But we have never seen investigating authorities taking action.
One of the most striking examples was the verdict of acquittal regarding Sedat Peker’s words about the academics for peace that “We will make them bleed in streams.” Moreover, we know that if this case was tried today, it would end in a different way. Also, it is an exact summary of the way the article’s implementation.
We see that women, Kurds, Alevis, workers seeking their rights, students, and, lately, migrants are constantly targeted by the government and other fascist movements and their media, and as a consequence of these statements, we see lynchings and massacres, which go beyond the element “open and imminent threat.”
While criminal investigations aren’t initiated even in these situations, we find the TCK 216 as a stick against the opposition when the government’s “values” are talked against.
Sources: Bianet, CNN