Speech from Mr. Ziyaaddin Saidpour on behalf of the “National Platform of North Kurdistan” (PNK-Bakûr) at a “Turkish Hearing” of the German PDS Parliamentary Party on 2^nd and 3^rd November 2001 at the Reichstag in Berlin (translated from a transcript of the speech)

Dear Chairman,

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would firstly like to thank the PDS for organising such a hearing and for inviting us so that our views can be discussed.

At this hearing I represent the “National Platform for North Kurdistan” (PNK-Bakûr). This platform is a union of eight political organisations from North Kurdistan who have come together for purposes of coordination and cooperation.

The PNK are for Turkey’s membership to the EU but only after they have fulfilled the requirements of democratisation and the resolution of the Kurdish question.

The EU’s demands within the framework of the “Entry Partnership” with Turkey, particularly in respect of the Kurdish question, are, in our view, inadequate.

The EU have avoided specifically referring to the Kurdish problem – seemingly because of over-consideration towards Turkish sensitivities. This stance is not realistic. With such an important issue as the Kurdish question, the EU should have specifically referred to it and should have openly presented its views on its solution. Because the EU did not do this, they have submitted to Turkey right from the beginning

But even if the Kurds have not been specifically referred to, the “Entry Partnership” still contains demands which are relevant to the Kurds. For example, the lifting within one year of the restrictions on languages (native languages) other than Turkish. Education and training in native languages is also a mid-term requirement.

Fulfilment these demands would enable radio and television broadcasting in Kurdish as well as the establishment of Kurdish schools.

These of course represent only a fraction of the Kurdish people’s demands. Their fulfilment alone would not be sufficient for any resolution to the problem.

But the Turkish government have even reacted harshly to these demands, claiming that they are an attempt to divide their country!

The Turkish government drew up a “National Programme” as a response to the demands and requirements of the “Entry Partnership”. But this programme does not in any way meet the EU requirements. It is again a case of tactical manoeuvring.

Since then, there have been practically no efforts made towards democratisation or resolving the Kurdish question. Nothing is being done about adapting Turkish laws and regulations to those of the EU, nor has there been any let up in practices affecting human rights.

Meanwhile, investigations continue to be carried out against writers, academics and journalists because of the opinions they have expressed.

The confiscation and banning also persists on books, newspapers and magazines in the Kurdish language or on the Kurds. In some areas the situation has even got worse. For example, there has been some relaxation concerning Kurdish music cassettes but then last year the playing of Kurdish music in coffee houses was banned, even in Diyarbakir.

The private TV broadcaster 21 from Diyarbakir was closed down for one year because it broadcast a Kurdish folk song.

The recent constitutional reforms were meaningless and nothing but window-dressing.

The proposals put before parliament on amendments to the 37 constitutional articles were, according to lawyers, “plentiful but without substance”. Some less important amendments could unfortunately not be agreed upon by parliament, or were changed to the extent that they were unrecognisable to the original proposal.

One of these amendments, concerning the right to freedom of opinion, did not make it through.

Regulations concerning the “National Security Council” (NSR), who politically have more say than parliament or the government, remain unaltered.

The banning of political parties in the country of “the political party graveyard”, should have been made more difficult. This did not happen.

The death penalty should have been abolished. This also did not happen.

Articles 26 and 28 of the Turkish constitution do not allow for “the expression of opinion or publication in a language banned by law”. Following the amendments, this sentence was to be omitted. Some Turkish newspapers considered this to be “permission to use the Kurdish language in publications”. But this is just a sick joke because there are no laws which ban publications in the Kurdish language.

There have been no changes to the government’s repressive policies towards the Kurds, their language or their culture.

Furthermore, it is doubtful in this country that anything would actually change even if there were serious amendments to the laws.

The Treaty of Lausanne, which laid the foundation for the Republic of Turkey, allows publications in the Kurdish language. Article 39 of this treaty states that every citizen of the Turkish Republic should be free to use their own native languages in all areas and without hindrance. Turkey has permanently violated this article.

If the EU really do not want to make the way easy for Turkey’s arbitrary attitude, then they have to provide verifiable guarantees.

The Kurds have never had the right to establish Kurdish political parties and to freely and openly discuss the Kurdish question. Such activity is treated as a serious criminal offence. Therefore, the Kurdish movement has always been forced towards illegality,

The Turkish regime, who deny the existence and the rights of our people, compares the campaigning of our people with the PKK, and consider such to be an act of terrorism.

The campaign of the Kurdish people against the coloniser and oppressor can not be described as terrorism, even if it is armed.

On the other hand, none of the organisations making up our platform have ever had anything to do with terrorist activities. We want to be active in Turkey, legally and politically, using our name and our programme. But we will not be allowed this right.

The Turkish regime are extremely fearful of any legally recognized Kurdish movement.

Over the past 10 years Kurds have attempted to legally organise themselves without openly claiming to be Kurds. These parties have never been provided with the lawful means to draw up plans to solve the Kurdish question, to openly discuss it or to propose possible solutions to it.

The political party laws in Turkey even ban parties from talking of the existence of cultures other than Turkish. Such an act is grounds for such a ban.

These lawful parties are subjected to immense political pressure. Their headquarters and local branches are often raided by the police. Activists have been imprisoned and murdered. Their activities have been hindered and assemblies have been dispersed. As if this wasn’t enough, parties such as HEP, DEP, DDP and the DKP were eventually banned. DEP members of parliament are still in prison.

In summary, it can be said that the Kurdish people have neither the possibility nor the political or the cultural right to freely organise themselves. The recent constitutional reforms have not altered this fact.

Consequences

Turkey have not completed their homework set by the EU. There are no efforts from them to conform to the Copenhagen Criteria.

The EU must remain true to its principles. As long as Turkey do not do their homework, then there must be no entry negotiations with them.

Instead of trickery, we would like to see Turkey taking sincere steps towards democratisation and the resolution of the Kurdish question.

We propose that the following must be achieved within the near future:

1.  A democratic constitution which guarantees the rights to freedom of expression, conscience and organisation.

2.  The annulment of anti-democratic laws and regulations.

3. Guarantees to the right of assembly.

4. Recognition of the existence of the Kurds and constitutional guarantees of Kurdish rights and identity.

5.  Freedom for Kurdish political parties and the open discussion of the Kurdish question.

6. Lifting of the suppression of Kurdish language and culture. Freedom to publish and broadcast on radio and TV in Kurdish.

7. The commencement of education and training in the Kurdish language.

8. Lifting of the states of emergency and the village protection system.

9. Providing compensation and facilitating the return of the millions of displaced people whose towns and villages have been destroyed over the past 15 years.

Such steps are necessary for democratisation in Turkey and for achieving a state of peace. In this way, the Copenhagen Criteria would also be fulfilled.

A complete solution to the Kurdish question would certainly not be achieved by such steps, but they would help level the way towards a permanent solution.

The Kurdish question is neither a question of individual rights nor the question of a national minority.

Kurdish history can be traced back thousands of years. Kurds have their own language and culture. Kurds make up the majority of people within their homeland of Kurdistan, a land which is partitioned over four different states. The number of Kurds in the region totals 40 million. Nearly half of these live in North Kurdistan, within the borders of Turkey.

Like all honourable people of the world, the Kurds want to live freely in their country. They want to be able to determine their own future.

Of course, there are differences within our organisation on the definitive solution to the Kurdish question. Some are for an independent state, some for a federation of states. What we have in common is that we are all for the right of self determination of the Kurdish people.

This means that our people will decide on this, either through a referendum or through national representative organs.

The Turkish administration consider a federal system to be inadequate for Turkish Cypriots who make up a fifth of the total population on the island. They instead call for a confederate state. But then the same administration is not even prepared to accept minority rights for Kurds who make up 90% of the population of their country, i.e. Turkish-Kurdistan.

This administration is not even prepared to accept radio and TV broadcasting or education and training in the Kurdish language. When this is called for they react angrily.

This isn’t cooperation towards the issue, but rather an unbelievably primitive attitude from the Turkish government.

The Kurdish people can never accept such repression, injustice and slavery.

We again call on the Turkish government to deal realistically with this issue, to recognise the existence of the Kurds and to be willing to compromise for a just solution in any dialogue with the Kurds.

We call on the EU to approach the problem realistically and not to just act with consideration towards Turkey. The EU should on the one hand insist on the Copenhagen Criteria, and on the other to see the Kurdish question as a national problem and to draw up solutions which do justice to these facts.

Thank you for listening.