Turkey Urged to Respect LGBT People’s Right to Freedom of Association
Amnesty International Magazine, NY
August 29, 2008
A local court in Istanbul ordered the closure of the Turkish lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender solidarity organization, Lambda Istanbul. The court ruled on May 29 in favor of a complaint by the Istanbul Governor's Office that Lambda Istanbul's objectives were against Turkish "moral values and family structure".
Amnesty International considers it an act of discrimination and a violation of the right to freedom of expression to close or attempt to close organizations on the basis of advocating for the rights of persons with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities.
Summary of the decision of the court for the closing case against Lambdaistanbul
The text below consists of the summary of the detailed decision of the Beyoglu Court of First Instance on the closing case against Lambdaistanbul.
SUMMARY OF THE DETAILED DECISION
In the decision, quotes from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, alongside many Articles of the Constitution of Turkey. The two quoted ECHR decisions are from 1976and 1997. The former is concerning obscene material directed at children. The quote from the decision is: “The view taken by their respective laws of the requirements of morals varies from time to time and from place to place, especially in our era which is characterized by a rapid and far-reaching evolution of opinions on the subject.”
An argument on public life, law and order is formulated in the decision, which states that lawful behaviour is also a requisite of morality:
Even though there is no statistical measure or percentage applicable to this specific incident on whether the defendant association is against our society’s sense of morality, when we take into consideration the strong prevalence of the patriarchal family structure in our society; the sanctity of the institution of family; kinship; religious conventions and etiquette; the scarcity of men and women with different sexual orientation; the recency of the time where such demands have started to be voiced; and that these voices originate from the urban areas of the country, rather than the rural areas; we can say that this issue involves factors that are rejected more or less by the whole society, and which are deemed to be against morality and decency.
It is understood that an article of the Turkish Civil Code touches upon gender reassignment, while there is no legal regulations regarding persons with different sexual orientation besides this.
Remarks concerning the legal expert’s opinion are as follows:
The court does not share the legal expert’s opinion regarding Article 31 of the Law of Associations, which states that language of registration and correspondence for associations is Turkish; therefore the name of the association should be in Turkish.
Remarks concerning the 2nd and 3rd articles of the association’s statute are as follows:
1.While members of the association are, as men and women, subject to Article 10 of the Constitution, which states that all persons are equal before the law; since there are no constitutional regulations regarding any other gender identity besides man and woman, forming an association based solely on sexual orientation and gender identity is against the essence and the spirit of this Article, and the concept of equality aimed by it.
2. It is observed that encouragement and propaganda, in all levels of the society, of the sexual orientation of the members of the association through organising instructive programs are predominant in the association’s aims, and that these activities are likely to bring about a tyranny of a minority over the majority, which is against legal and constitutional regulations, and that this would jeopardise the rights and freedom of the family and children, as mentioned in Article 41 of the Constitution, and the rights and the freedom of the youth, as mentioned in Article 58 of the Constitution.
3. Articles 42/3 of the Constitution states that “Training and education shall be conducted along the lines of the principles and reforms of Ataturk, on the basis of contemporary science and educational methods, under the supervision and control of the state,” whereas this association’s statute refers to opening institutions of education of all levels, without mentioning subject and content, even though there is no legal or constitutional basis for an association’s demand to open institutions of education, schools and courses of any level.
In conclusion, it is decided that the association shall be dissolved, on the grounds that the right to association, which is protected by Article 33/3 of the Constitution and Article 11/2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, may be obstructed “to protect public morality and others’ freedom,” due to the infringement upon Article 41 of the Constitution; and the infringement, of Articles 2 and 3 of the association’s statue, upon the Law of Associations clause which states that “No association may be founded for unlawful or immoral purposes.”
Lambdaistanbul LGBTT Dayanisma Dernegi
Tel: +90 (0) 212 245 70 68
Istiklâl Caddesi, Katip Celebi Mah. Tel Sok. No: 28/6 Kat:5
Beyoglu - Istanbul
www.lambdaistanbul.org
lambda@lambdaistanbul.org
Original Link: http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx?c=jhKPIXPCIoE&b=2590179&template=x.ascx&action=11037
August 29, 2008
A local court in Istanbul ordered the closure of the Turkish lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender solidarity organization, Lambda Istanbul. The court ruled on May 29 in favor of a complaint by the Istanbul Governor's Office that Lambda Istanbul's objectives were against Turkish "moral values and family structure".
Amnesty International considers it an act of discrimination and a violation of the right to freedom of expression to close or attempt to close organizations on the basis of advocating for the rights of persons with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities.
Summary of the decision of the court for the closing case against Lambdaistanbul
The text below consists of the summary of the detailed decision of the Beyoglu Court of First Instance on the closing case against Lambdaistanbul.
SUMMARY OF THE DETAILED DECISION
In the decision, quotes from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, alongside many Articles of the Constitution of Turkey. The two quoted ECHR decisions are from 1976and 1997. The former is concerning obscene material directed at children. The quote from the decision is: “The view taken by their respective laws of the requirements of morals varies from time to time and from place to place, especially in our era which is characterized by a rapid and far-reaching evolution of opinions on the subject.”
An argument on public life, law and order is formulated in the decision, which states that lawful behaviour is also a requisite of morality:
Even though there is no statistical measure or percentage applicable to this specific incident on whether the defendant association is against our society’s sense of morality, when we take into consideration the strong prevalence of the patriarchal family structure in our society; the sanctity of the institution of family; kinship; religious conventions and etiquette; the scarcity of men and women with different sexual orientation; the recency of the time where such demands have started to be voiced; and that these voices originate from the urban areas of the country, rather than the rural areas; we can say that this issue involves factors that are rejected more or less by the whole society, and which are deemed to be against morality and decency.
It is understood that an article of the Turkish Civil Code touches upon gender reassignment, while there is no legal regulations regarding persons with different sexual orientation besides this.
Remarks concerning the legal expert’s opinion are as follows:
The court does not share the legal expert’s opinion regarding Article 31 of the Law of Associations, which states that language of registration and correspondence for associations is Turkish; therefore the name of the association should be in Turkish.
Remarks concerning the 2nd and 3rd articles of the association’s statute are as follows:
1.While members of the association are, as men and women, subject to Article 10 of the Constitution, which states that all persons are equal before the law; since there are no constitutional regulations regarding any other gender identity besides man and woman, forming an association based solely on sexual orientation and gender identity is against the essence and the spirit of this Article, and the concept of equality aimed by it.
2. It is observed that encouragement and propaganda, in all levels of the society, of the sexual orientation of the members of the association through organising instructive programs are predominant in the association’s aims, and that these activities are likely to bring about a tyranny of a minority over the majority, which is against legal and constitutional regulations, and that this would jeopardise the rights and freedom of the family and children, as mentioned in Article 41 of the Constitution, and the rights and the freedom of the youth, as mentioned in Article 58 of the Constitution.
3. Articles 42/3 of the Constitution states that “Training and education shall be conducted along the lines of the principles and reforms of Ataturk, on the basis of contemporary science and educational methods, under the supervision and control of the state,” whereas this association’s statute refers to opening institutions of education of all levels, without mentioning subject and content, even though there is no legal or constitutional basis for an association’s demand to open institutions of education, schools and courses of any level.
In conclusion, it is decided that the association shall be dissolved, on the grounds that the right to association, which is protected by Article 33/3 of the Constitution and Article 11/2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, may be obstructed “to protect public morality and others’ freedom,” due to the infringement upon Article 41 of the Constitution; and the infringement, of Articles 2 and 3 of the association’s statue, upon the Law of Associations clause which states that “No association may be founded for unlawful or immoral purposes.”
Lambdaistanbul LGBTT Dayanisma Dernegi
Tel: +90 (0) 212 245 70 68
Istiklâl Caddesi, Katip Celebi Mah. Tel Sok. No: 28/6 Kat:5
Beyoglu - Istanbul
www.lambdaistanbul.org
lambda@lambdaistanbul.org
Original Link: http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx?c=jhKPIXPCIoE&b=2590179&template=x.ascx&action=11037
