Editorial of september 2002

"Tell me who judge you and I will tell you who you are. In policy, it is the most infallible axiom". The permanent coup - François Mitterrand

The Attorney General of the Turkish Supreme court of appeal has asked to block Akin Birdal (former chairman of l'IHD) and Murat Bozlak (chairman of HADEP) for the elections of the next November 3th.

This asking just happens when the Consitutionnal Court should state on a possible ban of the HADEP, and when Turkey, that wishes to enter in UE expects that this latter choices quickly a date for opening negociations d'adhésion. Unfortunatelly Turkey does not make profitable the delay imposed by Europa by varing to apply the criterions of Copenhaguen. It seems, at the contrary, that it rather to while away its impatience by taking in hostages the Kurdish democrats and attempting to restrain their freedom of expression. 

Moereover we could wonder why denouncing Akin Birdal and Murat Bozlak, then both are well-knowned for their pacific speeches and their statements for democracy and human’s rights.

In that context, it is not unuseful to remind that, from another side, and since many months, the PKK (re-called KADEK) attempts strategies for provoking the ban of the HADEP, of which it has ever considered the leader as a spoil-trickies and a spoil-black deals. It does not hesitate, moreover, for convincing the European associations and insitutions of its own « legacy », to show some of its activists as the official representatives of the HADEP, and it allows it to make a large propaganda… and pretending in a same time that the real leaders of the HADEP are in fact PKK members (And against all credibility, it successes, for an attitude of self-dignity and a three-pieces suit are often enough to convince...). 

At the beginning of the year, the PKK was persuaded that Turkey will state « last but not least » the ban of the HADEP – and did not hesitate to felicitate itself and organized the succession. For that reason, it took care to start here none campaign of information for supporting this party, that has the majority in South-Eastern areas. And this, in spite of its so-called devotion to freedom and democracy. In the same time, it tried to convince many European NGO’s to mobilize against Turkey for the most various motives, because the entering of that country in UE is not a part of its plans.

Only a quick and favorable decision to the HADEP could allow to stop this ambiguous situation that prevents a real democratic system in Turkey. An incredible blindness makes it to act against its own interest, attempting to threaten the only politicians who fight really for improving the situation. Denying them any way of expression is taking the risk to prevent any dialogue between the South-East and the State, if there would not have any legal representatives in which the electors of the region are entrusted. And it happens at a time when the situation there becomes more and more serious.

If it muzzle representatives interlocutors, Turkey would open the path for extremist groups and would be deprived thus of a precious support.

However, the Constitutionnal Court could stop the PKK… if it makes no mistake about the real target by banning the only party that prevents the latter to deal in the South-East. But the HADEP seems to trouble more with its ascendant on its electors, than a totalitarist, no legal and clandestine movement, that does’nt hesitate presently to re-arm its troops.

Roxane

Summary