Religious minorities and new constitution
 
 
  |  
  |  
  |  
  |  
RSS
  |  
  |  
  |  
24 May 2013 Friday
 
 
 
 
 
 
Columnists 08 December 2011, Thursday 0 0 0 0
ORHAN KEMAL CENGİZ
o.cengiz@todayszaman.com

Religious minorities and new constitution

According to a news article published by the Akşam daily on Dec. 8, the parliamentary Constitutional Subcommittee has invited the leaders of religious minorities to explain their viewpoints on the new constitution.

The newspaper reports that:

“In this regard, Greek Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew, Armenian Orthodox Archbishop Aram Ateşyan, Chief Rabbi of Turkey Rav İsak Haleva and Syrian Orthodox Archbishop Yusuf Çetin will come to Parliament in order to personally convey their suggestions. If the leaders of religious congregations don’t come to the commission, then minority foundations to which they may refer to will be called upon. Committee member Altan Tan said: ‘There are many minority congregation foundations. We don’t know many of them. This is why we have embraced the idea of calling upon their highest level representatives and listening to what they may want to share with us’.”

I find this invitation quite significant and important. However, I am not sure if religious minorities have any concrete suggestions to put forward for the agenda of this committee.

As far as religious minorities are concerned, the Turkish legal system is based on a few tricks. Neither the Constitution nor any law make a single reference to religious minorities or their institutions. The only legal instrument that recognizes the very existence of minorities in Turkey is the Treaty of Lausanne dated 1923. The courts and Turkish bureaucrats used to refer to this treaty when they dealt with minorities. However, this reference is just make up, because, somehow, they managed to use it in a negative way. The treaty has always been referred to like this: “Such and such rights are not recognized in the treaty.”

We are talking here about a huge legal gap, which was deliberately created by the founders of the Turkish Republic as part of their policy of getting rid of non-Muslims from Turkey. Consequently, the legal affairs of non-Muslims have always been operating in a vacuum, in which the legal gap could be exploited in a million different ways to make non-Muslims vulnerable and have them suffer.

In recent years, these policies started to change. This government came out with some de facto solutions to solve some deep-rooted problems. For example, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that the expropriation of some buildings of the Ecumenical Patriarchate was a clear breach of Turkey’s obligation under the European Convention. And the court ordered Turkey to return these buildings to their legal owners. The government decided to get these buildings listed under the name of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in the Land Registry. This was undoubtedly a huge step forward, on the one hand. Yet it is very limited since it does not bring about a comprehensive solution to the “legal personality” problem of the Ecumenical Patriarchate or to other non-Muslim congregations because there is no law in Turkey that regulates the legal personality matter of religious minorities. The government’s step in giving back properties only opened a very limited window for the legal personality question with regard to the Land Registry.

In some of my previous articles I also criticized the passive attitudes of religious minorities when it comes to pursuing their rights in Turkey. This legal gap could only be filled by introducing some new laws and regulations which are not available in the Turkish legal system. Religious minorities could and still can have an active role in the creation of these new legal instruments. They can identify good examples from Europe and the US; they can try to reach consensus on some minimum standards amongst themselves and then bring these suggestions to the attention of the government, instead of waiting passively for the steps that will be taken by the government.

I think the parliamentary subcommittee’s invitation is a good opportunity for non-Muslims in Turkey. I strongly suggest they try to reach consensus on a few principles before talking to the members of Parliament. They can then introduce these “principles” as the common demands of minorities in Turkey. They do not need to go into sophisticated legal details. For example, they can demand the constitutional recognition of religious minorities in Turkey as a start. I really hope the leaders of religious communities will come together and start to produce some common work on this occasion.

Columnists Previous articles of the columnist
23 May 2013
Some citizens more equal than others
21 May 2013
Religious freedom problems in Turkey in 2012 and forever
16 May 2013
Who are the owners of places of worship in Turkey?
14 May 2013
How and why was the terrorist attack in Reyhanlı censored?
9 May 2013
The day after the PKK's withdrawal
7 May 2013
When will official reaction to 1915 change?
2 May 2013
Peace or democracy?
30 April 2013
Rumi, Buddha and remarks of Tokyo governor
25 April 2013
April 24 and Turkey's time tunnel
23 April 2013
An Armenian lady, Hrant and April 24
18 April 2013
Wise people's contribution to peace process
16 April 2013
What is wrong with Fazıl Say's punishment?
11 April 2013
How do Turkish laws produce terrorists?
9 April 2013
Truth and reconciliation commissions are necessary in Turkey
4 April 2013
What should wise people do for the peace process?
3 April 2013
Why can we not make fundamental improvements for non-Muslims?
28 March 2013
Murder of an Armenian Turkish soldier accidentally on purpose
26 March 2013
What is Turkey's roadmap for the Kurdish question?
21 March 2013
Real injustice in Ergenekon and Balyoz cases
19 March 2013
What did the Hasan Cemal case show us?
14 March 2013
Turkey, Israel and jujitsu lessons
12 March 2013
Secrecy in the investigation of attacks on Armenian women
7 March 2013
The peace process and freedom of the press
5 March 2013
Does an Armenian murderer eliminate the hate crimes presumption?
28 February 2013
Culture of lynching: dealing with hate crimes
26 February 2013
Öcalan's letters
21 February 2013
Turkey in mirror of European Court of Human Rights
19 February 2013
Victory and defeat
12 February 2013
What is wrong and right in criticisms against American ambassador
7 February 2013
Turkey's judiciary problem
5 February 2013
Hrant and Talat Pasha
31 January 2013
Genocide through the eyes of a child
29 January 2013
The Halki Theological School and the SCO
28 January 2013
‘I wish I wasn't Armenian'
22 January 2013
Why were the lawyers arrested?
17 January 2013
Is the Hrant Dink murder being resolved?
15 January 2013
Aren't the murders of Armenian women hate crimes?
10 January 2013
Atrocities in Syria committed by all sides
8 January 2013
A country of speed readers
7 January 2013
How can we achieve peace?
1 January 2013
The prime minister’s lawsuits will backfire
27 December 2012
Uludere massacre one year later
25 December 2012
Why was the commemoration for the Maraş massacre banned?
20 December 2012
How the Uludere massacre alienated Kurds from Turkey
18 December 2012
What can propaganda achieve?
13 December 2012
Praising Hrant Dink's murder
11 December 2012
Special Warfare and Christians
6 December 2012
Hrant, embarrassment, a disaster
4 December 2012
Déjà vu -- removing immunity of Kurdish MPs?
29 November 2012
Revealing too much: info belonging to Armenian groups online
28 November 2012
Turkey and Germany’s past atrocities
22 November 2012
Can Germany be a model for Turkey in confrontation with past atrocities?
20 November 2012
Hunger strikers did not die, but handicapped for life
15 November 2012
İstanbul and Constantinople
8 November 2012
Polar bears, Bedouins and poor Turkish politics
6 November 2012
Hunger strikes and a vicious circle
1 November 2012
1915: heroes and murderers
30 October 2012
The price of no criticism for the government
23 October 2012
Do not interfere with Kemalists’ mourning
18 October 2012
Armenians and a Turk in a Lebanese restaurant
16 October 2012
Restorative guilt and the Kurdish question
12 October 2012
Linking women’s stories in Turkey and Armenia
11 October 2012
1915 and terrorists on mountains
4 October 2012
The price for denial of the events of 1915
2 October 2012
How can Turkey bring an end to violence in Kurdish question
27 September 2012
Why are they so successful in seeing problematic aspects in coup cases?
20 September 2012
How Alevi victims became criminal offenders
18 September 2012
Islamophobia and hate speech in Turkey
13 September 2012
Criticizing Israel and insulting the Prophet
11 September 2012
Owen, Cemal and 1915
6 September 2012
How missionaries were linked to the PKK
4 September 2012
Will justice be served in Malatya massacre case?
30 August 2012
Campaign against violence
28 August 2012
Has the dispossessing of non-Muslims ended?
23 August 2012
Was Atatürk an Armenian?
21 August 2012
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar!
16 August 2012
Zero tolerance for freedom of expression
14 August 2012
PKK, kidnapping and absolute impunity for the PKK
9 August 2012
Is there any ‘legal' place of worship for Alevis in Turkey?
7 August 2012
The government as an advocate of military coups
19 July 2012
The future of the deep state
17 July 2012
One basketball for all non-Muslims
12 July 2012
How was a monastery robbed in Turkey?
10 July 2012
Halki Seminary, cemevi in Parliament
3 July 2012
Who ordered the murder of Christians?
28 June 2012
From the September 1955 pogroms to a campaign against missionaries
26 June 2012
Recognizing the victimhood of the slain Christians
21 June 2012
What does the PKK really want?
19 June 2012
Prison SOS
14 June 2012
Let’s send all Kurds to prison
12 June 2012
From stone throwing children to child soldiers
7 June 2012
What do Islamist feminists say about abortion?
5 June 2012
Nationalists, muslims and the Kurdish question
3 June 2012
How did abortion come to our agenda?
29 May 2012
Some things never change
24 May 2012
Turkey through Amnesty International’s eyes
22 May 2012
Mr. Öcalan!
17 May 2012
Greek radio, Greek properties
15 May 2012
Arameans’ return and state policies
10 May 2012
Fabricated evidence in Sledgehammer case and the ECtHR
...