Law & Politics

Judicial and political environment in Turkey on LGBTI issues

“This judge’s conduct is against the law!”

On May 7th, a judge shared a petition for a gender transition lawsuit submitted to his court on his social media accounts and mocked the applicant. Pink Life Association filed a complaint to the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) about the incident.

Source: “This judge’s conduct is against the law!” (“Hakimin Bu Eylemi Suç ve İlkelere Aykırıdır!”), Pembe Hayat, May, 11, 2018, http://www.pembehayat.org/haberler.php?id=1747

On May 10th Emrah Şahin, the lawyer for Pink Life Association, filed a complaint against the judge who published a petition submitted to his court on Instagram and ridiculed the applicant. Şahin states that such conduct of the judge is not only criminal but also goes against the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, the Law for Judges and Prosecutors as well as the Principles of Ethical Conduct for Public Servants:

“Such social media posts by a judge who should be protecting the principles of equality, impartiality and integrity, not only weakens the faith of our citizens in the impartiality of the justice system but also hurts their dignity and pride. Therefore as Pink Life Association, we filed a complaint to the Council of Judges and Prosecutors about this judge regarding his actions which are not fit with the profession and dignity of of the profession.”

Şahin also suggests that the judge should be investigated and believes that public servants in the judiciary harm LGBTI+ individual’s faith in the Turkish justice system :

“The judiciary system has a crucial importance for the perpetuity of the state, it is required to treat all citizens equally. This requirement is not an ideal or a wish but a rule, warranted by international conventions, our Constitution and regulations alike.  These ugly posts shared on a personal social media account of a member of the judiciary is detrimental to the society as well as to other judges and prosecutors who are loyal to their duties.”

“If this judge is sentenced because of our complaint, it will be a step forward in ensuring that such incidents will not be repeated.”

“The Turkish Constitutional Court is concerned about public order, not the well-being of trans individuals!”

Lawyers continue to evaluate Constitutional Court verdicts regarding gender transitioning. Demir, an attorney, suggests that “ ‘Being deprived of the ability to procreate’ is no longer required but the ID card change necessitates a surgery in any case. The Constitutional Court is only concerned with public order”. Kara, also an attorney says that public order is perceived in this case as the imposition of the binary gender regime and that “court rulings can not be based on speculations”.

 

Source: “The Turkish Constitutional Court is concerned about public order, not the well-being of trans individuals!” (“AYM’nin kaygısı transların sağlığı değil kamu düzeni!”), Yıldız Tar, kaosgl.org, March 21, 2018,  http://kaosgl.org/sayfa.php?id=25388

Lawyers continue to evaluate Constitutional Court’s two seperate rulings regarding Article 40 of Civil Code which regulates the gender transitioning process. [Translator’s note: Article 40 regulates the requirements to have a person’s gender changed legally in civil registry, which necessitates a gender reassignment surgery. See this article for background information.]

The Constitutional Court (AYM) has abolished the requirement to “be deprived of the ability to procreate” in order to gain “the permission for gender reassignment surgery”. Regarding the requirement to have surgery in order to change the records in the state registry the court stated “[It] is necessary for public order, the process has to be regulated by the state”.

But what do these rulings mean? Attorneys Hatice Demir and Hayriye Karar interpreted the rulings for KaosGL.

Rights violations will continue as long as “the requirement to have surgery” remains!

Demir states that the abolishment of the requirement “to be deprived of ability to procreate” is good news yet the rights violations will continue as long as the requirement to “have surgery compliant with medical purpose and methods” to have registry records changed remains:

“A trans subject files a lawsuit to ‘be granted the permission to have gender reassignment surgery’ after using hormones for approximately 6 months under medical supervision. The law stipulates four conditions for this lawsuit to be approved: Being unmarried, being over 18, a health council report and being deprived of the ability to procreate. Among the new conditions, only the requirement to be ‘deprived of the ability to procreate’ is removed.”

What happens at court?

The law had stipulated that “a person cannot become ‘permanently deprived of the ability to procreate’ by using hormones. A person can continue to ‘be able to procreate’ after stopping the use of hormones, under ordinary circumstances.

To briefly summarize the situation as it used to be: You had to undergo surgery in order to be permanently deprived of the ability to procreate yet you had to prove that you are ’deprived of the ability to procreate’ to undergo that very same surgery. Under these rules many cases were being rejected. We had a very difficult time explaining this to the judges.

The Constitutional Court did not recognise this issue as a conflict within the law but has acted to resolve it. What this ruling says is ‘We already have the requirement for a surgery to have the registry changed on the second clause of Article 40 of Civil Code. We don’t need to create an obligation through a condition on the first clause of the same article.’ “

The ruling is due to the fact that court permission does not ‘directly affect the registry’!

Demir emphasizes that the Constitutional Court gave the ruling due to the fact that it does not regard the court order for gender transitioning as an “issue which directly affects the public space and registry”: “When you get a court permission to go ahead with the gender transitioning, you can’t just apply to the Civil Registry.  The Constitutional Court abolished the requirement to ‘be deprived of the ability to procreate’ as the change in registry is already dependent on the surgery on the second clause of Article 40”.

Trans individuals are still seen as marginals

Demir defines the Constitutional Court’s ruling for the requirement for surgery in order for someone to change their gender in the civil registry as a “horrible verdict” and added:

“The fact that the ruling persistently uses the concept of biological gender and that this biological gender can be changed ‘only in exceptional cases’ show that the Constitutional Court regards transsexuality as a marginal identity. The text repeatedly uses the words ‘exceptional’, ‘biological gender’… The ruling explains the subjection of the transitioning process to state regulation based on it being ‘irrevocable’ and involving ‘health risks’. Yet what we can gather from the rest of the text and its conclusion, the Constitutional Court is concerned only with public order and social welfare, not with the physical and psychological health of trans subjects.”

The attitude of the higher courts has not changed over the last 30 years

Demir stresses that the Constitutional Court is claiming that ‘a change in the registry without surgery will disrupt the public order’ in its ruling and says “The most horrifying part of the ruling is that it states the risk that such change will bring the possibility for an ‘unjust benefit for trans individuals from legal regulations which aim to protect women”.

Demir reminds us that 30 years ago the first Court of Cassation rulings regarding the gender transitioning in Turkey had phrases such as “what if men change their gender to avoid mandatory military service” and says that “30 years have passed yet the approach of our higher courts has not changed at all”.

Binary gender regime is accepted as public order

The attorney Hayriye Kara draws attention to the fact that ‘being deprived of the ability to procreate’ is not required anymore  because the rights and obligations of Turkish citizens are based on ‘biological gender’. Kara states that the vote against the ruling for the “correction of the gender slot on civil registry records” is important:

“The vote notes take the demands of people’s struggle into consideration. Yet if we set these notes aside, the reasoning of the verdict is horrifying. It clearly states that the imposed binary gender regime is the public order. The ruling in sum suggests ‘gender is defined by biological and physiological features as well as the physical appearance; rights and obligations are defined by this gender’. It means to say that ‘ People have a right to change their gender but their affirmed gender is recognized legally only after they obtain the defined masculine and feminine physical qualities after completing surgery’. The psycho-social dimension of the gender is not even discussed. The line of reasoning which justifies all sorts of state intervention on individual bodies to protect the binary gender was once more confirmed.
Courts can not base their rulings on speculation!

Kara criticized the dependence of legal recognition on surgical operation and stated: “The court claims that legal recognition and a correction of genders without surgery might be ‘abused, rights reserved for women can be used and people might avoid certain obligations [i.e mandatory military service]’. There is no ground for the allegation of ‘abusing gender transitioning to enjoy rights and to avoid obligations’. This is clearly speculative. Courts can not base their rulings on speculation. This is a hypothetical incident. What kind of data does the Constitutional Court base its presumption? If the court actually checked the data, it would have recognized the intervention as against the right to live and the bodily integrity of the trans individuals in Turkey.  There is institutional discrimination against trans individuals. There is no state protection against domestic and social violence against trans people. The ruling has no discussion of these facts yet states [gender transitioning without surgery] might be ‘abused’. This is speculative. It is horrifying and unlawful.”

Regarding a similar case, Constitutional Court Deputy Chair Engin Yıldırım’s note attached to his vote against the Martial Penal Code, Kara said: “This is an important text which follows the latest developments in international law. It is also remarkable that six judges including Yıldırım, have voted favourably towards LGBTI individuals. Yet the ruling of the court means othering is officialized”

 

Trans activist Demhat Aksoy on hunger strike to protest her conditions as an asylum seeker in Sweden

Demhat Aksoy, a trans woman activist who has recently moved to Sweden seeking asylum, has started a hunger strike to draw attention to her living conditions as an asylum seeker. We are sharing her message below, explaining why she has chose to strike. 

 

“This is a ‘ Hunger Strike ‘ text
Hello, I am Demhat, a trans-woman.
I have migrated to Sweden because my life was in danger and I wanted to have a more peaceful life. Transphobia, harassment and violence was part of my daily life, so though one does not get used to those- I know them well. However, here is one more thing that I have to re-encounter here in Sweden which is called racism.

By all means, the problem is not only racism. If you are a refugee in the asylum process, you are only allowed an isolated life barred from society, away from urban settings. Maybe that is kind of a life most of us could not find; you are settled to a flat, you are given money for the food. What about socialization, social cohesion or work, don’t we need them as well? But there is no place for any of these in the asylum process. There is no limit to ‘waiting’, no definite timing. Some waits for 8 months, some waits for 2 years, some for 5. Not all waitings have a good ending – some can be deported! But this is our lives which are damned to uncertainty.

Life during asylum process…
Actually there is no life during this process. You try to create a daily routine for yourself and this routine is probably the same for everyone who are in the asylum process. We are all living in small towns far from the city center. There is no opportunity for social activities. You get up in the morning, have some breakfast, sleep again, get up again, cook for dinner and sleep again – if you can. When you attempt to register for gym, you cannot – you do not have a right to do it. Because you do not have an ID card. Indeed, if you do not have an ID card, you do not have any rights. You have no rights to get mails, you have no rights to go to gym, you have no rights to buy some internet data, you have no rights to enter entertainment centers, you have no rights to buy certain stuff like mobile phones, cars etc. Indeed, you have no rights other than breathing. They want to see your ID card for any matter and refugees in the asylum process do not have access to ID cards. There are quite a lot of questions straining my mind, but the most important one is the following:
Is our existence identified with ID cards?
Beyond a piece of paper, I am a trans who escaped from death and who wants to live. But it really hurts that I am abandoned to a kind of social death in this country!

What can I do with 2000 Kr?
When I was settled here, they started to give us a certain amount of money for food. We do not pay for the rent, electricity or heating and yes that’s brilliant indeed. However, we are human after all. We have to buy hygiene products, personal daycare stuff like wax, razors, shampoo etc. If you are a trans woman, make-up is very crucial and you have to find out to cover that with the same amount as well.
In the waiting process, you drink, eat and sleep. That is all. But we do need social rights, private spaces. Considering all these, I have started my Hunger Strike on April 30, 2018, at 18.00. My decision is certain and it is a political act!
The Swedish Immigration Authority is in charge of anything that may hurt me during the process!
I will end the action if immigration authorities makes this situation more humane and regulates the following matters.

Demands:
Stop deportation of LGBTI+ refugees
Minimise the waiting process and standardise
LMA cards to have equal opportunities with IDs
More allowances for personal needs
New regulations on trans* medical process

Despite everything, love will win!
Refuges rights are human rights!
Demhat (Bella) Aksoy”

Constitutional Court Deputy Chair’s final remarks on the verdict of a gay soldier: “It is neither the state’s business nor anyone else’s.”

The Constitutional Court’s verdict found the Martial Penal Code’s ruling of expulsion from the Armed Forces for soldiers having homosexual relations to be in compliance with the Constitution. Constitutional Court Deputy Chair Yıldırım in his disagreement to the ruling attached a comment suggesting that this does not concern anyone: “Are these people less valuable or less dignified than others due to their sexual orientations?”

Source: “Constitutional Court Deputy Chair’s final remarks on the verdict of a gay soldier: ‘It is neither the state’s business nor anyone else’s.’ “ (“AYM Başkanvekili’nden eşcinsel asker kararına şerh: Ne devleti ne de başkalarını ilgilendirir”) , Sputnik, February 20, 2018, http://tr.sputniknews.com/amp/turkiye/201802201032328510-aym-escinsel-asker-serh-/

The detailed ruling of the Constitutional Court (AYM) on the issue was published in the Official Court Gazette. According to the ruling, a public action was filed against a soldier due to his homosexual orientation, with the allegation of ‘engaging in unnatural intimacy’. The Chamber of the 1. Military Supreme Court ruled in favour of the Martial Penal Code’s rule which states: “Soldiers engaging in unnatural intimacy with someone are subject to the sentence of expulsion from Turkish Armed Forces and soldiers are to be stripped of their rank” is against the Constitution and applied to Constitutional Court for the cancellation of the law.

‘ EXPULSION FROM TURKISH ARMED FORCES DOES NOT ACCORD WITH THE SENSE OF JUSTICE’
Deputy Chair Yıldırım’s objection to the verdict, stated that it does not accord with a sense of justice to sentence soldiers who engage in ‘unnatural sexual behaviour’ with expulsion from Turkish Armed Forces, without concrete justifications of these behaviours leading to disruption of the discipline or dishonoring the dignity of the armed forces.

‘DISPROPORTIONATE INTERVENTION IN THE DEMAND FOR RESPECT FOR PRIVACY’

Yıldırım further stressed that the expulsion of someone from their profession based on their sexual activities constitutes a disproportionate intervention in their right to demand respect of privacy. The text also states that it was against the principle of equality to sentence soldiers to expulsion for engaging in actions considered ‘unnatural intimacy’. It was pointed out that people employed in security directorates, the justice system or religious services are not subject to such heavy sentences.

The constitutional Court has carried out the principal examination of the application, rejecting the demand for cancellation of the regulation in question.

‘THE CONSTITUTION CAN LIMIT THE PRIVATE LIFE ON CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES’

The justification of the constitutional court ruling stated that although everyone has right to demand respect for personal and family life according to the Constitution, however there can be limitations to the protection of private life in certain circumstances and that this right is not considered to be absolute.

The text also suggested that fundamental rights and liberties can only be limited by law and based on the circumstances envisioned only by the constitution without infringing on their essences, and that these limitations can not be in discordance with the principle of proportionality and prerequisites for a democratic social order.

‘ IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE IN ALL SOCIETIES’

The ruling explained that the regulation in question prohibited ‘engagement in unnatural intimacies’. The clause ‘engaging in unnatural intimacies’ being defined as ‘demonstrating unnatural sexual behaviour’ and suggested: “Such sexual behaviours can emerge in a myriad of ways and can be different from person to person or from society to society. As indicated on the Constitutional Court’s verdict dated April 1, 2015, said behaviours are sexual behaviours which have negative impacts on the moral standards of the society and can not be considered natural in all social orders”.

‘TO PROTECT THE DIGNITY AND HONOUR OF THE PROFESSION’
Yet it was also suggested that the principal objective of the penal sanction stipulated on the Martial Penal Code is to protect and to maintain the military discipline, that the sanctions on the soldiers aims to sustain the public order and productive and active work, to establish discipline and to protect the dignity and honour of the profession.

ANNOTATION BY DEPUTY CHAIR: REFERENCE TO ECHR

Constitutional Court Deputy Chair Engin Yıldırım, did not agree with the majority’s view. The Deputy Chair referred to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) verdicts and recommendations as well as international conventions regarding the struggle against gender based discrimination in his opposing vote note.

‘VERDICT CONTRADICTS WITH CONTEMPORARY DEVELOPMENTS’

Yıldırım emphasized that up until recently societies considered sexual relations among same sex individuals to be unnatural sexual behaviours, defined these acts as ‘disease’ or ‘perversion’, subjecting them to penal sanctions and wrote “As the understanding of human rights and social approaches improved, this [view] started to change. The evaluation of homosexual relationships as ‘unnatural intimacies’ contradicts with the contemporary developments in human rights”.

CONCRETE EXAMPLES SHOULD BE GIVEN

Yıldırım stressed that the ECHR came to the conclusion that expulsion from the army solely based on homosexuality or homosexual relations is against the European Convention of Human Rights. Yıldırım also stated that if it is alleged that the employment of homosexuals in armed forces is a risk to military discipline and operational activity then the premises for such suggestion should be put forward with concrete examples.

‘STEREOTYPES and PREJUDICES…’

Yıldırım based his rejection on the below reflections:
“The subjection of the soldier to expulsion from the Turkish Armed Forces due to the regulation in question, is not based on professional inadequacy or a related cause but is based on the person’s behaviours or preferences related to the person’s private life. This, excluding extremely exceptional circumstances, is neither the state’s nor anyone else’s concern. In a democratic system the majority should not ignore the fundamental rights and liberties of LGBTI individuals who are deemed a sexual minority. The regulation in question ignores the dignity of the soldiers with different sexual orientation, in the name of protecting the dignity of the military profession. The regulation in question reflects the stereotypes and deep prejudices regarding the LGBTI individuals which have been calcified in social life systematically throughout the history, resulting in the reproduction of said prejudices. People are valuable solely because they are humans and human dignity is a birthright, it makes the people worthy of respect, of value and of irrevocable rights based on their humanity. Are these people less valuable, less dignified because of their sexual orientations? “

The constitutional court’s changes to Article 40 are now in effect

The Constitutional Court annulled a clause in the Turkish Civil Code’s Article 40 stating the requirement of “to be permanently deprived of the ability to reproduce” on Nov. 29, 2017. The decision is now in effect with its publication in the Official Gazette on March 20.

Source: Pembe Hayat, “AYM’nin Madde 40’taki Değişikliği Yürürlüğe Girdi”, 20 March 2018, http://www.pembehayat.org/haberler.php?id=1681

A trans man launched a case in 2014 at the Ankara 4th Court of First Instance for a name change as well as his gender transition process. He requested that the court investigate the Turkish Civil Code Article 40’s “mandatory sterilization” as being unconstitutional, that this surgery was not successfully performed in Turkish state hospitals and successful experts charged exorbitant amounts, that there was lasting irreversible damage after the operation affecting bodily integrity.

The Constitutional Court committee examined the file and annulled the requirement “to be permanently deprived of the ability to reproduce” from the Turkish Civil Code’s Article 40 on Nov. 29, 2017.

That change has been put into effect as of March 20.

No requirement for infertility anymore

The annulment of Article 40’s Clause 1 stating “to be permanently deprived of the ability to reproduce” means sterilization will not be required in gender transition operations. However, Article 40’s Clause 2 stating “the court will rule for the necessary changes in the population registry after an official health council confirms that the gender change surgery was conducted” remains in the law after the push for its annulment was rejected on Nov. 29.

“The effect of this annulment may be joint indemnity cases.”

Attorney Sinem Hun said she finds the decision to be positive and told Pink Life:

Though we don’t yet know the reason for the annulment, it may be a reflection of European Court of Human Rights A.P., Nicot and Garcon decision. The effect of this annulment may be joint indemnity cases as we have also seen in Sweden. Injured parties and associations may consider action as this practice lasted between 2002 and 2017. Of course the legal techniques should be evaluated and I reserve comments on the issue of techniques for now.

“This article was contrary to the Constitution’s Articles 17 and 20”

Pink Life’s lawyer Emrah Sahin said this incommensurable condition will no longer be sought in gender transition and added:

We see this decision as positive because this clause was contrary to the Constitution’s Articles 17 and 20. This decision also reveals that. With the annulment of this clause, the state will no longer seek “permanently deprived of the ability to reproduce” in gender transition.

Turkish Civil Code’s Article 40

Turkish Civil Code’s Article 40 regulates the “procedure” on “gender change.” The changed article is:

A person wanting to change their gender may apply to a court in person to request the allowance of gender change. However, in order to be allowed [to do so], the person needs to have passed the age of 18 and be unmarried, and document, via an official health council report from an education and research hospital, that they are of transsexual disposition, that it’s necessary to undergo gender change for their psychological health. The court will rule for the necessary changes in the population registry if an official health council confirms that the gender change surgery was conducted in line with the goal and medical procedures dependent on the granted permission.

 

 

 

Evrensel: Mican’s threats and hate speech is considered freedom of speech

The Istanbul Chair of the Alperen Hearths Foundation, Kürşat Mican’s threats and hate speech against LGBTI Pride Walk was evaluated and ruled to be within the scope of freedom of speech by a state prosecutor’s investigation. Despite the fact that Mican is not a journalist, the prosecutor emphasized the ‘freedom of press’ in his verdict.

Source: Cansu Pişkin, “Mican’ın tehditleri, nefret söylemi ifade özgürlüğü sayıldı!”, Evrensel, February 10, 2018, https://www.evrensel.net/haber/345211/micanin-tehditleri-nefret-soylemi-ifade-ozgurlugu-sayildi

A criminal complaint had been filed against Kürşat Mican, who used threats and hate speech bearing statements during a television programme on KRT. The statements were directed towards the LGBTI Pride Walk planned to take place on June 25 last year. Lawyers Rozerin Kip and Levent Pişkin filed a complaint to the Istanbul Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor, stating that Mican was inciting the public to hatred and animosity, using threats and insults. Mican had threatened the Pride Walk with the following statements: “These people plan to build a structure in every neighborhood. We warn our Intelligence Agencies. This is a project of the capitalist, communist, imperialist powers. They aim to spread homosexuality, to destroy the unity of family, to stop procreation, to end the husband-wife relationship and to prevent the growth of a generation which is a result of said relationship and which would do good for this nation. This dynamite is planted at the foundation of the structure of the family. Young people are getting inclined towards this direction. They especially went down to working at the level of neighborhoods. We will not allow this, whatever the cost may be. I’m addressing the Turkish nation, these are very dangerous structures. We need to prevent this immorality, this will spread otherwise. If the state allows this, we won’t. Where ever they will walk, we will go and block that region, that avenue, they won’t be able come there anyway. We will not let them walk. We can find 200 thousand people if need be.”

The statements were interpreted as within the legal parameters of press freedom.

Public Prosecutor Ersoy Altıntaş from the Istanbul Office of Chief Public Prosecutor Press Crimes Inquiry Bureau evaluated the criminal complaint and found the statements to be within the scope of freedom of speech. Rather than focus on Mican’s words, Altıntaş frequently emphasized ‘press freedom’ in his verdict and on the medium of the statements, the TV channel, and the program–even though Mican is not a journalist. Altıntaş stated: “If a journalist is sentenced for helping disseminate another person’s words, this will create a serious obstacle against the contribution of the press in public debate. Thus, this should not be the path to take unless there are valid reasons to do so. To set the condition for the journalists to systematically refrain from statements which can hurt, incite, or defame others does not comply with the role of the press to inform the public on current affairs, opinions and notions.”

Prosecutor Altıntaş also suggested “freedom of speech is among the most fundamental rights in a democratic society” and stated “according to the regulation in the law, there needs to be a concrete danger in order to have an element of crime. The news article in this case does not create such a concrete danger; therefore, as in the incident for which the complaint is filed, the legal elements for the alleged crimes are not existent. As a result of the investigation carried out by our Office of Chief Public Prosecutor, it was understood from the documents pertaining to investigation that the alleged crimes had not come into existence”. The case is at the moment deemed as nolle prosequi. Rozerin Kip and Levent Pişkin have stated their intention to file an appeal to this verdict.

LGBTI activist Kıvılcım Arat joins Diren Coskun’s death fast

Trans woman Diren Coşkun, incarcerated in Tekirdağ No.2 Prison, has been on a hunger strike for 13 days, asking for an end to rights violations in detention and for her right to surgery and treatment. Her friend Kıvılcım Arat, too, has announced her own hunger strike to help Coşkun’s voice be heard and to support her right to treatment.

This article was compiled from: ”Diren Coşkun 13 gündür ölüm orucunda, Kıvılcım Arat da aynı eyleme başladı”, Gazete Karınca, February 6, 2018, http://gazetekarinca.com/2018/02/diren-coskun-13-gundur-olum-orucunda-kivilcim-arat-da-ayni-eyleme-basladi/

Keskesor activist Diren Coskun, who was arrested in August 2017, has completed the 13th day of her hunger strike in Tekirdağ No.2 Prison.

Istanbul LGBTI Solidarity Association Board Member and spokesperson for Democratic Women Movement Kıvılcım Arat had announced that trans woman Coşkun has started a hunger strike against the prevention of her right to surgery and treatment, and the rights violations occurring in prison. Coşkun had declared her protest as follows:

“I’ve been subjected to many humiliating practices here. I lay my body to die, to gain my right to surgery and treatment, and to have this severe isolation abolished. I hereby declare to democratic public opinion that I have started a hunger strike as of January 25.”

As Coşkun’s death fast continues, Kıvılcım Arat announced that she has “started a death fast in order to reinforce Diren Coşkun’s voice and to make her demand for treatment heard”.

Kıvılcım Arat tweeted on February 6:

“In spite of our best efforts, we were not able to draw attention to Diren’s demand for access to treatment. Her trans identity cast a shadow over her protest and rendered it invisible. As of February 6 00:00, I have started a fast in order to reinforce Diren Coşkun’s voice and to make her demand for treatment heard.”

Arat stated that she will continue the fast until Diren Coşkun’s demands are met. Arat has criticized the LGBTI community for its lack of interest in Coşkun’s current situation and has emphasized that the oppression and violence against trans individuals remains invisible.