Mehmet Tarhan

Prison time and fine for Conscientious Objector Mehmet Tarhan

The Sivas Military Court sentenced conscientious objector Mehmet Tarhan to 15 months in prison and a 9,000 Turkish Lira fine. The Military Court’s ruling ignores the European Court of Human Rights’ earlier verdict on Tarhan v. Turkey.

Source: “Vicdani retçi Mehmet Tarhan’a hapis ve para cezası!” (“Prison time and fine for conscientious objector Mehmet Tarhan”), KaosGL.org, 10 February 2015, http://kaosgl.org/sayfa.php?id=18692

Conscientious objector and LGBTI activist Mehmet Tarhan received a 15-month prison sentence and a 9,000 Turkish lira (~$3,600) fine based on disobedience charges.

The Sivas Military Court’s ruling on the case is in conflict with the earlier European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) verdict from 17 July 2012, which stated that Tarhan’s rights were violated by the Turkish state.

Tarhan spoke to KaosGL.org about the court’s decision: “The Sivas Military Court has shown that it does not recognize either the constitution or the European Court of Human Rights. We will take the decision to the Supreme Court of Appeals.”

mehmettarhan1

What happened before?

Tarhan rejected military service and announced his conscientious objection in 2001. In 2005, he was forcibly taken for military service, sued for insubordination in two separate cases, and treated poorly whilst under arrest in a military prison.

In violation of the constitution and the ECtHR, Tarhan was given a physical exam because of his homosexuality.

According to records dated 25 May 2005, Tarhan’s hair and beard were shaved against his will by seven soldiers, who pulled him down onto the ground and got on top of him. Tarhan reported having suffered several bruises and abrasions on his body. He started a 28-day hunger strike the same day.

ECtHR convicted Turkey

Tarhan then applied to the ECtHR to defend his right to conscientious objection and report his maltreatment under arrest. The ECtHR ruled that the European Human Rights Convention was violated in Tarhan’s case and sentenced Turkey to pay 10,000 Euros.

Amnesty International Statement from 18 October 2006- “Turkey: Conscientious objector Mehmet Tarhan sentenced

‘Marginal’ debate in the Peoples’ Democratic Party and the LGBTI community

Source: Barış Avşar, “HDP’de ‘marjinal’ tartışması: LGBTİ zaten hiç sorgusuz sualsiz kabul edilmedi ki”, (“‘Marginal’ debate in the Peoples’ Democratic Party: as a matter of fact, the LGBTI community has never been implicitly, unquestioningly accepted”), Radikal, 26 August 2014, http://www.radikal.com.tr/politika/hdpde_marjinal_tartismasi_lgbti_zaten_hic_sorgusuz_sualsiz_kabul_edilmedi_ki-1209120

‘The debate about the Peoples’ Democratic Party’s (HDP) avoidance of marginalized persons’ continues with evaluations from well-known names such as Member of Parliament Ertuğrul Kürkçü, after statements made by Cemil Bayık, leader of the the Kurdistan Workers’ Party. Party member and LGBTI activist Mehmet Tarhan, however, draws attention to a ‘mishap’ in the debate.

After the interview that PKK leader Cemil Bayık gave to Vatan newspaper writer Ruşen Çakır last week, the most salient statement [he made] referring to the HDP was, “It could become Turkey’s greatest opposition force. It needs to avoid certain marginal political positions. For instance, there is a group in Beyoğlu… I do not wish to give their name. In any case, people know who I mean.”

Following this statement, it has been alleged, especially in social media, that the group referred to is the LGBTI movement within the party. Ertuğrul Kürkçü, one of the founding leaders of the party and deputy for Mersin, has made comments on the matter, stating that the HDP should not be engaged in efforts to distance itself from marginal political positions.

We asked Mehmet Tarhan, one of the HDP’s LGBTI activists, what his thoughts about the debate were.

How do you assess the fact that such a debate has made it to the top of the agenda?

First of all, one needs to ask what the issue is, because from the point of view of the LGBTI movement, the point in question has never been ‘being accepted without question.’ The HDP is a party that came into being as a result of the efforts of various opposition movements to form a more effective opposition. Various conflicts are bound to occur in any party that consists of such diverse segments.  We are no exception to this. That controversy could be related to both class and ethnicity…

Could the point in question be an approach where the HDP, as a ‘union of oppositions,’ will, at certain periods, in a tactical sense, give prominence to some of these; as, for example, when a struggle is taking place against ISIL, LGBTI demands will be held back?

The LGBTI movement naturally developed in big cities, but from the nineties even up to this point it has had a relationship with the Kurdish movement. Nevertheless, it is natural to encounter difficulties. Within the Kurdish movement, even the women’s movement encountered resistance as it was gaining strength. Moreover, yes: from time to time, certain political alliances come to the fore. On the other hand, the LGBTI movement is not interested solely on LGBTI rights demands. The demands of other identities, and of those who are oppressed because of [sic] these identities, have been, and will continue to be, on our agenda as well.

In that case, in your view, how should a debate like this be conducted?

These debates should certainly be carried on within the party, and they should be followed by the party members as well. But while the debate is going on, one must not ignore the party’s official position and statements with regard to the LGBT issue [sic], as happened in this latest mishap. When I say mishap, I am referring not to Cemil Bayık’s statement, but to what was subsequently expressed in the course of the debates taking place on Twitter.

 

The Military and the ‘Gays’

Source: Mehveş Evin, “Askerlik ve ‘gay’ler,” (The Military and the ‘Gays’,”) Milliyet, 17 November 2010,  http://cadde.milliyet.com.tr/2013/11/07/YazarDetay/1315132/askerlik-ve-gay-ler

When it comes to the “headscarf” debates, the words “fundamental rights” and “freedoms” are flying around. Well, what about the rights of those who are discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation?

If Der Spiegel had not reported on the issue, it would have continued to be an urban legend. The German magazine ran the headline “Porn for the General” and reported that homosexual men are asked to present documents along with photos and videos to the Turkish military as proof of their sexuality in order to be approved for exemption from service. The news have entered mainstream Turkish press, while the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have denied it. Thus, the TSK, for the first time in its history, has delivered an opinion on homosexuality.

(more…)

Comrade, I am a Faggot

Source: Elif Akgül, “Yoldaş Ben İbneyim,” (“Comrade, I am a faggot,”) Bianet, 25 October 2013, http://bianet.org/biamag/diger/150839-yoldas-ben-ibneyim

Journalist and LGBT activist Yıldız Tar talked to bianet about the newly released book Comrade, I am a Faggot and the perception of socialist organizations on the LGBT movement.

Journalist Yıldız Tar’s book Comrade, I am a Faggot: The Left’s Perception of the LGBT Movement has been published by Ceylan Publishing House. Tar answered Bianet’s questions,  stating that the LGBT and leftist organizations had close contacts for the first time during the Gezi Resistance and that this encounter affected all of them Tar also adds that they have to face up to our existence and cause. Those who cannot embrace the LGBT movement will end up in history’s trash bin.

(more…)