Deradicalization and Integration Legal and Policy Framework

Turkey/Country Report WP4 December 2021

Abstract

This country report focuses on the legal and institutional framework with respect to radicalization in Turkey. Both desk research and interviews with experts show that the constitutional organization of the state with respect to fundamental rights and values, the relevant legislative and institutional framework and deradicalization policies carry the legacy of historical ethnic and religious conflicts and sensitivities and a limited approach to minorities adopted in the Lausanne Peace Treaty. As the definition of the minorities is confined to the boundaries of the Lausanne Peace Treaty which only acknowledges the non-Muslims, and, a further minority regulation regime was not introduced in the later years, the political space does not provide adequate space for the recognition of ethnic and religious demands. The constitutional framework has maintained a similar perspective despite different constitutions were enacted across time. Secularism and a notion of civic nationalism comprise the two main founding principles. Article 3 provides that the integrity and indivisibility of the unitary state and its nation is an irrevocable provision and thus ethnic or religious diversity claims have been perceived as threats to the national unity. Despite the constitution also emphasizes the importance of fundamental rights and liberties and equality before law, the fact that Articles 13 and 14 allow suspension of the fundamental rights and liberties in case of the violation of Article 3 indicates the priorities of the political regime. The relevant legislative framework beyond the constitutional context with respect to radicalization has a similar security-based approach in which there is not a specific conceptualization of radicalization: discourses outside the constitution and official ideology are treated as threats to national integrity and evaluated under the context of counter-terrorism. The legislation is punitive, limited in scope regarding the hate crimes and applied in a biased way to protect the majority ethnic and religious groups.
As a more salient pattern, Article 301 regulating insulting Turkish nation is used to frame ethnic demands as anti-constitutional and terrorist activities. Recent Internet law also gives the state the right to acquire communication data without any court permission and is instrumentalized to incriminate the opposition. The available legislative context with respect to radicalization doesn’t encompass the online contexts and any effort to detect radical contents on online platforms targets the minorities and dissident groups rather than hate speeches and discriminatory attitudes targeting the minorities. The only paradigmatic case law is Selendi case in which the perpetrators of the attacks on the Roma community are sentenced at the maximum prison term provided by the relevant provisions of the Turkish Penal code, and it forms the only case, that we are aware of, used to rule on the attacks against the minorities. While carrying the potential of being an exemplary case, the evidence shows that it didn’t have a dramatic impact on legislative framework for later crimes.
The institutional and policy framework reflects the approach in the legal framework in that policies ignore the ethnic and religious diversity, downplay the crimes against minorities with a security approach on radicalization and deradicalization and protect the dominant groups rather than minorities and dissidents. The Islamization policies of the AKP and its further closing down the political space with a super-presidential system also exacerbates the situation and feelings of insecurity among non-Muslim and heterodox Muslim groups such as the Alevis.
Concomitant with the counter-terrorism approach and the lack of a framework for radicalization, de-radicalisation projects are majorly composed of prison programs.
One of them is called “Multi-level in-prison Radicalization Prevention Approach” (R2PRIS) enacted between 2015 and 2018 jointly funded by the Erasmus+ program.
The program focused on training the frontline personnel in terms of assessing the indicators of radicalization and developing measures to alleviate the potential factors for radicalization. Its comparative aspect also paved the way to exchange best practices via bilateral visits. The other deradicalization project targets jihadist inmates in prison in which the Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Religious Affairs cooperate.
The latter relies on the clerical personnel in prisons who are charged of disseminating the tolerant messages of Islam. However, the low participation rate in program shows the necessity of adopting a radicalization approach at state level, involvement of experts and practitioners of diverse backgrounds to decrease the categorical rejection by inmates, and devising a training program which equips the clerical personnel with specialized training about radicalization and deradicalization going beyond the tolerant religious narratives.