Mavi Boncuk |Why Turkey may not want to join the ICC
The Coalition for the International Criminal Court announced Sept. 4 that Turkey will be the focus of its month long campaign for global justice in September. The coalition, which is composed of 2,500 nongovernmental organizations in 150 countries, is demanding that Turkey ratify the Rome Statute[1] — the founding treaty of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Summary: There is pressure for Turkey to join the International Criminal Court, especially due to the country's EU accession process, but the government has its reasons to resist.
by Tulin Daloglu
Posted September 5, 2014
Read more from SOURCE
FULL TEXT
Speaking to Al-Monitor, Gunal Kursun, president of the Human Rights Agenda Association and member of the Turkish National Coalition for the ICC, said that although being a member of the ICC is not a benchmark concerning the entry into the European Union, the 2013 Progress Report also mentioned that “Turkey did not sign the statute of the International Criminal Court.”
“While there are so many other bilateral and multilateral treaties that Turkey is not a signatory of, I believe it is attention-grabbing for the Turkey-EU relationship that this has been noted in the Progress Report,” Kursun said, noting that all EU member countries are signatories to the ICC.
With the start of the accession talks with the EU in 2004, Turkey actually expressed a willingness to ratify the Rome Statute[1]. In that framework, then-Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government made an amendment to Article 38 of the constitution “clarifying the distinction between the extradition of nationals to a foreign country and surrender to the ICC, removing a potential obstacle to accession,” Kursun said.
Pointing out that Turkey failed to follow up on this amendment by ratifying the Rome Statute, Kursun said Turkey could only benefit from being a member state of the ICC. “The member countries of the ICC make a point that they won’t engage in any activity violating the fundamental human rights, or that they won’t [commit] genocide. This provides a positive, secure outlook for the signatory country,” Kursun told Al-Monitor. Kursun said Turkey needs to find a way to dismiss fears that it could be the target of such international prosecution, due to its fight against the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and the Cyprus issue.
“The country can only strengthen its democracy by facing its errors, if any,” Kursun said, referring to the December 2011 Uludere incident, where 34 Kurdish civilians died in an airstrike. “The ICC can only take cases for crimes that are committed in 2002 and beyond. … In that respect, if there becomes anyone to take the [Uludere] incident to the ICC, Turkey should have nothing to be concerned [about]. It can only strengthen its democracy, not by escaping from its mistakes, but by facing and resolving them.”
Kursun argued that Turkey’s ratification of the Rome Statute[1] at this time will stand as testament that it won’t get involved in any political or judicial wrongdoing. “I am, however, hearing rumors that President Erdogan has growing reservations on this issue due to speculation about Turkey’s involvement with groups like the Islamic State [IS],” Kursun said.
Dengir Mir Mehmet Firat, former deputy chairman of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and once a close confidant of Erdogan, wrote Sept. 1, "The new government aims to soften the relationship with the EU by appointing Mevlut Cavusoglu as the foreign minister and Volkan Bozkir to the EU ministry. Doing that, the new government is trying to avert the possibility of Erdogan being put on trial at the ICC due to Turkey’s [intervention] in the Syrian civil war and therefore giving support to some 'Islamic organizations.'"
Before the AKP came to power over a decade ago, Turkey's government was clearly against joining the ICC, even without allegations of support for IS or other extremist groups to bring about the end of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime that the current government faces. With growing international support for Kurdish demands for an independent Kurdistan, Turkey was concerned that the international community would change its perception of the fight against the PKK, and that Turkish military personnel would risk facing trial at the ICC. Since the United States is also not a member of the ICC, the Ankara government is encouraged to follow in its strategic ally’s footsteps.
Turkey’s objection to ICC membership, however, may not be limited to concerns over the fight against the PKK threat, the Cyprus issue or its alleged support for Islamic jihadist groups. The Turkish government also accuses US-based Turkish Sunni cleric Fethullah Gulen and his followers of establishing a parallel state to overthrow the elected, legitimate government, making Gulen's movement a terrorist organization. If Turkey were an ICC member, it could end up settling the score on such accusations in court, making Ankara more likely to stand firmly against the ratification of the Rome Statute[1].
In sum, the Turkish government seems far from bringing this issue to the forefront of the country’s agenda.
Read more from SOURCE
[1] Full Text of Rome Stature (EN)
Article 126 Entry into force
1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day
following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance,
approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the
deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the
Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following
the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or
accession.
Article 127 Withdrawal
1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the
United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one
year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later
date.
2. A State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations
arising from this Statute while it was a Party to the Statute, including any financial
obligations which may have accrued. Its withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation
with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in
relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were
commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it
prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already
under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became
effective.