Parliament rejects CHP bugging probe request: “A motion requesting a probe into Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Interior Minister Beşir Atalay for alleged wiretapping of the headquarters of Turkeys main opposition Republican Peoples Party (CHP) was rejected in Parliament yesterday.”
(Via Today’s Zaman, your gateway to Turkish news :: News.)
Freedom of Information is not so free: “Freedom of Information is not so free
The number of individual citizens requesting information from public agencies as part of an information access law that promotes transparency and democracy has been increasing, but the number of rejections of these requests has also been rising, a report has shown. “
According to a report on queries made by individual citizens to public agencies in 2007 prepared by the Prime Ministry’s Council on Information Acquisition (BEDK), higher judicial organs have been the most resistant of all state institutions to comply with a law governing the right to information.
Those agencies reluctant to respond to requests for information in the first few years after the law’s enactment were much more responsive to queries in 2007. Another report released in May of this year compiled by Yaman Akdeniz, a senior lecturer in law at the University of Leeds, assessing the implementation of the Right to Information Act, agrees that agencies have been more responsive, but highlights that resistance still remains in place.
The most notable example, however, is undoubtedly the Constitutional Court, which received 3,389 requests and rejected 2,367 of them. None of the inquirers appealed the court’s rejection. Nearly 1 million requests were made to public agencies across the country last year and only about 7 percent were rejected. The Constitutional Court’s rejection rate last year stood at 69.8 percent.
The Supreme Court of Appeals rejected all 154 inquiries made to it last year and the Council of State rejected 115 out of 146 requests. The law went into force on April 24, 2004 as a necessary means to ensure a democratic and transparent administration. The BEDK was set up when several agencies refused to respond to queries from citizens.
Under the law, if an agency refuses to respond to a request for information, the inquirer has the right to appeal the agency’s refusal by turning to the BEDK, which decides whether an agency can provide the information sought or not.
Akdeniz’s report, released in May, incorporates data and research gathered between 2004 and 2008. It suggests that higher numbers of right to information requests in the latter years after the law went into force suggest broader awareness of the existence of the law and the right to information and access to official documents in Turkey. However, the right to information is not being completely complied with, Akdeniz’s report found.
At the time of the release of the report Akdeniz said: “Although the enactment of the Right to Information Act is a very important step towards openness, transparency and democratization, the report has identified several problems with the application of the law. As the report will show, despite the BEDK’s decisions and administrative court orders, resistance to give information remains and a high number of public authorities dispute the council’s decisions either by ignoring them or by appealing to administrative courts to challenge them. Therefore, there needs to be significant improvements to the current system to break down the culture of secrecy and resistance to provide information.”
Akdeniz, a freedom of information activist since 1998, is also the co-founder of the BilgiEdinmeHakki.org lobby group, which has monitored the implementation and application of this law since 2003. The full report can be acquired from their Web site.
The BEDK report
According to the BEDK report released last week, 395,557 queries were made to public agencies around the country in 2004 compared to a total of 998,442 applications demanding information in 2007. About 5 percent of the queries were denied an answer in 2004 and 7 percent in 2007.
The report found that the attitude of security-related institutions was changing positively on the right to information. For example, the National Intelligence Organization (MİT), which put up some resistance in the beginning, was one of the most responsive public agencies last year. No queries were made to the Military High Administrative Court and the Military Supreme Court of Appeals. The Constitutional Court received 3,389 queries while the General Staff received 8,405 requests for information. Only 89 requests were made to the National Security Council (MGK), a sharp fall from 128 queries in 2004 when the MGK had not yet been reformed to become a more civilian institution.
The General Staff responded to 6,100 out of the 8,405 queries it received, partially responded to 91, refused to respond to 1,654 and redirected 549 to other public agencies. Only four inquirers appealed rejected queries last year. In comparison, of the 2,017 requests made in 2004 to the General Staff, only 278 inquiries received a response, 365 received a partial response, 139 were rejected and 638 were unanswered, with the involved agency citing classified or sensitive information as the reason.
In 2007 MİT replied to 2,388 queries out of the 3,398 it received. It gave a partial response to 85 and refused to give any information at all to 837 queries. It redirected 88 queries to other public agencies. In 2004 MİT replied to 4,260 out of 6,185 questions and rejected 1,797.
In 2007 Parliament received 1,865 queries, 18.5 percent less than the year before. Nearly 70 percent of these queries received a full response while 17 percent were rejected. Parliament redirected 228 queries that should have been addressed to other institutions to the relevant public agencies.
CHP eavesdropping allegations proven false
Allegations that the government bugged Republican People’s Party (CHP) Secretary-General Önder Sav’s private office without authorization were proven false when the daily that sparked the controversy revealed the source of the conversation transcript the CHP had based its accusations on.
Today’s Zaman, your gateway to Turkish news: Wiretapping and slandering
Politician: What is the political atmosphere like in Bolu?
Governor: Your job is not that easy. However, it wouldn’t be right to give up just because it is difficult.
Politician: Do you have the determined and careful human resources required to facilitate the political formation that will win the public over in the town?
Governor: Yes, we do, albeit small. It is necessary to know that we don’t have many people.
Politician: How do you view Bolu, in particular from the political perspective? What can be done?
Governor: Bolu’s base is the Republican People’s Party [CHP]. We can see that the CHP’s votes are growing — particularly in local elections. If a large group is established in Bolu, things could change for the better for the CHP to such an extent that the CHP may well win the elections.
This dialogue is from a conversation that took place between Önder Sav, the CHP secretary-general, and Mehmet Ali Serindağ, the former governor of Bolu, who has been relieved of duty through a recently enacted bylaw on governors. I should first of all note that this type of relationship and conversation should never take place between a political party official and the highest-ranking bureaucrat who represents the state in his province. It’s impossible for us to approve of either this dialogue or relationship. An understanding of public administration based on impartiality and a democratic culture never allow for such a relationship or dialogue.
Today’s Zaman, your gateway to Turkish news: Who is wiretapping the CHP?
The wiretapping of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) headquarters is a very grave situation despite the ruthlessness, rashness and inconsiderateness of CHP leader Deniz Baykal’s statement about it. The duty of taking the very first action is incumbent on the government and the judiciary.
Today’s Zaman, your gateway to Turkish news: Bug, By Ekrem Dumanli, 30.05.2008
Unusual things are happening in Turkey. At a time when the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) closure case is being reviewed at the Constitutional Court, one of the 11 members of the court met with Turan Çömez. Who is Çömez?
Turkish press is full of stories about illegal interception of communications of politicians in Turkey as well as news about a new draft Data Protection Bill. I will post further information about these developments too.
Watergate scenes in Ankara: Who bugged the CHP? - Turkish Daily News May 29, 2008: ” It was two weeks ago when the Constitutional Court’s Vice President Osman Paksüt alleged he was being stalked, and yesterday a political party also denounced security officials for eavesdropping on private meetings in the party’s headquarters and providing the illegally acquired information to an Islamic daily, likening it to a Turkish Watergate.
This is not related to Turkey but nevertheless an interesting news item.
Britain Opens Archives on UFO Sightings: “More than 1,000 reported sightings of unidentified flying objects, heretofore kept locked away in the National Archives, have been released. Of particular interest is a 1984 sighting, made simultaneously by several experienced (and sober) air traffic controllers.
”
(Via Wired News.)
BilgiEdinmeHakki.Org Press Release: 08.05.2008
A report prepared by Dr. Yaman Akdeniz entitled Freedom of Information in Turkey: A Critical Assessment of the Implementation and Application of the Right to Information Act 2003 is made available by BilgiEdinmeHakki.Org, a Turkish pressure group on 08 May, 2008.
The report incorporates data and research gathered between 2004-2008, and provides a detailed analysis of the implementation and application of the Right to Information Act in Turkey. High numbers of right to information applications between 2004-2006 (1,886,962 in total) suggest wider awareness of the existence of the law and the availability of a right to information and access to official documents in Turkey.
The report includes an assessment of the work of the Turkish Right to Information Review Council (BEDK) between June 2004 and March 2008 as well as the assessment of the implementation of the law by central and local government agencies. The report further assesses whether the enactment of a freedom of information law in Turkey helped to achieve an open and transparent regulatory process and whether the new law promotes openness and good practice within government institutions in terms of provision of information.
The report highlights both positive and negative observations with regards to the application and implementation of the Right to Information Act and provides a set of recommendations for improvement of the application of the Right to Information Act in Turkey.
The author of the report, Dr. Yaman Akdeniz, stated that “Although the enactment of the Right to Information Act is a very important step towards openness, transparency, and democratisation in Turkey, the report has identified several problems with the application of the law. As the report will show despite Right to Information Review Council decisions and administrative court orders, there is still resistance to give information, and a high number of public authorities are disputing Council decisions, either by ignoring them, or by appealing to administrative courts to challenge such decisions. Therefore, there needs to be significant improvements to the current system to break down the culture of secrecy and resistance to provide information.”
The report is available at http://www.bilgiedinmehakki.org/doc/Turkey_FOI_2008_Report.pdf
For further information see the Turkish Right to Information Blog: http://foia.bilgiedinmehakki.info
Dr. Yaman Akdeniz can be contacted at akdeniz@bilgiedinmehakki.org
Dr. Yaman Akdeniz is a senior lecturer in law at the School of Law, University of Leeds, United Kingdom. Dr. Akdeniz has been following the enactment of the Turkish Right to Information Act 2003 which came into force on 24 April, 2004 since its inception. He has been a freedom of information activist since 1998 and is also the co-founder of the BilgiEdinmeHakki.Org pressure group which monitors the implementation and application of the Turkish law since 2003.
BilgiEdinmeHakki.Org (www.bilgiedinmehakki.org) has been set up as a pressure group on 09 October, 2003, the day the Turkish Government enacted the Right to Information Act 2003 (No: 4982) to ensure that the Act is effectively used by the Turkish citizens and a greater degree of openness and transparency is established in Turkey as part of its democratization. Bilgi Edinme Hakki stands for Right to Information in Turkish, and the name of the organisation is based upon the Turkish Act.
BilgiEdinmeHakki.Org obtained the following detailed statistics from the Council in March 2008:
As can be seen above, majority of the Council decisions (2,782 (79%)) remain unpublished, an there is no “clear” indication in terms of when these decisions will be published by the Turkish Council (BEDK).
BilgiEdinmeHakki.Org