In Turkey’s campaign efforts to eradicate torture, a new program in which provincial human rights bodies monitor local police stations can play a critical safeguard role, but this monitoring needs to be independent and more widespread, Human Rights Watch said today in a report published ahead of the European Union’s foreign ministerial troika meeting with Turkey on March 8.
Since early 2005, a countrywide network of provincial human rights boards operating under the prime minister’s office has begun to pay both announced and unannounced visits to local police and gendarme stations to ensure that they have implemented safeguards against the torture and ill-treatment of detainees. By late 2005, human rights boards in 31 of Turkey’s 81 provinces had carried out visits to police or gendarme stations.
“Police station visits by human rights boards can be an effective tool in helping Turkey eliminate torture,” said Holly Cartner, Europe and Central Asia director of Human Rights Watch. “Detainees continue to be tortured or ill-treated even though important safeguards are on the books. Regular, unannounced visits by independent monitoring bodies can help ensure that the safeguards are implemented in practice.”
In a new report, Human Rights Watch evaluates the police station monitoring activities of Turkey’s provincial human rights boards. Information collected from interviews with doctors, lawyers and government officials in all 81 provinces shows progress as well as problems. While some human rights boards have begun to have a positive impact, the full potential of the monitoring system has yet to be realized.
The monitoring boards are comprised of government officials, representatives of professional bodies, and representatives of NGOs. Their establishment marks the first time that ordinary civilians such as doctors and lawyers are directly involved in monitoring the activities of the security forces. This network has the potential to contribute significantly to the eradication of torture in Turkey, especially when combined with already existing anti-torture measures.
However, more than half of the 81 provincial boards have not yet carried out visits to police stations, or have conducted visits that were not sufficiently probing. Other boards have been unwilling to conduct visits unless they first receive a formal complaint from a torture victim. Moreover, few boards have reported publicly on the frequency, methods and findings of their visits. The overriding influence that provincial governors can exert on the process has also raised questions about the boards’ independence.
On the other hand, most doctors and lawyers who participate in the boards take their responsibilities seriously and are committed to making this system an effective tool in the fight against torture. With more boards initiating visits each month, the authorities must take steps to ensure that all delegates are informed about best practices and are assisted in gaining the training and experience needed to fulfil their mandate.
“The monitoring system is an important beginning, but it is still far from perfect,” said Cartner. “Now it is important for the boards to become more independent and more active in their monitoring efforts.”
For decades, torture was pandemic in police stations throughout Turkey, and especially in Turkey’s anti-terror units. Death as a result of torture peaked in the mid-1990s. Sexual assault of male, female and child detainees was common. Civilian access to interrogation facilities in police stations was unheard of. In the absence of regular, independent monitoring or accountability for abuse, torture flourished. The only bodies that had access to Turkish police stations were the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and the human rights commission of the Turkish parliament, which found considerable medical evidence of torture during their visits, as well as secret interrogation rooms and instruments of torture.
In recent years, the Turkish government has introduced a number of reforms aimed at protecting detainees from torture and ill-treatment. Several laws were passed to, among other things, shorten detention periods, abolish incommunicado detention, and to allow all detainees, including those detained under the Anti-Terror Law, to consult with their lawyer from the first moments of detention.
As a result of these reforms, reports of torture and death in custody due to torture have fallen dramatically in recent years. Nevertheless, there are still reports of ill-treatment and torture, which often occur when police or gendarmes fail to implement these safeguards. Human Rights Watch said that an effective monitoring system could greatly contribute to a further reduction in cases of torture and ill-treatment, by underscoring that those who fail to implement safeguards will be exposed and held to account.
Last year, the Turkish government took two significant steps to open up police stations to independent monitoring. First, it signed the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, thereby committing itself to set up “a system of regular visits undertaken by independent international and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty, in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” This signalled the government’s acceptance of the need for independent monitoring in places of detention, but could take several years to implement fully.
Secondly, the countrywide network of “human rights boards” began to make visits to police stations, as an interim measure until a permanent monitoring system can be established based on commitments under the Optional Protocol.
The human rights board monitoring system is still at an experimental stage, and additional steps are needed in order to ensure that it fulfills its potential to help combat torture. Human Rights Watch made a number of recommendations to the Turkish government. To increase the independence of the boards, the government should encourage bar and medical association delegates to take the lead in monitoring activities, provide the boards with resources independent of the local governors (who are responsible for the police within the province), and invite human rights NGOs (such as Mazlum-Der and the Human Rights Association) to assist boards in visiting activities as consultants.
