EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 10.11.2015 SWD(2015) 216 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT TURKEY

2015 REPORT Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS EU Enlargement Strategy {COM(2015) 611 final}

{SWD(2015) 210 final}

{SWD(2015) 211 final}

{SWD(2015) 212 final}

{SWD(2015) 213 final}

{SWD(2015) 214 final}

{SWD(2015) 215 final}



Table of Contents 1.Introduction 1.1.Context 1.2.Summary of the report 2.Political criteria and enhanced political dialogue 2.1.Democracy 2.2.Public administration reform 2.3.Rule of law 2.4.Human rights and the protection of minorities 2.5.Regional issues and international obligations 3.Economic criteria 3.1.The existence of a functioning market economy 3.2.The capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union 4.Ability to assume the obligations of membership 4.1.Chapter 1: Free movement of goods 4.2.Chapter 2: Freedom of movement for workers 4.3.Chapter 3: Right of establishment and freedom to provide services 4.4.Chapter 4: Free movement of capital 4.5.Chapter 5: Public procurement

4.6.Chapter 6: Company law 4.7.Chapter 7: Intellectual property law 4.8.Chapter 8: Competition policy 4.9.Chapter 9: Financial services 4.10.Chapter 10: Information society and media 4.11.Chapter 11: Agriculture and rural development 4.12.Chapter 12: Food safety, veterinary and phytosanitary policy 4.13.Chapter 13: Fisheries 4.14.Chapter 14: Transport policy 4.15.Chapter 15: Energy 4.16.Chapter 16: Taxation 4.17.Chapter 17: Economic and monetary policy 4.18.Chapter 18: Statistics 4.19.Chapter 19: Social policy and employment 4.20.Chapter 20: Enterprise and industrial policy 4.21.Chapter 21: Trans-European networks 4.22.Chapter 22: Regional policy and the coordination of structural instruments 4.23.Chapter 23: Judiciary and fundamental rights 4.24.Chapter 24: Justice, freedom and security 4.25.Chapter 25: Science and research

4.26.Chapter 26: Education and culture 4.27.Chapter 27: Environment and climate change 4.28.Chapter 28: Health and consumer protection 4.29.Chapter 29: Customs union 4.30.Chapter 30: External relations 4.31.Chapter 31: Foreign, security and defence policy 4.32.Chapter 32: Financial control 4.33.Chapter 33 — Financial and budgetary provisions Annex I – Relations between the EU and Turkey Annex II – Statistical Annex



1.Introduction 1.1.Context Turkey has been linked to the EU by an Association Agreement since 1964 and a customs union was established in 1995. The European Council granted the status of candidate country to Turkey in December 1999 and accession negotiations were opened in October 2005. Within the framework of accession negotiations, 14 chapters have been opened so far and one of these was provisionally closed. Preparations started for the opening of chapter 17- economic and monetary policy which would underpin the envisaged high level economic dialogue with Turkey. Opening benchmarks for Chapters 23 and 24 on the rule of law still need to be defined so as to provide Turkey with a roadmap for reforms in this essential area. Turkey can accelerate the pace of negotiations by advancing in the fulfilment of the benchmarks, meeting the requirements of the negotiating framework and by respecting its contractual obligations towards the EU The EU and Turkey continued to enhance dialogue and cooperation in the areas of joint interest, which support and complement the accession negotiations, including with a number of mutual visits at the highest level. Political dialogue on foreign and security policy continued, including on counter-terrorism, against the background of Turkey joining the international coalition against Da'esh. Cooperation on visas, mobility and migration was pursued in the framework of the visa liberalisation dialogue launched in December 2013. Turkey continued to provide unprecedented humanitarian aid and support to about 2.2 million refugees from Syria and Iraq. A Joint EU-Turkey Action Plan for refugees and migration management was welcomed by the European Council in October. The Commission and Turkey agreed to step up cooperation on energy and launched a High Level Energy Dialogue. Developing further close economic ties was also a shared priority and both sides agreed to initiate procedures in view of a modernisation and extension of the Customs Union.

1.2.Summary of the report As regards the political criteria, the pace of reforms slowed down, also due to protracted elections. The outgoing government made efforts to reinvigorate the EU accession process. However, this repeated commitment was offset by the adoption of key legislation in the area of the rule of law, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly that ran against European standards. The political landscape continues to be divided. The 7 June general election saw a record 84% turnout, a clear sign of the strength of Turkish democracy with all major political parties being represented in the new parliament. However, a government could not be formed by the constitutional deadline and repeat elections took place on 1 November. Amongst the shortcomings in the legal framework regulating elections, the 10% threshold of votes for parties to be represented in parliament need to be addressed as a priority. In the reporting period Turkey saw its security situation increasingly deteriorate. The authorities launched an extensive anti-terror military and security campaign against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which remains on the EU list of terrorist organisations, both in Turkey and in Iraq. The settlement process of the Kurdish issue came to a halt despite earlier positive developments on the issue. Turkey was struck by the deadliest terrorist attack in its modern history, on 10 October in Ankara, claiming the lives of scores of demonstrators gathering for a peace rally sponsored by trade unions and opposition parties' youth branches. It is essential that swift and transparent investigations are conducted into these heinous acts which were aimed to destabilise and harm Turkey's democracy. Turkey is moderately prepared in the area of public administration reform. It has a strong public service and is committed to a user-oriented administration. However, impetus for a more comprehensive reform is weak. Recent dismissals and demotions in the context of the fight against the ‘parallel structure’ were a source of concern. Civil society has remained active, growing in numbers and continuing to be involved in many spheres of public life, but restrictions to freedom of assembly remain a serious concern. Turkey's judicial system has some level of preparation. The independence of the judiciary and the principle of separation of powers have been undermined and judges and prosecutors have been under strong political pressure. The government's campaign against the alleged ‘parallel structure’ within the state was actively pursued, at times encroaching on the independence of the judiciary. Substantial efforts are needed to restore and ensure its independence. As regards the fight against corruption, Turkey has some level of preparation to effectively prevent and fight corruption. Turkey's track record in the fight against corruption remains inadequate. Corruption remains widespread. The undue influence by the executive in the investigation and prosecution of high-profile corruption cases continues to constitute a major concern. Turkey has achieved some level of preparation in the fight against organised crime. Financial investigations remain under-used. Precautionary freezing of assets is rarely applied and the level of assets confiscated is low. The absence of data protection legislation is an impediment for wider cooperation with EU agencies and Member States. Turkey’s Constitution guarantees the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Implementation had considerably improved over the past few years. However, major shortcomings remain. The enforcement of rights stemming from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is not fully ensured. There is an urgent need to adopt a comprehensive framework law on combating discrimination in line with European standards. Turkey also needs to effectively guarantee the rights of women, children, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) individuals and ensure sufficient attention to the social inclusion of vulnerable groups such as the Roma. There was significant backsliding in the areas of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Legislation on internal security contradicts the measures outlined in the March 2014 action plan on the prevention of violations of the ECHR by granting broad discretionary powers to the law enforcement agencies without adequate oversight. After several years of progress on freedom of expression, serious backsliding was seen over the past two years, with some level of preparation in this field. While it had been possible to discuss some sensitive and controversial issues in a free environment, ongoing and new criminal cases against journalists, writers or social media users are of considerable concern. Changes to the internet law, which are a significant setback from European standards, increased the government’s powers to block content without a court order on an unduly wide range of grounds. Turkey supported the resumption of the talks on the Cyprus settlement in May and expressed its support for the UNSG Special Advisor’s efforts. Turkey’s continued commitment and contribution in concrete terms to this comprehensive settlement remains crucial. However, Turkey has still not fulfilled its obligation to ensure full and non-discriminatory implementation of the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement and has not removed all obstacles to the free movement of goods, including restrictions on direct transport links with Cyprus. There was no progress on normalising bilateral relations with the Republic of Cyprus. The conclusions on Turkey that were adopted by the Council (General Affairs and External Relations) on 11 December 2006 and endorsed by the European Council on 14/15 December 2006 remain in force. They stipulate that negotiations will not be opened on eight chapters relating to Turkey’s restrictions regarding the Republic of Cyprus and no chapter will be provisionally closed until the Commission confirms that Turkey has fully implemented the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement. Turkey needs to commit itself unequivocally to good neighbourly relations and to the peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the United Nations Charter, having recourse, if necessary, to the International Court of Justice. In this context, the EU has expressed once again serious concern and urged Turkey to avoid any kind of threat or action directed against a Member State, or source of friction or actions that damages good neighbourly relations and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Regarding the economic criteria, the Turkish economy is well advanced and can be considered a functioning market economy. Economic growth has been moderate. Turkey continued to face external and internal imbalances, calling for adjustments in monetary and fiscal policies as well as an acceleration of comprehensive structural reforms. The large current account deficit continued to contribute to the economy's vulnerability to shifts in global monetary conditions and risk sentiment. On the internal side, inflation continued to run at a relatively high rate, which is problematic in terms of macro-economic stability, resource allocation and re-distributive effects. It again exceeded the official target; nevertheless the central bank cut interest rates. Public debt has attained a sustainable level, but the general government structural balance has been significantly negative. Unemployment increased slightly to an annual average of 9.9 %. Some progress was made in structural reforms such as improving schooling rates and further liberalising the energy sector. Such reforms need to accelerate to improve the functioning of the markets for goods, services and labour. Turkey has a good level of preparation in acquiring the capacity to cope with the competitive pressure and market forces within the EU. The quality of education and gender equality in education needs particular attention. Efforts are needed to ensure the transparency of state aid and to remove constraints and exceptions in the area of public procurement. Regarding its ability to take on the obligations of membership, Turkey has continued to align with the acquis, albeit at a slower pace, and has achieved a good level of preparation in many areas. Turkey is well advanced in the areas of company law, financial services, trans-European networks and science and research. The country has also achieved a good level of preparation in the areas of free movement of goods, intellectual property law, enterprise and industrial policy, customs union and external relations. Turkey remained highly mobilised to tackle the extraordinary migration and asylum challenges. Turkey has achieved a good level of preparation in the area of financial control. Further significant efforts are however needed to implement public internal financial control at all levels. Turkey is only moderately prepared on public procurement as important gaps remain in its alignment. Turkey is also moderately prepared in the area of statistics where further significant efforts are needed across the board. In all areas, more attention needs to be given to enforce legislation whilst many areas require further significant progress to achieve legislative alignment with the EU acquis. In the past year, events in Syria and Iraq meant Turkey had to face a further increase in the number of refugees and displaced people. Turkey is currently hosting the largest refugee population in the world, of which close to 2 million are Syrians. Managing such a huge influx of refugees and displaced persons is a major challenge for Turkey, which has already spent more than EUR 6.7 billion to this purpose. 2.Political criteria and enhanced political dialogue

2.1.Democracy Elections The 7 June general election saw a very high 84 % turnout, a clear sign of the strength of Turkish democracy. All major political parties won seats in the new parliament. Fundamental freedoms in the election period were generally respected but a substantial number of attacks on candidates and party offices took place. The President’s active role in the campaign, perceived as favouring the ruling party, and the increased pressure on the media gave cause for concern. A government could not be formed and repeat elections took place on 1 November, again with a very high turnout of 85 %. All major political parties re-won seats in the parliament with the ruling party securing enough votes to form a majority government. The security of the repeat election was ensured despite concerns due to the situation notably in the east and southeast of the country. Media freedom remained an area of serious concern. Shortcomings in the legal framework regulating elections need to be addressed as a priority, particularly the 10 % threshold of votes to be represented in parliament. The general election took place on 7 June. The 550 members of parliament were elected for a four-year term under a proportional representation system. All four major parties won representation in the new parliament. The ruling Justice and Development Party, AKP, obtained 40.87 % (258 seats); the main opposition Republican People’s Party, CHP, 24.95 % (132 seats); the Nationalist Movement Party, MHP, 16.29 % (80 seats); and the Peoples’ Democratic Party, HDP, 13.12 % (80 seats). HDP competed for the first time as a party, instead of putting forward independent candidates. It succeeded in reaching out beyond its core voters to pass the 10 % national threshold necessary to obtain seats in parliament, the highest such threshold among Council of Europe member countries. Civil society played a valuable role in monitoring the electoral operations. The campaign was confrontational and focused on a possible shift to a presidential system of governance, the Kurdish peace process and socioeconomic issues. Fundamental freedoms were generally respected. However, a high number of attacks on candidates and party offices took place, some resulting in fatalities. According to international observers, the involvement of the President was perceived as favouring the ruling party and as overstepping the President’s constitutional prerogatives. The use of public resources to support the AKP campaign was criticised. The media faced increased pressure and intimidation, which contributed to self-censorship. Concerns were raised over the transparency and independence of the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) and the transparency of the election administration, in particular the lack of judicial remedy in election matters. A government could not be formed by the constitutional deadline and repeat elections took place on 1 November, again with a very high turnout of 85 %. Reported results show that the AKP obtained 49.5 % (317 seats), CHP 25.3 % (134 seats), MHP 11.9 % (40 seats) and HDP 10.8 % (59 seats). The ruling AKP secured enough votes to form a majority government. The atmosphere of the campaign was affected by a challenging security environment, in particular the terrorist bomb attack in Ankara on 10 October. There were the increased tensions across the country which included attacks on media outlets and on party members, offices and campaign staff. According to international observers, citizens could choose between genuine and diverse political alternatives, however the campaign environment limited the ability to campaign freely and media freedom was an area of serious concern. Adopting a legal basis for international and domestic election observers would increase trust in the electoral process. Campaign financing is not regulated in a comprehensive manner, limiting the transparency and accountability of the process. Parliament Political confrontation ahead of the general election continued to hamper parliament’s work. The parliament in office after the 7 June election convened only exceptionally as elections were repeated on 1 November. There was no progress in aligning the legal framework on political parties and parliamentary immunity with European standards. A comprehensive reform of parliament’s rules and procedures is also needed to improve the inclusivity, transparency and quality of law-making and effective oversight of the executive. Structured civil society consultation arrangements should be developed as part of the legislative and policy-making processes. The new parliament needs to give priority to addressing these long-standing shortcomings. The system of parliamentary immunity lacks specific and objective criteria for taking decisions on lifting immunity. Such decisions should be based on the merits of the case and not subject to political considerations. A restrictive interpretation of the Constitution and shortcomings in anti-terror legislation continue to pose a risk to the freedom of expression of members of parliament (MPs). Legal framework on elections and political parties needs to be aligned with European standards. The election requirement that a party must obtain at least 10 % of valid votes to be represented in parliament is still in place. The rules on the closure of political parties are unchanged. There are important shortcomings on funding for political parties and election campaigns (see Fight against corruption). Comprehensive ethical regulations for members of parliament, such as declaration of assets and rules on conflict of interest, are yet to be adopted. Parliament’s ability to perform its key functions of law-making and oversight of the executive continued to be dominated by political confrontation and several plenary debates were marred by incidents. Key laws were most often prepared and adopted without sufficient consultation with stakeholders and debate in parliament. Drafts with significant impact on fundamental freedoms were not referred to the committee on human rights or to the committee for EU harmonisation. Omnibus laws were again widely used to amend legislation in unrelated policy fields. The absence of a stable and forward-looking agenda hampered the involvement of MPs and stakeholders. Media accreditation and rules for inviting stakeholders were applied selectively, limiting the transparency of parliamentary work. There was no progress on reforming the parliamentary rules and procedures to improve the inclusiveness, transparency and quality of law-making. Traditional instruments of parliamentary oversight of the executive, including parliamentary questions and investigative committees, were frequently used. However, the effectiveness of these instruments remained limited as the follow-up by the executive was generally insufficient. The work and reports of parliamentary investigative committees received good media coverage, but a court decision prohibited media from reporting on the outcome of the investigative committee on allegations of high level corruption cases. The parliament in office after the 7 June election convened only exceptionally as elections were repeated on 1 November. There was no improvement in parliament’s oversight of public spending. Scrutiny of public expenditure remained superficial in the absence of a specialised committee with technical expertise to follow up reports from the Turkish Court of Accounts. Governance A government could not be formed after the 7 June election and an interim government took office in the run up to the repeat election. The outgoing government made efforts to reinvigorate the EU accession process, which needs to be pursued with renewed determination. The outgoing government’s campaign against the alleged ‘parallel structure’ within the state was actively pursued, at times encroaching on the independence of the judiciary. The President remained engaged in a wide range of domestic and foreign policy issues which led within Turkey to criticism that he was overstepping constitutional prerogatives. The Kurdish peace process effectively came to a halt in the wake of a resurgence of violence by the PKK leading to an extensive governmental response. It is imperative to resume the Kurdish peace process as a matter of urgency. In his first year as Turkey’s first directly elected President, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan remained actively engaged in key domestic and foreign policy issues. His priorities included the adoption of a new constitution setting up a presidential system of governance and fighting against the alleged ‘parallel structure’ within the state under the influence of the Gülen Movement. On several occasions the President publicly challenged other institutions, notably the judiciary and the central bank. He made a number of statements against the media or other forms of expression. The opposition criticised the President for overstepping his powers, in particular for not keeping to the traditional conciliatory role assigned by the Constitution. A government could not be formed after the 7 June election and an interim government took office on 30 August in the run up to the repeat election. In the period before the elections, the outgoing government led by Prime Minister Davutoğlu maintained continuity in key policy areas and put emphasis on the EU accession process. It implemented its communication strategy, including by holding a series of consultations with civil society across Turkey. Only a few reforms were introduced, and several pieces of legislation that were adopted, such as the internal security package, were not meeting key European standards. After initial positive developments in settling the Kurdish issue, the peace process effectively came to a halt in July, in the wake of a resurgence of violence by the PKK and the government's extensive response that followed. The government holds a key responsibility to create the conditions for the resumption of the peace process (see Situation in the east and south-east). The fight against the alleged ‘parallel structure’ was formally included in the governmental programme and in the agenda of the National Security Council. Significant reassignments and dismissals in the police, civil service and judiciary continued (see also Public administration reform). Members of the executive made public statements on the ongoing judicial investigations targeting members of the alleged ‘parallel structure’, thus interfering with the independence of the judiciary. These judicial investigations expanded significantly, with charges ranging from illegal wiretapping and espionage to belonging to an armed terror organisation. Any such allegation needs to be examined with due respect for the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. Transparent procedures and due process need to be applied in line with the Constitution. Regarding local government, fiscal decentralisation remains limited despite the 2012 amendment to the Law on Metropolitan Municipalities, which extended the scope of municipalities’ powers. Municipalities need the necessary financial resources to carry out the responsibilities transferred to them. The Ombudsman was active and has built up its capacity of handling ordinary cases of maladministration. In 2014, it took decisions on 89 % of 7 167 complaints received. In 2015, the caseload increased sharply, reaching 25 000 at the end of August. Public administration improved its follow-up on the Ombudsman’s recommendations to 38 % in 2014 from 24 % in 2013. The Ombudsman lacks ex officio powers to initiate investigations and to intervene in cases with legal remedies. The institution was not involved in cases of human rights' violations in the east and south-east.

The legal framework insufficiently protects Turkey’s eight independent regulatory authorities from undue political interference. Their work needs to become more transparent. Civil society Civil society has remained active, growing in numbers and continuing to be involved in many spheres of public life in Turkey, including electoral monitoring. Some progress was made in improving cooperation between the government and civil society organisations. The authorities have continued their engagement, albeit to a lesser degree, with organisations focused on human rights. Systematic and inclusive mechanisms for consulting civil society need to be put in place, notably on new legislation. The legal, financial and administrative environment needs to be more conducive to the development of civil society. An empowered civil society is a crucial component of any democratic system and should be recognised and treated as such by the state institutions. There are good examples of interaction between the authorities and civil society, including preparation of the Tenth National Development Plan (2014-2018) and four well-attended meetings across the country focusing on EU issues. The EU-Turkey Civil Society Dialogue programmes have now involved more than 1 650 Turkish civil society organisations (CSOs) with their counterparts in the EU. The programmes contribute to the development of civil society and enable greater recognition of CSOs at the local level. However, in the absence of structured arrangements for their participation, CSOs have frequently not been able to take an active part in the policy and legislative processes. Systemic problems, such as restrictions on registering and the procedures for the authorisation and functioning of associations, need to be addressed. A number of CSOs have also continued to see their regular operations challenged through court closure cases, penalties, restrictions or discriminatory practices by public authorities. Restrictions on freedom of assembly remained a problem for segments of civil society (see freedom of association and freedom of assembly). In some cases the activities of human rights defenders were also subject to penalties, investigations and court cases. Current legislation, including tax rules, is not conducive to stimulating private donations to CSOs. Civil society remains financially vulnerable and dependent on public project grants. At the same time, public funding has not been sufficiently transparent. Civilian oversight of the security forces The situation in this area remained stable, without undue interference in politics by the military. Civilian oversight of the law enforcement duties of the gendarmerie was widened. The military and intelligence services lack accountability in parliament. In the reporting period, the armed forces did not exert any undue influence on politics and abstained from commenting on political issues beyond their professional remit. The Supreme Military Council, composed of civilian and military leaders, appointed a new Chief of the General Staff and force commanders. The Chief of the General Staff continued to report to the Prime Minister rather than to the Minister of Defence. In March 2015, a High Criminal Court acquitted all defendants in the re-trial of the ‘Sledgehammer’ case of an alleged coup plot. The judicial investigation into the 28 February ‘postmodern coup’ of 1997 continued. The parliamentary security and intelligence committee continued to have a very limited oversight mandate. The legal framework for overseeing military expenditure is yet to be improved. Access to audit reports from the Turkish Court of Accounts on security, defence and intelligence agencies remains constrained. On the positive side, the internal security package widened civilian oversight of the law enforcement duties of the gendarmerie. The authority to appoint, suspend and supervise gendarmerie personnel in the provinces was transferred from the Gendarmerie General Command to the Ministry of Interior. The Law on Provincial Administrations still provides for the involvement of the armed forces in domestic security operations without civilian oversight. 2.2.Public administration reform Turkey is moderately prepared with the reform of its public administration. Some progress was made in the past year, mainly with service delivery to citizens and businesses, thanks to a strong commitment to a user-oriented administration. Turkey benefits from a strong public service and administrative capacity. However, political and administrative engagement for a more comprehensive public administration reform remains a challenge. Recent dismissals and demotions in the context of the fight against the ‘parallel structure’ were a source of concern. In the coming year, Turkey should in particular: → focus on more coordinated management of human resources, including introduction of a modern and integrated information system and more transparent procedures for recruitments, promotions and dismissals to safeguard merit-based principles; → start to develop and systematically implement impact assessments to support policy- and law-making; → allocate more funding to support strategic plans and legislative proposals. Public service and human resources management Turkey’s public service is regulated by the Law on Civil Servants which establishes several categories of civil servants covered by specific legal acts. Recruitments and promotions are in principle merit-based following mandatory centralised entry examinations. However, concerns remain as regards the application of the merit-based principle to senior management positions. As there is possible political influence during the oral interview phase of the entry examination and as a high number of employees have been converted into permanent civil servants without entry examinations, the credibility of the system is undermined. Female representation has slightly increased, reaching 36.5 % in the civil service and 9.7 % at senior management level in 2015. The 3 % quota for disabled persons could not be filled and more than 24 000 such posts remained vacant. Merit-based principles for dismissals have been legally established and procedures are in place to allow dismissed civil servants to appeal. However, the recent dismissals and demotions of a significant number of civil servants in managerial positions on grounds of alleged participation in the ‘parallel structure’ within state institutions are a source of concern. The State Personnel Administration, under the supervision of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, has the central coordination responsibility for the management of human resources. However, it lacks the coordination and monitoring capacity to ensure that modern human resources management standards are systematically implemented. Human resources management units are in place in various services, but implement different approaches. A modern human resources management information system providing real-time data on the civil service is necessary to ensure efficient overall management of the civil service. The civil service remuneration system is regulated according to the principle of equal pay for equal work. In practice, however, there are some flaws when it comes to transparency. Training strategies and plans are in place to ensure professional development of civil servants, but they could be further improved. Turkey has established an ethics board for civil servants in the Prime Ministry and has set up ethics committees in public authorities to foster integrity in the civil service. The Criminal Code criminalises active and passive bribery, corruption and abuse of office. Disciplinary procedures are regulated in the Law on Civil Servants. However, there are no integrity plans in place. In addition, the existing system of asset declaration and disclosure, conflict of interest and post-employment of civil servants fails to actively promote integrity in the civil service.

Policy development and coordination Turkey has the legal and institutional structure in place to ensure a consistent policy-making system, including on European integration. Policy coordination among central government units is generally strong. However, there is no coordinated annual planning and monitoring of whole-of-government performance. Sectoral strategies are not developed in a uniform manner and they are not systematically costed, therefore potentially jeopardising their implementation, in case budgetary needs have been underestimated. Current arrangements partially ensure that policy and legislative development is inclusive and evidence-based. Ministries have well-developed capacities with dedicated policy and legal units. The Ministry for European Affairs, in coordination with the Directorates-General for EU Affairs in relevant ministries, has developed a well-functioning system to steer alignment with the acquis, the body of EU law. A regulatory obligation exists for inter-ministerial and public consultations on draft policies and legislation, but in practice public consultations are neither systematically organised nor monitored. Regulatory impact assessments are also not systematically carried out, despite the legal requirement. Financial impact assessments are not generally published for strategy documents. Ensuring the quality and uniform application of impact assessments is a key challenge. Public scrutiny of government work is weak and parliamentary scrutiny suffers from the limited capacity of the parliamentary committees. The oversight role has been weakened by the government’s slow response to parliamentary questions. Accountability of the administration The state administration is organised in a hierarchical and rational way. Ministries report to the Council of Ministers and constitutional bodies to the parliament. Public agencies have clearly established lines of accountability to their parent institutions. State institutions are required to submit annual accountability reports on the use of resources to achieve targets. These reports are, however, not specifically followed up by the Council of Ministers. Regarding lines of accountability within institutions, there is a culture of managerial accountability and delegation of responsibilities (see Chapter 32). Legal privileges granted to public officials, notably the requirement for prior authorisation from their administrative hierarchy, continue to protect public officials from criminal and administrative investigations. The relevant internal and external oversight arrangements are in place to ensure the citizens' right to good administration. The Ombudsman’s active approach in this area is a positive development. In 2014 the administration improved its follow-up of the Ombudsman’s recommendations (See Governance). The right to access public information is regulated by the law on the right to information. Broad exemptions are, however, allowed on the grounds of protecting state secrets, commercial secrets and personal data. There is no central body or independent commissioner to oversee the implementation of the law. The right to administrative justice and fair treatment is regulated in the Code of Administrative Procedures. Administrative disputes are dealt with by the administrative courts, tax courts, regional administrative courts and the Council of State. The efficiency of administrative courts is considered to be high. The Constitution ensures public liability and the right to seek compensation, but practical application is difficult to assess since no institution is responsible for collecting the relevant data. Public financial management Turkey has pursued reforms in various public finance areas, but there is no overarching public financial management reform programme that would better ensure sequencing of these reforms. The annual budget is prepared as part of the medium-term budgetary framework. Overall fiscal discipline is ensured despite the absence of an independent fiscal council. The main elements for ensuring budget transparency are in place as the annual financial report includes full information and is made available to parliament on time. Since January a new accounting regulation aims to improve financial reporting during the year and provides a new format for end-of-year reporting. Revolving funds are a specific cause of concern as they are not included in the annual budget process or in the Treasury single account. Service delivery to citizens and businesses Turkey has a strong commitment to a user-oriented administration, in particular by expanding e-government services. The number of services provided through the e-government gateway has doubled over the past two years. At the end of 2014 a quarter of the population was using the e-services, and public satisfaction rate with them is high. General access to public services is good but disabled persons’ access to public services, including public buildings, remained low. In the absence of a law on general administrative procedures, the legal framework on administrative procedures is very fragmented. Further efforts are needed to simplify administrative procedures. Strategic framework for public administration reform Turkey has no overarching strategy for public administration reform but several planning documents, especially the 10th development plan, its 2014 annual programme and the strategic plans of the institutions, cover a number of relevant areas. Political support and administrative impetus for a more comprehensive reform agenda are a challenge. There is no cross-cutting system for monitoring and reporting on the planning documents, since management of public administration reform is highly decentralised and the department in the Prime Ministry responsible for strengthening the administration lacks sufficient coordination mandate and capacity. Financial sustainability of the overall public administration reform is not ensured, as the key planning documents do not specify the expected costs. They are also not reflected in the medium-term expenditure framework. 2.3.Rule of law Functioning of the judiciary Turkey’s judicial system reached some level of preparation. Between 2007 and 2013, the judicial system had achieved significant improvements, related to its independence, the quality of trials, juvenile justice, a substantial reduction in use of police custody, more limited use of pre-trial detention, and respect for human and fundamental rights, including abiding by the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Turkey also worked towards making the judiciary more efficient, achieving some real successes such as wider use of information and communication technologies. However, there has been no progress since early 2014. The independence of the judiciary and respect of the principle of separation of powers have been undermined and judges and prosecutors have been under strong political pressure. In the coming year, Turkey should in particular:

→ create a political and legal environment that allows the judiciary to perform its duties in an independent and impartial manner, with the executive and legislature fully respecting the separation of powers; → limit the role and influence of executive power within the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors and provide sufficient guarantees against transfers of judges against their will; → introduce further safeguards against any interference by the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors in judicial proceedings. Strategic documents A revised judicial reform strategy was adopted in April 2015. The strategy targets the main shortcomings of the judicial system. However, it is a very general planning document, specifying lead institutions and broad timelines, but providing only limited detail on envisaged steps and actions and no assessment of budgetary implications. Management bodies The High Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) is the key institution managing the judiciary. It is responsible for appointing, transferring, promoting, suspending and dismissing judges and prosecutors, as well as for dealing with disciplinary issues. The Council also renders final decisions on Ministry of Justice proposals to abolish a court or change a court’s jurisdiction. 15 of the HSYK’s 22 members are chosen from among judges and prosecutors. The Council independently administers a budget of EUR 12.5 million. HSYK is supported by a well-staffed office led by a Secretary-General. However, annual reports, minutes of meetings and other relevant documents are not published. Between 2007 and 2013 the process of judicial reform in Turkey has progressed towards implementing European standards of effectiveness, independence and impartiality. The most important building block was the reform of the HSYK in 2010. However, following legislative changes in 2014 and personnel changes in the Council, the executive reasserted its influence over the Council. As ex officio members, the Minister of Justice, acting as president of the Council, and his Undersecretary play an extensive role in the work of the HSYK, particularly on disciplinary issues and transfers. The 2014 legislation also gave the Minister increased powers to appoint the staff of the Council’s secretariat. More transparency in the work of HSYK and its strict adherence to procedures are needed to strengthen its credibility and trust in the judiciary. Independence and impartiality Judicial independence and impartiality are enshrined in the Constitution and the law. On the basis of the existing legislation, an electronic system allocates cases to the courts and judges which is though not entirely random. However, in practice, there are numerous reports of selective justice and political interference in court cases. Representatives of the executive have continued to publicly undermine the credibility of the judiciary as a whole. The strong role of representatives of the executive in the HSYK raises concerns about the Council’s independence. Decisions to launch disciplinary proceedings against judges and public prosecutors, as well as the annual routine inspection schemes, require approval by the Minister of Justice who, as ex officio president of the Council, supervises the inspection board. The Minister’s power, again as ex officio president of the Council, to appoint the personnel of the Council secretariat also undermines the Council’s independence. There are important limitations to the principle of immovability of judges. Accusations of conspiracy by the executive in the fight against the ‘parallel structure’ led to a high number of judges being transferred against their will in the past two years. With the exception of dismissals, HSYK decisions such as transfers of judges against their will are not open to judicial review. A number of disciplinary and criminal cases against judges and prosecutors have lacked due process, and in some instances have been based on their rulings. This contradicted basic principles of the rule of law and considerably undermined the independence of the judiciary. (See Chapter 23) Accountability There is no code of ethics for judges and prosecutors. Lawyers have to abide by the professional principles of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations. Integrity training is part of the curriculum for initial training but is not a criterion in the initial selection and nomination process, or in the appointments to senior positions. The HSYK inspection board is the authority responsible for launching disciplinary proceedings and for taking decisions on disciplinary and ethical matters. In 2013, 2014 and 2015, respectively, 13, 6 and 9 judges and prosecutors were dismissed. All judges/judges of High Courts, including members of HSYK, have to declare their assets. Professionalism and competence Candidates to become judges and prosecutors are recruited through a combination of a written examination and an interview. The interview is conducted by a board of seven members. Currently, five of them are senior officials of the Ministry of Justice and the other two come from the Justice Academy. The HSYK does not play any role in this process. The HSYK exercises the power to appoint and transfer judges and public prosecutors. The Undersecretary of the Ministry of Justice has full voting rights on these issues. The HSYK is also responsible for evaluating the performance of and promoting judges and prosecutors. Assessment criteria for the promotion process are published in the Official Gazette. The HSYK can also dismiss a judge or prosecutor from his profession following a specified procedure. The dismissed judge or prosecutor has the right to appeal to judicial bodies. However, there have been numerous cases of dismissals being processed hastily. Quality of justice Pre-service and in-service training of candidate judges and prosecutors is given by the Justice Academy. The executive appoints the President of the academy and deputies, following the 2014 February legislative changes. There is no strategy for developing systematic training for legal practitioners and increasing the capacity of the academy. With 11.9 professional judges and 6.2 prosecutors per 100 000 inhabitants and a budget of EUR 3.2 billion in 2015, representing 0.5% of GDP and 42 € per inhabitant, the judiciary’s human and financial resources in 2015 seem proportionate to the challenges. Mediation and other various alternative dispute resolution mechanisms are in place but are only marginally used. Overall, the quality of judicial decisions has improved in recent years, but the weak reasoning and poor quality of certain indictments – without appropriate selection and assessment of relevance of evidence to support the case – remain a serious criminal justice issue (e.g. in terrorism-related cases). Consideration is being given to establishing a court of appeals, which would help ensure consistency of case law.

Courts across the country tend to have modern ICT equipment. In most courts, cases are assigned through an automated IT system which offers lawyers and parties protected access to important information about judicial proceedings, and is used for the purpose of statistical reporting. Turkey has observer status in the European Judicial Training Network (EJTN). However, Courts do not issue regular activity reports. Efficiency In general, the Turkish judicial system has the capacity to handle the caseload it receives. In 2012, the backlogs of civil, criminal and administrative cases were reduced, with a clearance rate, at first instance, at 116% for civil cases, 127% for administrative cases and 108% for criminal cases. However, comparable data for the years 2013 and 2014 are not available and this positive trend cannot at present be confirmed. The heavy and increasing workload of the court of cassation supports the ongoing reflection on creating an appellate court system. The issue of length of proceedings has been a long-standing problem in the Turkish judiciary. Additionally, public authorities’ disrespect towards some court rulings has also a negative impact on their enforcement. Reflecting the size of the country, the judicial network is complex. There is a sufficient number of support staff but no human resources management strategy exists. Fight against corruption Turkey has reached some level of preparation in the fight against corruption. No progress has been achieved in the past year, in the absence of legislative developments on public transparency. Corruption perception remains widespread. The legal and institutional framework that allows undue influence by the executive in the investigation and prosecution of high-profile corruption cases constitutes a major source of concern. Turkey does not have an independent anti-corruption body. A broad political consensus is required to tackle corruption properly. In the coming year, Turkey should in particular: → strengthen the independence of prosecution and law enforcement agencies in high-level corruption cases; → adopt legislation ensuring deterrent sanctions for corruption offences and ensure their effective enforcement; → adopt an updated anti-corruption strategy and action plan setting out a clear vision and selecting a realistic number of priorities to tackle corruption effectively as well as establish an independent anti-corruption body in line with UNCAC provisions. Track record The track record of investigations, prosecutions and convictions remained inadequate. This was particularly true of high-level corruption cases implicating political figures. Prosecutions in such cases, including the Deniz Feneri case and the December 2013 corruption investigations, resulted in no convictions. Serious concerns remain over the effectiveness of these investigations due to interference by the executive. Political authorities should ensure law enforcement bodies are fully empowered to act effectively and impartially when investigating corruption allegations. A total of 279 574 corruption investigations were conducted in 2014, leading to 64 239 convictions. Public procurement — in particular concessions and public and private partnerships — as well as land administration, energy, construction and transportation remain particularly vulnerable to corruption. Financial investigations are not conducted systematically in cases of corruption and organised crime. The freezing of alleged criminal assets as a protective measure continued to work effectively. The number of corruption cases in which criminal assets were confiscated increased from 11 048 in 2013 to 12 324 in 2014. The level of detection and investigation of foreign bribery offences remained limited. With few exceptions, sentences are not deterrent and courts defer judgments on major corruption offences. Political influence on judges and prosecutors and other law enforcement officers was a serious cause of concern as politicians continued to frequently publicly criticise and exert pressure on ongoing corruption investigations. This was exemplified by the removal, suspension or subsequent prosecution of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officers, in particular those who led the 17-25 December 2013 corruption investigations and the Deniz Feneri case. The Constitutional Court was systematically late with its decisions on external financial audits, publishing its financial audit decisions on AKP and CHP 2010 accounts only in December 2014 (see also Chapter 23- Judiciary and fundamental rights). In the past five years no political party has been referred to the Public Prosecutor for violating the party financing provisions of the Law on Political Parties. The existing system of asset declaration and verification has limited scope and asset declarations are not made public. In 2014, nine public officials were convicted and 42 acquitted on charges of illicitly acquiring or concealing property. One judgment was deferred. Turkey still needs to establish a proper asset disclosure and conflict of interest mechanism. Whistle-blowing is rare given the inadequate protection provided by the current law. The track record of access to information is positive. In 2014, only 2.7 % of requests for access to information were refused, against 3.4 % in 2013. The share of appeals refused by the Board of Review of the Access to Information fell from 50.6 % in 2013 to 36.3 % in 2014. However, at just a quarter of the population, public awareness of the right to information remained low. Protection of state secrets, commercial secrets and individual privacy were the most common grounds for refusing information requests. Institutional framework On prevention of corruption, an independent anti-corruption body has not been established yet. The inadequate policy coordination among the various institutions in charge of preventing corruption constitutes a major impediment to the effectiveness of the anti-corruption policy. The Prime Ministry Inspection Board coordinates preventive anti-corruption measures. However, the board lacks both independence and ex officio investigation powers. The Prime Ministry Communications Centre (BIMER) continued to act as the primary body for receiving corruption and maladministration complaints. In 2014 alone, the centre received more than 460 000 complaints, 95 % of which were submitted online or via a hotline. Anti-corruption awareness-raising campaigns have not been conducted on a systematic basis. The Ombudsman remained silent on corruption. No comprehensive policy is in place yet to fight corruption in the private sector.

As regards the law enforcement and prosecution side, the country lacks a specialised court and prosecution service designated by the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) with the permanent authority to deal with anti-corruption investigations. In addition to the lack of independence of the HSYK and law enforcement officers, the existing legal framework prevents effective anti-corruption investigations. Information-sharing between police and the Financial Intelligence Unit is automated and electronic access to databases by the relevant agencies is broadly in place. Legal framework Although passive and active bribery are defined in the Criminal Code, the definition of the latter is not in line with the recommendations of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO). The legislation on political party and electoral campaign financing is deficient. The parliamentary elections in June and November 2015 took place in a legal and institutional context in which individual persons such as party candidates and independent candidates were not subject to any of the transparency requirements that apply to political parties. Due to numerous exceptions allowed by the public procurement law, public tenders remain particularly vulnerable to corruption. In the Penal Code as amended in 2013, penalties imposed for bid-rigging are not deterrent and suspects convicted of tender-rigging charges can benefit from deferred judgments. These were applied to 572 convicts in 2014. Anti-corruption legislation is inadequate to prevent, prosecute and penalise conflicts of interest effectively and to ensure that asset declarations become an effective tool in the fight against corruption. The penalties for these offences are not deterrent and enforcement remains weak. Turkey has no legislation governing lobbying. Frequent changes to protective measures in the Criminal Procedures Code, such as legal limitations on probation, arrest, search and confiscation, hamper the effectiveness of investigations. Turkey is party to the UN Convention against Corruption and has criminalised the unfair acquisition of property by public officials. The first implementation review was published in June. The country signed and ratified the relevant Council of Europe anti-corruption conventions and the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions. However, the OECD’s Foreign Bribery Report published in December 2014 expressed concern over Turkey’s limited enforcement of the foreign anti-bribery legislation. Strategic framework The initial objectives set out in the 2010-2014 anti-corruption strategy and action plan have not been met in the absence of legislative developments on public transparency. The initial action plan highlighted a total of 28 preventive, enforcement and awareness-raising measures. Initial objectives such as revising the legislation on state and trade secrets, public procurement and the permission system in investigations related to public officials have not been addressed so far. Civil society has participated only marginally in the implementation of the strategy. There was no transparency in the work of the working groups as reports on their work are not public. Turkey has not updated its anti-corruption strategy or action plan. Fight against organised crime Turkey has achieved some level of preparation in the fight against organised crime. Some progress has been made over the past year to increase investigation capacity and adopt and implement new strategies in the field. However, statistics on the number of final convictions and other important indicators are not available. Financial investigations remain under-used. Precautionary freezing of assets is rarely applied and the level of assets confiscated is low. In the coming year, Turkey should in particular: → adopt sound data protection legislation in line with European standards to create the conditions for efficient and effective international police and judicial cooperation, including with Europol and Eurojust; → take measures to improve its track record, in particular by dismantling criminal networks and confiscating criminal assets; → collect and use appropriate aggregate statistics to facilitate threat assessment, policy development and implementation. Track record There are no statistics available for final convictions for serious and organised crime. Police carried out 61 operations in 2015 compared with 65 in 2014 and almost the double in 2013 for illegal possession of guns. The number of arrested suspects was 69, substantially less than in previous years (129 in 2014 and 653 in 2013). The number of migrants’ smugglers in 2014 was 803, most of them (624) of Turkish nationality. The number of suspicious transaction reports submitted to the Financial Crimes Investigation Board was 36 483 in 2014 compared with 25 592 in 2013; those on terrorism financing was 1 159 in the first semester of 2015 and 744 in 2014. There are no available statistics on trafficking in human beings, investigations and convictions for money laundering, precautionary freezing of assets during the initial phase of investigations or confiscation of criminal assets. The Turkish law enforcement authorities detained 117 686 suspects in 2014 in relation to 77 664 drug related crimes. Institutional and operational capacity Turkey has 432 768 police officers which corresponds to 557 per 100 000 inhabitants. Initial and in-service training is provided by the police academy. However, its capacity to provide specialised training is limited. Specialised units are in place to combat terrorism and trafficking in human beings, drugs and cybercrime, and for witness protection and financial investigations. Specialisation and effectiveness need to be developed through training and retention of staff in the respective units. The general level of police equipment is good in terms of vehicles, radio communication systems, software, hardware and premises. However, as part of the government's response to anti-corruption allegations in December 2013, the national police faced a high number of staff changes and reassignments as well as arrests and suspensions, which have impacted on the effective functioning of the relevant institutions. The various law enforcement agencies have numerous databases, for example on passports, human trafficking and gun licences. However, clear procedures governing mutual access and data sharing are lacking. Further specialisation of courts to deal with organised crime is needed. Inter-agency cooperation on the ground needs to be improved. An operational agreement with Europol is not in place due to the lack of data protection legislation in line with European standards. This is despite Turkey having concluded a strategic cooperation agreement with Europol in July 2004. International cooperation needs to be stepped up. There have been only a few cases of successful international cooperation on asset confiscation in the past five years despite requests for assistance in many cases. Since a Law on Witness Protection was adopted in January 2008, witness protection units have been established under the national police and Gendarmerie General Command in 78 provinces. A Witness Protection Board composed of 11 officials decides whether to launch protection measures. The witness protection law is applicable to crimes punishable by solitary confinement for life, life imprisonment and imprisonment for 10 years or more, as well as crimes committed as part of a criminal organisation as defined in the Penal Code and other laws with criminal provisions. There were 185 people enrolled in the witness protection scheme. The police and judiciary have signed a memorandum of understanding; however, their respective roles need to be defined more clearly to improve coordination.

In the fight against cybercrime, Turkey established a 24/7 contact point in the national police in line with the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime ratified in May 2014. Turkey signed the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data in January 1981 but has yet to ratify it. An amendment to the internet law in March 2015 allowing the Telecommunications Communications Presidency to remove or block access to content within four hours without a court order is a matter of concern (see also political criteria and Chapter 23 on Judiciary and fundamental rights). A National Cyber Security Council including senior representatives from relevant ministries and institutions has been set up. The Council has been tasked with developing a national policy to counter the cybercrime threat and, in particular, to defend key strategic assets and raise public awareness. The strategy and action plan on cyber security (2013-2014) are currently being updated, with the Ministry of Transport coordinating. A financial intelligence unit is in place within MASAK, the Financial Crimes Investigation Board. The number of suspicious transactions analysed by the board has been rising every year. The board has increased the number of investigation staff and is upgrading its IT infrastructure. Currently, it collects crime statistics on an annual basis. Information on suspicious transactions is used to help improve threat assessments and the development of national policies and strategies. Legal framework The Criminal Code is largely in line with the acquis covering specific types of crimes. A number of shortcomings in the investigation phase need to be addressed, including the timeline and detailed arrangements for using special investigation measures. The investigative powers of the border police and customs remain very limited and highly dependent on the police. The law on confiscation of criminal assets is partially in line with the acquis. Rules on third-party confiscation and extended confiscation and precautionary freezing of assets need to be aligned. The legislation to combat money laundering and financing of terrorism is largely in line with the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force, which has removed Turkey from its permanent monitoring process. Turkey has committed to work with the task force to address all issues identified in its mutual evaluation report. Strategic framework Turkey is providing input to the Serious and Organised Crime Threat Assessment, although it has not yet adopted Europol’s reporting methodology. Turkey is implementing its 2010-2015 national strategy and 2013-2015 action plan against organised crime under the coordination of the Ministry of Interior. On drugs, Turkey is implementing its 2013-2018 national strategy against drugs and 2013-2015 action plan under the coordination of the national police. The strategy and action plan address topics such as coordination, reduction of supply, prevention, treatment, rehabilitation, harm reduction, international cooperation, data collection, research and assessment. Following a Prime Ministry circular of November 2014, an anti-drug emergency action plan has entered into force with a number of complementary objectives. Turkey is currently updating its 2013-2014 strategy and action plan on cyber security in order to identify and address emerging cyber threats. A comprehensive multi-disciplinary and victim-oriented approach to human trafficking remains to be developed. Fight against terrorism Turkey was struck by the deadliest terrorist attack in its modern history, on 10 October in Ankara, an attack which followed a similar pattern to the one in Suruç in July, which claimed more than 30 lives and was attributed to Da'esh. Turkey has in recent months been giving priority to the PKK in its efforts to fight terrorism, particularly following a severe surge of violence in the country since July. The PKK remains on the EU list of terrorist organisations. Turkey is legitimate to defend itself against such terrorist violence, but measures taken need to be proportionate (see Situation in the east and south east). Turkey joined the international coalition against Da'esh in September 2014. Following the Da'esh attributed terrorist attack in Suruç in July, Turkey strengthened its engagement with the coalition and launched several air-strikes against Da'esh positions in Syria. It also reached an agreement with the US on the use of Incirlik base for the coalition forces. Turkey has been seriously affected by the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters transiting through the country and is a source for terrorist fighters. It has improved its regime for combating the financing of terrorism. Turkey’s active counter-terrorism dialogue with the EU has continued, with particular attention paid to foreign terrorist fighters on which an experts’ meeting was held in June. The phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters needs a dedicated approach by the intelligence and law enforcement community and a consistent judicial policy. A comprehensive strategy is needed to effectively prevent and counter radicalisation. This needs to be done in close cooperation with religious leaders and communities, social workers, the education system and youth organisations. 2.4.Human rights and the protection of minorities Overall situation Turkey’s Constitution guarantees the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Implementation had considerably improved in the last decade. However, major shortcomings remain. The enforcement of rights stemming from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is not yet fully ensured. There was significant backsliding in the past two years notably in the areas of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Legislation on internal security was adopted which contradicts the measures outlined in the March 2014 action plan on the prevention of violations of ECHR by granting broad discretionary powers to the law enforcement agencies without adequate judicial or independent parliamentary oversight. Most recently, the escalation of violence in the east and south east since July gave rise to serious concerns over human rights violations. Anti-terror measures taken in this context need to be proportionate. Turkey should widen the scope and improve the monitoring of the implementation of the action plan to cover all rights and the case law of the ECtHR. Shortcomings particularly affect the following areas: • Freedom of expression is frequently challenged, in particular through arbitrary and restrictive interpretation of the legislation, political pressure, dismissals and frequent court cases against journalists which also lead to self-censorship. • Freedom of assembly is overly restricted, in law and practice, in particular through disproportionate use of force in policing demonstrations and a lack of sanctions for law enforcement officers.

• Non-discrimination is not sufficiently enforced, in law and in practice, and the rights of the most vulnerable groups and of persons belonging to minorities are not sufficiently upheld. Gender-based violence, discrimination and hate speech against minorities, and respect for the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons are major areas of concern. • Criminal and anti-terror legislation is not yet in line with the ECtHR case law and the proportionality principle needs to be observed in practice. In line with the new reporting methodology, a detailed analysis of freedom of expression as a pilot area follows below. For a detailed analysis of developments on other human rights and the protection of minorities, see Chapter 23 — Judiciary and fundamental rights. For developments in the areas of trade union rights, non-discrimination and equal opportunities, see also Chapter 19 — Social policy and employment. Freedom of expression The country has reached some level of preparation on respect for freedom of expression, the media and the internet. After several years of progress, serious backsliding has been seen over the past two years. While in recent years it had been possible to discuss some sensitive and controversial issues in a free environment, ongoing and new criminal cases against journalists, writers or social media users are of serious concern. Changes to the internet law, which are a significant step back from European standards, increased the government’s powers to block content without court order on an unduly wide range of grounds. In addressing the shortcomings outlined here, in the coming year the country should in particular: → act against intimidation of journalists in all its forms: notably investigate all physical attacks and threats against journalists and actively prevent attacks on media outlets but also defuse the tense political climate which creates an environment curtailing freedom of speech in the media and on the internet; → ensure that defamation law and other similar offenses are not used as a means of putting pressure on critics by ensuring courts are fully aware of and apply the case law of the ECtHR; → ensure that existing legislation notably the internet law complies with European standards and is implemented in a manner which ensures proportionality and equality before the law. Intimidation of journalists While the number of journalists in prison in Turkey decreased significantly since 2011, it currently still exceeds 20, many of whom face or were convicted for charges under the anti-terror law. A high number of arrests, hearings, detentions, prosecutions as well as censorship cases and layoffs occurred, as the government maintained a strong pressure on media. Several international journalists were deported. Frequent threats and various types of intimidation from state and non-state agents against journalists and media outlets continue to be an issue of serious concern. Sporadic physical attacks against journalists have taken place, which are being investigated by the authorities. In the context of the escalating violence in the east and south east and increasing tensions across the country, a number of attacks on media outlets took place and the authorities took actions curtailing further freedom of media. Old cases of killings and assaults on journalists, including from the 1990s, continue to be investigated while some are closed due to the statute of limitations. There is a widened practice of court cases for alleged insult against the President being launched against journalists, writers, social media users and other members of the public, which may end with prison sentences, suspended sentences or punitive fines. This intimidating climate leads to increased self-censorship. Legislative environment By permitting undue restrictions, the Constitution does not fully protect the right to freedom of expression. A number of laws restrict freedom of expression and are not in line with European standards. The legislation on the internet was again changed in March 2015, increasing the government’s prerogatives to block content without a court order on an unduly wide range of grounds. Under the Criminal Code, prosecution for insulting high-level politicians, including the President, can result in a jail sentence of one to four years, which can be increased if the offence is committed publicly through media or social media. Such legislation is not in line with ECtHR case law. Insulting religion and blasphemy are criminal offences carrying penal sentences. In addition to prison terms, high fines have a deterrent effect on free media reporting. The legislation on hate speech is not in line with ECtHR case law. Legislation on the registration and accreditation of journalists as well as legislation on access to information are not entirely in line with international standards. Implementation/institutions Media blackouts about information considered as sensitive, including reporting on the terrorist attacks in Ankara and Suruç, are a recurrent trend. Criminal legislation on defamation against the state, its institutions, employees or other symbols of statehood is extensively used against journalists, lawyers and users of social media critical of the government and government officials. Blocking of websites with or without a court order continues. Turkey has made more requests to Twitter to delete content or suspend accounts than any other country in the world. The distinction between freedom of expression and hate speech is not clearly delineated. Divisions in the media prevent the profession from regulating itself and drawing up and implementing common rules on professional ethics. Public Service Broadcasters There are concerns about the editorial independence of the public service broadcaster, including its election coverage, which displayed a significant bias towards the ruling AKP party. Regulation of the public service broadcaster is not in line with European standards. The independence and neutrality of the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) remain a matter of concern as its members are elected by the parliament without civil society and professional and other relevant organisations being involved or represented in the Council. The Council’s work is fairly transparent as its decisions are published together with the supporting expert reports. RTÜK is also responsible for licensing. The lack of precise licensing rules can make the tender process vulnerable to undue political pressure. Economic factors The media market in Turkey is diverse. However, the lack of transparency on media ownership casts doubts on the independence of editorial policies. A small number of media groups dominate the media market which affiliated businesses have interests in energy, construction, real estate, trade, finance and tourism. Through these related interests, media outlets may be vulnerable to economic pressure from major customers, including the state. State-sponsored advertising is not fairly distributed across the media organs, distorting the market and adding to the economic pressures on some media outlets. Independent and sustainable financing of the public service broadcaster is not ensured. The broadcasting law does not ensure fair competition as it does not prevent monopolisation.

Professional organisations, Professional conditions The representation of journalists continues to be divided between the professional journalists associations and the pro-government union. Journalism is an increasingly precarious profession with low wages and job security. Working conditions, insufficient trade union rights and application of labour legislation, the difficulty of obtaining a press card and arbitrary accreditation decisions are major concerns. Situation in the east and south-east After initial positive developments in settling the Kurdish issue, the peace process effectively came to a complete halt in July, in the wake of a resurgence of violence by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the government's extensive response that followed. There were numerous casualties among civilians and members of the security forces. It is imperative that the Kurdish peace process resumes. It remains the best opportunity in a generation to solve a conflict that has claimed far too many lives. The new government needs to give priority to making progress towards democratisation and reconciliation. Regional disparities affecting the eastern and south-eastern regions, which are also shouldering a great number of refugees from the conflicts in Syria and Iraq, should also be gradually addressed. The year was marked by escalating violence, resulting in the halt of the settlement process of the Kurdish issue. Some initial positive developments had given reasons for hope of a new impetus. In February, a joint press conference by the Government and the pro-Kurdish party HDP was held and the call of the imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan to discuss the organisation's disarmament was announced. Options for a solution were widely and freely discussed, including the positions of the PKK, which remains on the EU list of terrorist organisations. However, already in October 2014 violent incidents took place, with some 50 casualties, in the context of the events in Syria and Kobane. The pre-election and election period were also tense, with a number of incidents, including a bomb attack on a HDP rally. The security situation deteriorated dramatically in July, shortly after the PKK announced considering ending the ceasefire, introduced in March 2013. A spiral of violence followed a Da'esh attributed terrorist attack in Suruç on 20 July. PKK conducted repeated terrorist attacks targeting Turkish police and military, which grew in scale in September. The EU firmly condemned these terrorist acts. In response, the government undertook extensive security and military operations against the PKK, including many air strikes on PKK bases in both Turkey and Iraq. Between July and September, dozens of civilians including 20 children and over 120 security forces were killed. A large number of PKK members were reportedly killed in Turkey, and many more in the air strikes in Iraq. There were disquieting reports of alleged severe human rights violations committed by security forces. More than 20 civilians were reportedly killed during a 9-day curfew imposed on the town of Cizre. Tensions also increased across the country, with several attacks on media outlets and HDP party headquarter and offices. The authorities took actions curtailing the free exercise of media freedom during the period. As a result, the settlement effectively came to a halt. The government also blamed HDP for its relations with PKK, whilst HDP leadership made several calls on PKK and the government to stop the violence. Criminal cases related to the Kurdish issue continued at a very slow pace. No steps were taken to abolish the village guard system, a paramilitary force of around 50 000 people paid and armed by the state. No comprehensive plan was developed to address the issue of missing persons, including thorough and independent investigations into alleged past cases of extrajudicial killing by security and law enforcement officers or the PKK. Mass graves discovered in the south-east were not adequately investigated. The recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur about lack of prosecutions over extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions were not addressed. The statute of limitations for cases of missing persons and extrajudicial killings dating from the 1990s remained in force. As a result, several cases were dropped in 2014 and 2015. Only 12 cases involving past crimes continued. Turkey should consider ratifying the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the Rome Statute. The South-East Anatolia Project to improve the socioeconomic development of the region continued, with notable improvements in infrastructure. However, socioeconomic and educational indicators show strong disparities with the rest of the country. The east and south east received a huge influx of refugees from Syria and Iraq, putting local communities under additional strain. Refugees and internally displaced persons Turkey continued to make considerable efforts to give shelter to Syrian refugees. Turkey is the country hosting the largest refugee population in the world, with about 2.2 million, of which close to 2 million from Syria. Sheltering and integrating such a large population of refugees is a major challenge for the country which has already spent about EUR 6.7 billion in this endeavour. The regulation on temporary protection issued in October 2014 should improve their integration. Syrians under temporary protection can benefit from health, translation and education services. However, some legislative loopholes exist. Turkey should still adopt legislation giving Syrians under temporary protection access to the labour market. This involves in particular drawing up detailed rules and procedures for labour market access, including a list of sectors and provinces where Syrians under temporary protection can be employed. Turkey should also adopt secondary legislation to implement the law on foreigners and international protection, notably as obtaining residence permits and health insurance remains difficult. Further progress on these issues would help Syrians in Turkey to become more self-subsistent (see Chapter 24). There are close to one million internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Turkey, most of whom fled their homes between 1986 and 1995 due to the armed conflict in the south-east of the country. The process of compensating IDPs continued. Damage assessment commissions processed over 340 000 applications and granted compensation in half of them totalling over EUR 1.1 billion. There is no comprehensive national action plan and strategy to address all challenges faced by IDPs such as security zones, village guards, lack of infrastructure and the presence of landmines in some places hamper their return to their villages. 2.5.Regional issues and international obligations Cyprus Turkey welcomed the resumption of the talks on a comprehensive settlement between the leaders of the two communities in May 2015, expressing its support for the UNSG Special Advisor’s efforts and for the newly elected leader of the Turkish Cypriot Community. Turkey had however previously, from October to April, issued statements and engaged into actions challenging the Republic of Cyprus’s right to exploit hydrocarbon resources in Cyprus’s Exclusive Economic Zone for the benefit of all Cypriots. The EU has repeatedly stressed the sovereign rights of EU Member States which include entering into bilateral agreements, and exploring and exploiting their natural resources in accordance with the EU acquis and international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The EU also stressed the need to respect the sovereignty of Member States over their territorial sea and airspace. As emphasised in the Negotiating Framework and Council Declarations, Turkey is expected to actively support the negotiations for a fair, comprehensive and viable settlement of the Cyprus issue within the UN framework, in accordance with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions and in line with the principles on which the EU is founded. Turkey’s commitment and contribution in concrete terms to this comprehensive settlement remains crucial. The process of granting the Committee on Missing Persons full access to all relevant archives and military areas needs to be expedited. Despite repeated calls by the Council and the Commission, Turkey has still not complied with its obligations as outlined in the declaration of the European Community and its Member States of 21 September 2005 and in Council conclusions, including those of December 2006 and December 2014. Turkey has not fulfilled its obligation to ensure full and non-discriminatory implementation of the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement and has not removed all obstacles to the free movement of goods, including restrictions on direct transport links with the Republic of Cyprus. There was no progress on normalising bilateral relations with the Republic of Cyprus.

Turkey continued to veto the Republic of Cyprus joining several international organisations, such as the OECD. Peaceful settlement of border disputes No bilateral exploratory talks were held between Greece and Turkey to find common ground for the start of negotiations on the delimitation of the continental shelf. Greece continued to object to Turkey’s launch of a tender for offshore oil and gas exploration including part of the continental shelf off the Greek island of Castellorizo. The threat of casus belli in relation to the possible extension of Greek territorial waters, as made in a Turkish Grand National Assembly resolution in 1995, still stands. In line with the Negotiating Framework and previous European Council and Council conclusions, the Council has reiterated that ‘Turkey needs to commit itself unequivocally to good neighbourly relations and to the peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the United Nations Charter, having recourse, if necessary, to the International Court of Justice. In this context, the EU has again expressed serious concern, and urged Turkey to avoid any kind of threat or action directed against a Member State, or source of friction or actions that damage good neighbourly relations and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Greece and Cyprus made formal complaints about repeated and increased violations of their territorial waters and airspace by Turkey, including flights over Greek islands. Regional cooperation Good neighbourly relations form an essential part of Turkey’s process of moving towards the EU. Bilateral relations with other enlargement countries and neighbouring EU Member States have been good. The Turkish Prime Minister visited Greece in December 2014, to co-chair the third Turkey-Greece High-Level Cooperation Council. The Greek Foreign Minister visited Turkey in May 2015. Turkey has continued its policy of engagement in the Western Balkans. Turkey maintained strong ties with countries in the region and supported their respective efforts to join NATO and the EU. President Erdoğan visited Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina in May 2015. Prime Minister Davutoğlu visited the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in December 2014 and met with the Serbian Prime Minister in Davos. Under the common security and defence policy, Turkey is continuing to contribute to the EU-led military mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina and to the EULEX mission in Kosovo *. 3.Economic criteria Key economic figures 2013 2014 Gross domestic product per capita (% of EU28 in PPS) 53 53 GDP growth (%) 4.2 2.9 Unemployment rate (female; male) (%) 8.8 (10.6; 8.0) 9.9 (11.9; 9.1) Economic activity rate for persons aged 20–64: proportion of the population aged 20–64 that is economically active (female; male) (%) 58.4 (35.6*; 81.6*) 58.9 Current account balance (% of GDP) -7.9* -5.8* Foreign direct investment (FDI) (% of GDP) 1.5* 1.6* Source: Eurostat, *National Statistics Agency In line with the conclusions of the European Council in Copenhagen in June 1993, EU accession requires the existence of a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union. The monitoring of these economic criteria should be seen in the context of the increased importance of economic governance in the enlargement process. In order to improve their economic governance, in 2015 the enlargement countries were asked to prepare Economic Reform Programmes (ERPs), which set out a medium-term macro-fiscal policy framework together with key structural reforms aimed at supporting the framework. The ERPs were the basis for country-specific recommendations jointly adopted by the EU and the Western Balkans and Turkey in the Economic and Financial Dialogue meeting on 12 May 2015. 3.1.The existence of a functioning market economy The Turkish economy is well advanced and can be considered a functioning market economy. Economic growth was moderate in 2014. There was, however, no progress in reducing the underlying macroeconomic imbalances. The large external deficit continued to make the Turkish economy vulnerable to financial uncertainty and changes in global risk sentiment. Inflation was running at a relatively high rate and exceeded the official target again; nevertheless the central bank cut interest rates. Monetary and fiscal policy should be adjusted to lower macroeconomic imbalances. At the same time, structural reforms should be accelerated to improve the functioning of the markets for goods, services and labour. In line with the ERP recommendations and in order to support longterm growth, in the coming year Turkey should pay particular attention to: → promoting domestic saving, including through a sufficiently restrictive fiscal policy, in view of the persistently large current account deficit; → making monetary policy more focused on the pursuit of price stability; → improving the business environment by strengthening the rule of law, making it easier to start a business and strengthening competition. Economic policy essentials Turkey’s resolve to address its underlying macroeconomic imbalances has been uneven. The government’s Economic Reform Programme for 2015-17, submitted to the Commission in March 2015, projects an optimistic macroeconomic scenario in which GDP growth strengthens while unemployment, inflation and the current account deficit decrease. Under the programme, structural reforms will be implemented as part of Turkey’s 10th Development Plan, covering the period 2014-2018. However, the fragmentation of responsibilities between government bodies continued to complicate the coordination of budgeting and medium-term economic policy-making. Uncertainty increased over the central bank’s independence in carrying out monetary policy to the detriment of macroeconomic stability. Macroeconomic stability

The Turkish economy has grown at an average annual rate of 3 % over the past three years. In 2014, GDP growth started strongly, but slowed down after the introduction of targeted policy measures to rein in consumer borrowing and a hike in interest rates. Annual GDP growth of 2.9 % was mainly driven by net exports, which benefited from a temporarily more competitive exchange rate and a sharp fall in gold imports. Domestic demand was relatively subdued, particularly investment. In the first half of 2015, GDP growth remained relatively constant (3.1 % year-on-year), but now with consumer spending as the main driver in the wake of the lower oil price while exports declined. GDP per capita was 53% of the EU average in 2014, based on purchasing power parity. Turkey’s long-standing current account deficit has remained very high. The deficit has averaged 6.6 % of GDP over the past three years, the largest of all G20 countries. It narrowed somewhat in 2014 in the context of lower domestic demand growth, a temporary surge in exports and a sharp fall in imports of non-monetary gold. With Turkey being a large energy importer, the lower dollar price for crude oil has also been favourable. Turkey’s current account deficit reflects a persistent shortfall of domestic savings, which needs to be offset with capital inflows. Most capital inflows are portfolio investments by foreign investors and foreign borrowing by Turkish banks. In recent years, only a small proportion of the required capital inflow has been in the form of relatively stable foreign direct investment. The dependence on volatile types of capital inflows has made the Turkish currency and economy vulnerable to a sudden loss of investor confidence. This was most recently seen before the general elections on 7 June and 1 November 2015 when uncertainties about the future direction of Turkey’s economic policies put the lira under strong downward pressure and again during the unrest in global financial markets starting in July 2015. Gross external debt as a percentage of GDP has edged higher, reaching 57.5 % of GDP at the end of March 2015. A particular concern relates to the foreign currency debt of private companies that receive most of their revenues in domestic currency: when the lira depreciates, their debt-servicing capability deteriorates. The number of jobs increased at a rate commensurate with output growth, but markedly below the growth rate of the labour force. In 2014, the unemployment rate increased by 1.1 percentage points to an annual average of 9.9 % as the labour force continued to grow faster than available jobs. Labour force growth is mainly driven by a growing number of people of working age, but also by some rise in the economic activity rate. The employment rate of women has remained at a very low level. The overall employment rate fell to 53.2 % in 2014, with a large difference between men (75.0 %) and women (31.6 %). Despite the low proportion of women actively looking for work, their unemployment rate remains significantly higher than the unemployment rate for men. In addition, about one third of women who are considered to be employed are in fact unpaid family workers in the agricultural sector. One quarter of young people were not in employment, education or training. The efficient functioning of the labour market continued to be impeded by a lack of flexibility, for example on labour contracts, while undeclared work remained widespread. This calls for a deepening and widening of labour market reforms, which also need to be more inclusive. Despite declining oil prices, inflation remained in high single digits. This has significant costs in terms of macroeconomic stability, resource allocation and redistributive effects. Fuelled by a depreciating currency and accelerating food prices, consumer price inflation increased from 7.4 % year-on-year at the end of 2013 to 8.2 % in December 2014, i.e. clearly above the official target of 5 %. In 2015, headline inflation has fallen only slightly despite a much lower oil price year-on-year. The Turkish lira depreciated by 12.9 % against the euro and by 8.2 % in real effective terms over the twelve months to August 2015. ERP recommendation 2: ‘Continue to take consistent steps to reinforce the focus of monetary policy on the pursuit of price stability, with other policy objectives being pursued with separate measures, and thereby contribute to improving both the functioning and the credibility of the inflation targeting regime.’ The central bank continued to pursue multiple objectives as part of an overly complex monetary policy framework that hampered transparency and predictability. Although price stability is the primary objective, the central bank is also pursuing macro-financial stability and trying to dampen exchange rate fluctuations. The central bank lowered its key interest rate from 10 % to 8.25 % between May and July 2014 and to 7.5 % in January-February 2015, i.e. to below the inflation rate. These interest rate cuts were inconsistent with the inflation target and took place against the background of repeated strong calls for lower interest rates from the President and parts of the government. Furthermore, negative real interest rates are contrary to the need to raise the low private saving rate. Turkey has reversed the limited simplification it made to its complex monetary policy framework in January 2014. Monetary policy should be focused more on its primary objective of price stability to attain the official inflation target (ERP recommendation 2). On public finances, the budget deficit remained moderate and public debt continued on a sustainable path. The 2014 central government budget deficit is estimated at 1.3 % of GDP, which is marginally higher than in the preceding year (1.2 %) but lower than the revised target of 1.4 %. Revenues increased by 9.3 % year-on-year while expenditures rose by 9.8 %, which is below nominal GDP growth for the first time in many years. General government debt increased by 3.5 % in absolute terms in 2014, but declined by 0.6 percentage points as a percentage of GDP to 33.5 %, i.e. it is clearly at a sustainable level. ERP recommendation 1: ‘Promote domestic saving in view of the persistently large current account deficit. Fiscal policy has an important role to play in this regard by following a sufficiently restrictive stance. Reducing the rigidity of public expenditures would help to make the fiscal policy stance more responsive to macroeconomic needs. The adoption of a fiscal rule would enhance budget transparency, provide an important fiscal anchor and enhance credibility.’ There was no progress on increasing the transparency of the fiscal framework, which continued to suffer from the lack of timely information in accordance with international standards. Adopting a fiscal rule would increase credibility and support the envisaged reduction of the structural fiscal deficit (ERP recommendation 1). Interplay of market forces Privatisation slowed down and there was no further progress on price liberalisation as the government continued to intervene in the price-setting mechanism in key sectors. Following a surge in 2013, privatisation activity has decelerated recently, with the total volume of completed deals decreasing from EUR 9.4 billion (1.5 % of GDP) in 2013 to EUR 4.8 billion (0.8 % of GDP) in 2014. The share of the energy sector in privatisation tenders remained high. Competition could be increased by continued liberalisation of product and services markets. The proportion of directly administered prices in the consumer price index (CPI) basket has remained below 5 %. However, food and alcohol prices, which together make up more than 25 % of the consumer basket, are highly sensitive to policy decisions. For energy (natural gas and electricity), automatic pricing mechanisms were applied in principle. In practice, however, the government con