REPORT ON DEVELOPMENTS IN RELATIONS WITH TURKEY SINCE THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE CUSTOMS UNION
Date: 1996-10-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU relations, Türkiye, customs union, financial cooperation, free-trade agreement

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES 

Brussels,  30.10.1996 
COM(96)491  final 

REPORT ON DEVELOPMENTS IN RELATIONS WITH TURKEY SINCE THE 
ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE CUSTOMS UNION 

(presented by the Commission) 

REPORT ON DEVELOPMENTS IN RELATIONS WITH TURKEY SINCE THE 
ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE CUSTOMS UNION 

INTRODUCTION - THE  COMMISSION'S UNDERTAKING 

This report corresponds to the Commission's undertaking made in autumn  1995 during the 
debate in Parliament on the assent to the EC-Turkey customs union. In accordance with that 
undertaking, the Commission is submitting an "annual report on the implementation of the 
customs  union,  economic  and  political  aspects,  including  the  democratic  reform  process 
and the human rights situation in Turkey". 

I. 

FUNCTIONING  OF THE CUSTOMS UNION 

Following  the  favourable  vote  by  Parliament,  the  customs  union  entered  into  force  on 
31 December  1995  in accordance  with the deadline  set by the Additional  Protocol  to  the 
EC-Turkey  Association  Agreement  of  1964.  Since  that  date,  the  customs  union  has 
functioned  satisfactorily  on the whole and in accordance with Decisions 1/95  and  2/95  of 
the  Association  Council.  Customs duties and  charges having  equivalent  effect  have  been 
abolished,  as have  quantitative  restrictions  (with the  exception,  on the  Turkish  side, of a 
restriction  on the export  of raw cotton to the Community). On the other hand, the textile 
voluntary  restraint  agreements applied  by Turkish exporters to the Community  have been 
abolished too, to the extent that at the present moment there are no longer any quantitative 
restrictions  or  import  or  export  duties  in the  industrial  sector  in  trade  with  Turkey.  The 
customs  union  agreement  was  supplemented  by  the  signing  in  July  of  a  free  trade 
agreement  on  products  covered  by  the  ECSC  Treaty.  The  Community  and  Turkey  have 
each notified  the WTO of the two texts (customs union and ECSC). In addition, further  to 
the undertakings  made by both parties, negotiations are under way  regarding  an exchange 
of mutually advantageous concessions on agricultural products. 

Both parties have endeavoured to ensure that the customs union operates in as satisfactory a 
manner  as  possible.  The  institutional  arrangements  provided  for  in  the  agreement  (the 
setting-up of a joint  customs union committee  and the participation  of Turkish  experts in 
certain  technical  committees)  have  been  complied  with.  The  Customs  Union  Committee 
has met several times and succeeded on the whole in reaching satisfactory  solutions to the 
problems raised. These problems are mainly the consequence of the current situation of the 
transition  -  Turkey  has  adopted  the  Common  Customs  Tariff  but  not  yet  concluded 
comparable  trade  agreements  to  those  which  the  EU  has  with  the  eastern  European  and 

/ 

Mediterranean  countries, nor adopted the Community's  generalised system of  preferences. 
The upshot  in certain cases  is that, whereas  EU  importers  can obtain  supplies  of  a given 
product at zero duty, their Turkish counterparts have to pay the Common Customs  Tariff. 
These problems should diminish with time as Turkey adopts the whole of the Community's 
preferential  policy. It has five years to do so. A free trade agreement has been signed with 
Israel  and  another  initialled  with  Hungary.  One  with  Romania  is  in  the  pipeline.  The 
negotiations  for  a number  of  other  agreements  with the  countries  of  Central  Europe  (the 
Czech and  Slovak  Republics, Poland, Bulgaria) are in progress. Initial contacts have been 
taken up with Lithuania. 

Note too that Turkey has respected its undertakings with regard to the implementation of a 
foreign trade policy in the textiles sector similar in substance to the one applied by the EU. 

At the  Association  Council  of  30 October  1995, the  Commission  noted  that  Turkey  had 
adopted most of the legislation required for the smooth operation of the customs union but 
pointed out that the Turkish government or Parliament still had to adopt certain measures, 
e.g.  establishment  of  an  authority  to  monitor  compliance  with  competition  law  or  the 
adoption  by  the  Turkish  Parliament  of the  new customs  code  aligned  on  the  EU's  code. 
These measures should have been adopted before the entry into force of the customs union. 
Until  now thé political  situation  in Turkey  has  not  allowed  it.  Although  these  omissions 
pose no threat to the functioning  of the customs union and, moreover, do greater  harm to 
Turkish than to Community interests, the Commission finds them regrettable. 

Economic  impact  of  the  customs  union:  neither  the  Commission  nor  the  Turkish 
authorities  as  yet  possess  sufficient  statistical  data  on  mutual  trade  to  allow  a  thorough 
analysis. 

However,  the  first  fragmentary  data  (some  months,  some  European  countries)  show  EU 
exports to Turkey generally rising sharply at the beginning of 1996 while Turkey's exports 
to  the  EU  have  risen  less  sharply.  Some  European  countries  -  Italy,  France,  UK  and 
Denmark  -  have  increased  exports  by  more  than  50% compared  to  the  same  periods  in 
1995. Turkish calculations put the country's trade deficit  at a potential US $ 10 billion  for 
the first  half of  1996 compared with US $ 13.2 billion for the whole of  1995. However, it 
would  be  premature  to  attribute  these  trends  to  the  impact  of  the  customs  union  alone. 
Overheating of the Turkish economy  in early  1996 certainly explains to a large extent the 
growth  in  Turkish  imports  as  it  did  during  a  comparable  cycle  in  1993.  Likewise  it  is 
difficult  at this juncture to attribute the recorded growth in Turkish exports to the ending of 
the Community textile policy for Turkey. 

II. 

OTHER  ASPECTS  OF  THE  IMPLEMENTATION  OF  THE  AGREEMENT  OF  6  MARCH 
1995 

The  agreement  with  Turkey  of  6  March  1995  not  only  covered  trade  aspects  (customs 
union, ECSC, agriculture)  but  also  contained  sections on financial  co-operation,  stepping 
up policy dialogue and developing co-operation in general over a wide range of areas. 

The situation is as follows in each of these sections: 

—  Financial co-operation: 

The EU's commitments to Turkey included a special package of ECU 375 million 
in budgetary aid in connection with the customs union and a package of EIB loans 
totalling  a  maximum  ECU  750  million  from  the  Bank's  own  resources.  The 
Community also undertook to extend the benefits of its co-operation policy with the 
Mediterranean  countries  to  Turkey  (the  Cannes  European  Council  later  fixed  the 
amount  of  this  and  laid  down  broad  guidelines)  both  as  regards  the  budgetary 
component (MEDA funds) and the EIB loans component. 

The Council has still to adopt the draft  financial  regulation for the special customs 
union budgetary aid of ECU 375 million. A political agreement was reached in the 
Council at the end of  1995 on the text of a regulation which had been approved by 
Parliament, with certain amendments, when it had approved the customs union. In 
the  aftermath  of the events  on Imia island  in January  1996, the  Council  has  been 
unable to attain the required unanimity to adopt the text formally. Similarly, the EIB 
has been unable to act on the invitation made by the Council in late  1995 to grant 
loans of up to ECU 750 million to Turkey. 

As  regards  Turkish  participation  in  the  Community's  co-operation  policy  with 
Mediterranean  countries,  Turkey  is  mentioned  as  a  beneficiary  under  the  MEDA 
financial  Regulation adopted by the Council in July. The financial  assistance to be 
received  by Turkey  under this budget was the subject  of an Indicative  Programme 
agreed  between  the  Commission  and  Turkey  and  submitted  to  Member  States  in 
accordance  with  the  Regulation.  Under  the  Regulation,  the  Commission  has 
appraised  a number of co-operation projects  some of which may be decided  before 
the  end  of  the  year  in  accordance  with  the procedures  adopted  under  the  MEDA 
Regulation.  The  overall  aim  of  the  projects  in  question  is  to  facilitate  the 
implementation of the customs union and to help the Turkish small business sector 
face  up  to  European  competition.  Another  project  in  this  context  involves 
developing  the  Jean  Monnet  programme  of  grants  to Turkish  students  wanting  to 
complete their studies in European universities. A number of co-operation  projects 
with a social component, some involving Turkish NGOs, are currently being studied 
too. 

The  Community  had  also  pledged  Turkey  macro-economic  assistance  subject  to 
certain conditions. Until now those conditions (e.g. acknowledgement  of balance of 
payments difficulties,  existence of a programme with the IMF) have not been met. 

- 

Political dialogue: 

Since the implementation of the customs union, contacts have been set up at various 
levels between the EU and Turkey. The successive Prime Ministers were invited to 
the  European  Council,  Mrs  Ciller  in  Madrid,  Mr  Yilmaz  in  Florence.  Mr  Yilmaz 
visited  the  President  of  the  Commission  in  June.  The  Joint  Parliamentary 
Committee met in Ankara in June too. Two meetings of political directors were also 

held  at  troika  level.  The  major  role  played  by  Turkey  in  the  Barcelona  Euro-
Mediterranean process, including numerous multilateral meetings at rninisterial and 
government level, should be mentioned too. 

However, following the events in the Aegean, it has proved impossible to hold the 
EC-Turkey  Association  Council,  or to  organise,  as laid  down by  the  Association 
Council's resolutions of  1995, meetings at ministerial level between European and 
Turkish heads of various sectors involved in the functioning  of the customs union: 
trade, internal market, transport, etc. 

Developing co-operation: 

Owing  to  the  unavailability  of  financial  resources  (the  MEDA  regulation  was 
adopted only  in July), resolution  1/95  of the association council on developing  co 
operation  has  gone  relatively  unheeded.  However,  it  should  be  noted  that  the 
Commission  has  sent  to  the  Council  and  Parliament  a  proposal  to  make  Turkey 
eligible for  the  youth exchange and cultural  development  programmes  (Leonardo, 
Socrates and Youth for Europe). These proposals are currently before Parliament. 

III. 

TURKEY'S ECONOMIC SITUATION 

The positive points of the economic  situation  relate to growth which, following  the  1994 
recession, exceeded 7% in 1995 and 8% during the first quarter of 1996. Domestic demand 
and exports, notably to Central and Eastern Europe and the former  Soviet republics, have 
been  extremely  dynamic  and  have  led  GDP  growth  over  the  period  in  question.  Other 
positive points: stability of the remittances from Turkish migrant workers (US $ 3 billion) 
and the growth of revenue from tourism. Foreign currency reserves have been reconstituted 
at a high level (more than US $ 15 billion). 

The  principal  concern  here  is  macro-economic  stability  and  in  particular  the  growing 
budget deficit  and the rise in real interest rates. Forecasts of the current account deficit  are 
likewise more pessimistic as a result of the growing trade deficit which amounted to US $ 
10 billion for the first half of  1996. The aspect causing most concern is the budget  deficit 
which had been kept in check thanks to the standby agreement with the IMF (6.6% in 1995) 
but which had begun to drift  again in the run-up to the December  1995 elections. Since the 
elections, Turkey  has had no  clear direction  in  its macro-economic  policy.  The  objective 
announced  by  the  first  coalition  government  of  a  deficit  equivalent  to  7.7%  of  GNP  is 
clearly  unachievable. It  would  have required  drastic tax,  social  security  and  privatisation 
measures  -  measures  which  have  still  not  been  implemented.  On  the  contrary,  the  first 
decisions taken by the Erbakan/Ciller coalition (50% increase in civil  service  salaries and 
pensions,  101%  increase  in  the  minimum  wage, various  measures  to  assist  farmers),  no 
matter how opportune politically  and socially, have had the immediate effect  of a serious 
increase  in  the  budget  deficit  even  taking  into  account  the  measures  announced  by  the 
government  in July and September.  Since such measures are not designed to improve  the 
controls on public expenditure, managing the internal  debt becomes all the more  difficult 
and  interest charges  could  reach  10% of  GNP by  the end  of  1996. An IMF mission has 
recently paid another visit to Turkey. 

In the absence of domestic stabilisation measures, the Turkish government could be forced 
to  introduce  curbs  on  imports  to  aid  the  early  recovery  of  its  external  accounts.  More 
important still, the macro-economic deterioration puts in doubt the benefits which Turkey's 
economy can rightfully expect to reap from the customs union. In short, the customs union 
gives  Turkey  the  opportunity  to  speed  up  modernisation  of its industry  and  specialise  in 
areas with a higher  added  value  in the  international  division  of labour.  In addition  to the 
mobilisation  of  the  country's  own  human  and  financial  resources,  the  underlying 
assumption  is that Turkey can import technology  and know-how, in particular in the  form 
of  foreign  investment.  But  although  foreign  investment  showed  a  sharp  rise  in  Turkey 
during  1995 in anticipation  of the customs union, it has since seemed to run out of steam. 
The  Commission  therefore  considers  that  early  progress  on macro-economic  stabilisation 
and structural adjustment  are essential to the smooth functioning  of the customs union and 
to Turkey's fundamental  stake in it. 

IV. 

POLITICAL SITUATION 

1. 

Domestic policy 

The  electoral  campaign  and  voting  in  the  recent  elections,  called  only  a  few  days  after 
Parliament  had  approved  the  customs  union,  were  conducted  according  to the  rules. The 
turnout was massive  (85% of voters). The REFAH Islamic party confirmed  its success in 
the municipal  elections of  1993 by pushing  its share of the vote up by 3 points to 21.5% 
and  finishing  on  top  of  the  list.  The  electors  had  not  been  able  to  decide  between  the 
respective parties of Mrs Ciller (DYP) and Mr Yilmaz (ANAP) who finished with roughly 
20% of the vote each. The results of the parties  of the Left  on the whole fell  far  short of 
their expectations while the pro-Kurd  party Hadep, with some 3% of the vote, was a long 
way from the threshold required to be represented  in Parliament. In March  1996, the DYP 
and  ANAP  formed  a  coalition  with  the  external  support  of  Mr  Ecevit's  socialist  party. 
Despite  sufficient  support  in Parliament,  the coalition could not withstand the atmosphere 
created by the rivalry between its leaders. After a month of crisis in the government, a new 
coalition between  Mr Erbakan's  REFAH party and the DYP came to power in June  1996 
with Mr Erbakan as Prime Minister and Mrs Ciller as deputy Prime Minister and Foreign 
Minister.  The  two  parties  undertook  as  their  government's  platform  to  pursue  the  main 
thrusts of Turkey's foreign policy (Nato membership, links with the EU and, in particular, 
customs  union).  They  also  undertook  to  strengthen  democracy  further  and  improve  the 
human  rights  situation.  The  lifting  of  the  state  of  emergency  in  the  south-east  was  also 
proposed. 

One of the most disturbing aspects of the political situation in Turkey, as already mentioned 
in relation to the situation of the economy, is the absence of any legislative initiative by the 
government  and  the  virtually  total  cessation  of  the  Parliament's  legislative  work 
programme. Under the DYP-ANAP coalition very few laws were adopted and almost none 
since  the  new  REFAH-DYP  coalition  was  formed.  The  impact  of  this  has  been  felt  in 
particular as regards the strengthening of the démocratisation process launched in 19c5. 

2. 

The situation in the Aegean 

Since the  events  of  early  1996  involving  the  islands  of  Imia  in  the  Aegean,  tension  has 
remained high in the region. Although the governments of both countries have tried to keep 
the  situation  in  check  and  to  avoid  any  degeneration  into  more  serious  incidents,  the 
problem  still  casts  a  shadow  on  relations  between  Greece  and  Turkey  and  the  EU  and 
Turkey. 

During the first half of 1996, the EU's Italian presidency made efforts  to bring the two sides 
closer  and  to  create  conditions  conducive  to  holding  a  fruitful  EU-Turkey  Association 
Council. This responsibility  was handed on to the Irish presidency. The Council  (General 
Affairs)  of  15 July adopted  a declaration  in which it stated that relations between the EU 
and Turkey should "be based on respect for international law and agreements, the relevant 
international practice and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Member States and 
of Turkey". The Council also appealed for "the avoidance of any action liable to  increase 
tensions, and specifically  the use or threat of force". It further  stated that "disputes created 
by territorial claims, such as the Imia islands issue, should be submitted to the International 
Court of Justice". 

Turkey has yet to make its position known on the principles contained in the declaration. 

3. 

Cyprus 

The  political  climate  in  Turkey  during  1996  and  the  tension  in  the  Aegean  have 
unfortunately  not helped advance dialogue between the EU and Turkey  in the search for a 
comprehensive  settlement  of  the  Cyprus  question,  though  it  should  be  pointed  out  that 
Turkey  has  agreed  to  co-operate  with  the  successive  envoys  of  the  two  presidencies  in 
charge of the Cyprus question (Mr Di Roberto and Mr Heaslip). 

The deplorable violent  incidents  in Cyprus in August have caused a serious worsening  of 
tension on the island and are clearly aimed at trying to persuade international  opinion that 
the cohabitation of the Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot communities as part of a single 
federal  state  would  pose  a  threat  to  the  security  of  the  inhabitants  of  Cyprus.  The 
Commission,  like  the  Presidency,  has  utterly  condemned  the  incidents.  It  considers  that 
such events will not in themselves threaten either the search for a comprehensive settlement 
in  accordance  with  UN  resolutions  or  the  EU's  political  decision  to  open  accession 
negotiations  six months after  the conclusion  of the intergovernmental  conference.  It joins 
the EU Presidency  in appealing to the two communities  immediately  to avoid any  further 
confrontation  and to co-operate fully with UNFICYP to help defuse the tension. 

V. 

THE  HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION 

In  its  report  to  Parliament  in  1995,  against  a  disturbing  portrayal  of  the  human  rights 
situation,  the  Commission  underlined  the  importance  of the  reforms  carried  out  in  1995 
insofar  as  they  put  Turkey  on  an  encouraging  track.  Turkey  had  in  fact  undertaken  a 
constitutional  reform,  the  first  by  a  civilian  government  for  a  long  time,  which  was 
designed  to  open  wider  the  political  field  and  improve  the  way  politics  functioned. 

Moreover, although it was not repealed, Article 8 of the anti-terrorism law was revised in a 
more  liberal  sense, thereby extending freedom of expression. In the month  following  the 
amendment,  142  detainees  sentenced  under that  Article  were  released.  Numerous  cases 
have  been reviewed  subsequently  with  the  result  that 269  detainees  have  been  released, 
1,408 sentences reduced and 4 prison sentences commuted to  fines. 

Impact of the 1995 reforms 

In  view  of  the  prevailing  political  situation,  the  democratic  reform  process  has  not 
progressed during  1996. The constitutional reforms  were not transformed  into laws. Even 
amended, Article 8 continued to be used to prosecute people for their beliefs, including the 
writer  Yasar  Kemal  (who  was  also  prosecuted  under  Article  312  of  the  Penal  Code),  a 
publisher, Mr Ozcan Sapan, and a former EDP member of Parliament, Mr Sakik. Moreover, 
the review of certain trials, e.g. of Mehdi Zana, on the basis of the new Article 8 carried the 
danger of the reimprisonment of some who had already been released. 

There are now fewer prosecutions under Article 8 than before and the sentences handed out 
are less severe but the fact remains that people are still being prosecuted  for their views. It 
should  also  be  noted  that  other  Articles  of  the  Penal  Code  (Articles  168  and  312  in 
particular) are still being used as a basis for prosecutions of this type which casts doubt on 
the new direction taken with the reform of Article 8. 

Violations of human rights 

The political situation in Turkey has also made it difficult  to take action with the necessary 
determination  against  the  torture  and  ill-treatment  of  prisoners,  disappearances  and 
extrajudicial  executions. During a public debate in the Turkish Parliament on 28 February, 
the Justice  Minister under the previous government  (Mr Firuz Cilingiroglu)  admitted  that 
torture was a widespread practice in particular during periods of custody when the detainee 
did not enjoy the necessary legal protection. Proceedings were being increasingly instituted 
against those responsible for torture. The Minister quoted a figure  of 252 prosecutions  for 
1993 and 224 for 1994. 

The  High  Council  for  Human  Rights  set  up  in  September  1993  recommended  various 
reforms at the end of 1994 in order to put an end to such practices, notably a reduction to 4 
days of the maximum duration of custody (the figure is 15 days under the anti-terrorism law 
and 30 days under the state of emergency) and giving detainees the possibility to consult a 
lawyer.  These proposals have yet to be put  into force  even though some political  leaders 
have aired them in their public declarations. 

In the worst cases the government has instituted proceedings against those responsible even 
at  high  level,  notably  following  the  murder  while  under  detention  in  an  Istanbul  police 
station  of journalist  Metin  Goktepe,  whose  body  was  found  only  a  few  hundred  metres 
from  the station, and the cases of the youths tortured  in Manisa (arrested  for their alk-ged 
membership of the revolutionary party of the Left, the DHKP/C, and for taking part in s;,me 
of its operations). After the murder of Mr Goktepe,  14 police officers,  the chief of security 
and  3  police  superintendents  were  suspended  from  their  duties  and  proceedings  started 
against 49 police officers.  Similarly the Manisa incident led to the appearance of  10 pciice 

officers  in court. Their trials are due to resume on 6 November. The verdicts in these cases 
are awaited with interest. 

The human rights situation in Turkey was the subject of debates at the 52nd session of the 
UN Human Rights Commission. The practice of torture was referred  to in the intervention 
by the EU presidency  as were the situation  in  south-east  Turkey, extrajudicial  executions 
and forced disappearances. 

The situation in prisons 

The hunger strikes in Istanbul prisons again drew attention to the conditions of detention in 
Turkish jails. The Turkish government was confronted  there not by a spontaneous revolt by 
prisoners  but  by  a  carefully  planned  operation  carried  out  with  determination  by 
revolutionary  militants.  A  solution  was  found  after  more  than  60  days  of  hunger  strike 
which saw the death of 12 prisoners. Mediation involving civilian and NGO representatives 
helped reach a humanitarian  solution to the problem but it is regrettable that a means had 
not been found  earlier before  so many lives were lost. The Commission  intervened  in the 
form of a letter from Mr Van den Broek to Mrs Ciller in which he asked for a humanitarian 
solution to be reached. It also noted that Turkey agreed to the situation in its prisons being 
examined by the Council of Europe's torture prevention Committee. The Committee in fact 
visited  Turkey  in  mid-September.  The  Commission  will  monitor  developments  on  this 
issue. 

The state of emergency in the south-east provinces 

The  government  had  indicated  in its address to the Turkish Parliament  on  3 July  that the 
state of emergency would be lifted and that the village watch system would be re-examined. 
This undertaking has yet to be followed up. 

Pressure on non-governmental organisations 

Several  Turkish  NGOs  suspected  of  actively  supporting  the  Kurdish  cause  (notably  the 
Human  Rights  Association,  the  Human  Rights  Foundation  and  the  Turkish  Medical 
Doctors  Association  (TMDA)), have  been  subjected  to  various  forms  of pressure.  These 
have  included  the  recent  arrest  and  release  of  the  chairman  of  the  Human  Rights 
Association  (Mr Akin Birdal), the institution of legal proceedings  against the directors of 
the centre for the rehabilitation of victims of torture in Adana and the arrest and sentencing 
of the chairman of the TMDA's Diyarbakir section. 

Trials of members of Hadep 

The Commission will monitor the forthcoming trial at the State of Ankara's Security Court 
of 41 people, most of whom hold positions of responsibility  in the pro-Kurd party, Hadep. 
Two of the defendants  are threatened with the death penalty under Article  128 of the Penal 
Code. The trial opened on 25 September attended by numerous international observers. The 
hearings were adjourned  until  23 October.  The Commission  will  follow  developments  in 
the trial with interest. 

Programmes financed by the Commission 

Thanks  to  an  annual  appropriation  of  ECU 500 000  under  a  budget  heading  specific  to 
Turkey,  the  Commission  has  supported  Turkish  NGOs  and  professional  organizations 
promoting  human  rights  for  several  years.  For  1995,  the  Human  Rights  Association 
received  a  grant  for  a  project  to  raise  teacher  awareness  of  human  rights  issues.  The 
Commission  also  subsidises  the  Human  Rights  Foundation  (HRFT)  which  produces  and 
distributes  periodical  literature  on  the  human  rights  situation  in  Turkey.  Many  other 
organizations of lawyers (Contemporary  Jurist Association, Foundation  for  Legal  Studies, 
Izmir  Bar  Association),  doctors  (Turkish  Medical  Association)  and  an  Association  for 
women's rights (Women's Solidarity Foundation) have received grants for various projects 
aimed  at  promoting  human rights. The  Turkish  government  made  representations  to  the 
Commission  about  its  support  for  the  Human  Rights  Association.  However,  the 
Commission  has continued to co-operate with the Association. As a rule the Commission 
grants aid to the NGOs concerned solely on the basis of the individual merits of the projects 
proposed. 

Conclusions 

1. 

2. 

After  the  recent  elections  in  Turkey,  there  has  been  a  lack  of  progress  in  the 
legislative work programme for strengthening democracy and human rights, and in 
statutory and legislative measures in many other fields. There is increasing criticism 
in Turkey of infringements  of these rights by the security services, as is evidenced 
by  the  debates  in  the  press  and  in  the  Turkish  Parliament.  The  Commission  is 
convinced  that  decisive  and  speedy  action  by  the  Turkish  government  and 
Parliament to strengthen the freedom of the individual and respect for  fundamental 
rights is essential to meet domestic and international  concerns and to give tangible 
proof  of  Turkey's  willingness  to take  steps  towards closer ties  with the  European 
Union.  For  its  part,  the  European  Union  takes  into  account  such  steps  in  the 
conduct of its relations with Turkey. 

The Turkish authorities point out that the country is at a particularly awkward time 
in its political  history: a terrorist movement  (the PKK), with criminal  connections 
(drug-trafficking,  money  laundering, racketeering) has claimed  numerous  victims 
and challenges the country's territorial integrity. Action has been taken against, the 
PKK  in  a number  of  EU  Member  States  (joint  police  operations  in Belgium,  the 
Netherlands, UK, Germany, banning of the PKK in Germany and France, etc.). The 
Commission  is aware of this situation but is nevertheless convinced  that the fight 
against terrorism must be conducted in a spirit of respect for the fundamental  values 
of democracy and human rights. Action against terrorism must not stand in the way 
of the recognition of the rights, particularly the cultural rights, of Turkish citizens of 
Kurdish origin whilst still respecting Turkey's unity and integrity. 

3. 

1996  has  seen  the  customs  union  enter  into  force  and  function  in  a  satisfactory 
manner but has also witnessed the repercussions of the legislative elections of late 
1995  in  Turkey  and  tension  in  the  Aegean  and  in  Cyprus.  The  Commission 
underlines the need to pursue the policy initiated on 6 March 1995 with regard to 
relations  with  Turkey  and  Cypriot  accession.  Turkey  remains  a  partner  of  the 
highest  importance  with  which  the  customs  union  has  strengthened  the  bond  of 
interdependence. It is also a major political and strategic partner in a region whose 
vulnerability  has  been  confirmed  by  recent  events.  The  objective  of  a  lasting 
reduction of tension in the Aegean according to the principles of international law 
and reaching a fair and sustainable settlement of the Cyprus question imply that the 
European  Union  must  strive  to  keep  open,  despite  the  current  difficulties,  all 
possible channels of dialogue and co-operation with Turkey. 

10 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(96) 491  final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

11  02 

Catalogue number  : CB-CO-96-509-EN-C 

ISBN 92-78-10124-9 

Office for Official  Publications of the European Communities 

L-2985 Luxembourg