WRITTEN QUESTION P-1661/03 by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Trial of Leyla Zana.
Date: 2003-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Türkiye, accession to the European Union, judicial proceedings, legal hearing, right to justice, rights of the defence

C 78 E/380

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

EDF or Community budget funding? Has the Commission been able to make its policies on food security,
food aid, infrastructure, water supply and other sectoral aid programmes more conflict-sensitive? If so, in
what ways? If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(13 June 2003)

European Civilian Peace Corps

Improving the personnel capacities of the Union to address situations of conflict or potential conflict
remains one of the key challenges in building a credible and effective operational capacity to support the
Union’s external policy. There is a clear need to be able to identify at short notice personnel with the
experience and training to contribute to the Union’s civilian crisis management activities and Community
assistance programmes, which are increasingly called to intervene in crisis and post-conflict situations.
The Commission’s approach to the range of issues this raises is outlined in Annex 1 which is sent direct to
the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

Mainstreaming Conflict Prevention

The Commission is in agreement with Parliament that a conflict sensitive approach is required in all
external assistance programmes, and indeed in other areas such as economic, agriculture, trade and
environment policy and diplomatic activity. In parallel, funding is needed for specific activities targeting
the prevention or alleviation of conflict situations. The Commission continues to implement this strategy
for conflict prevention, which was first set out by the Commission in the April 2001 Communication (1).
A summary of progress made is attached in Annex 2 which is sent direct to the Honourable Member and
to Parliament’s Secretariat.

(1) Communication from the Commission on Conflict Prevention, Brussels 11.4.2001 COM(2001) 211 final.

(2004/C 78 E/0402)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1661/03

by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 May 2003)

Subject: Trial of Leyla Zana

Knowing that:

(cid:1) I have attended the two sessions held so far of the retrial in Ankara of Leyla Zana and her three
colleagues, who have been in prison for some 10 years serving a sentence passed by a tribunal
dismissed as unfair by both the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and the European
Parliament. I attended the second session of the trial also in my capacity as a member of the ad hoc
delegation of the European Parliament;

(cid:1) apart from the absence of a military judge, there is no difference between this trial and that of 1994;

(cid:1) the rights of the defence continue to be flagrantly breached. The panel of judges has rejected the
request by the defence to introduce new witnesses, i.e. witnesses for the defence, none of whom was
allowed to testify in the 1994 trial. Moreover, the defence is not allowed to put questions directly to
witnesses (cid:1) all of whom appear for the prosecution (cid:1) but must submit questions to the president of
the panel of judges, who then puts them to the witnesses with modifications of his own;

(cid:1) the president of the court has refused to allow witness statements made in 1994 to be read out in

court;

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/381

(cid:1) the panel of judges’ meetings in camera take place in the presence of counsel for the prosecution;

(cid:1) policemen armed with assault rifles stand facing the public and the accused in the courtroom, and

there are policemen armed with pistols in the public gallery;

(cid:1) the trial is not open to the public, but admission is allowed or refused at the discretion of the officials
in charge of the heavily manned police cordons posted at the entrances to the court. Finally, at the
end of both the first and the second sessions, the court refused to allow the accused to be released,
even though the fact that a new trial is being held constitutes an admission that the 1994 trial was
unfair.

the foregoing would the Commission provide an assessment of

In view of
these facts, which the
Community institutions represented at the trial can corroborate? Does the Commission agree that it should
draw the Turkish Government’s attention very firmly to the fact that the conduct of this trial is inimical to
any prospect of Turkey entering the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2003)

The Commission is closely monitoring the proceedings in the retrial of the Sadak, Zana, Dicle and Dogan
case. Commission staff have attended the two sessions held so far in Ankara’s State Security Court n.1.

The Commission takes note of
the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member regarding the
procedures and alleged shortcomings of this case. The Commission is aware that a number of these
concerns relate to aspects of judicial proceedings that appear to be common to all trials carried out under
State Security Courts in Turkey.

In its recently revised Accession Partnership with Turkey, the European Union stressed the need for Turkey
to strengthen the independence and efficiency of the judiciary and called for the alignment of the
functioning of State Security Courts with European standards.

The Commission will continue to monitor this case in the light of the above mentioned requirements and
will make its overall assessment of the proceedings in due time. The Commission will raise this case with
the Turkish authorities in the context of its regular dialogue with Turkey.

(2004/C 78 E/0403)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1668/03

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Human rights abuses in the Western Sahara

(19 May 2003)

What steps is the Commission taking to implement Article 2 of the Association Agreement between the
EC and the Kingdom of Morocco in the light of the alleged human rights violations against the people of
the Western Sahara and the disbanding of the Saharawi Human Rights non-governmental organisation
Forum for Truth and Justice: Sahara Section?

Will the Commission raise the case of Ali Salem Tamek, an Amnesty International prisoner of conscience,
sentenced to two years imprisonment based on confessions which Amnesty International believe were
extracted under torture?

Will the European Commission Delegation in Rabat send observers to the trials of human rights activists
from the Western Sahara?

Finally, what effect does this unresolved conflict on Morocco’s economic and social development, and what
efforts have been made by the Commission in assisting the Moroccan government to resolve this long-
standing dispute to the benefit of the peoples of Morocco and the Western Sahara?