Haydar Ergül
It has been thirty-nine months since the total isolation and incommunicado detention was imposed on PKK Leader Abdullah Öcalan. This state of isolation and incommunicado detention is not only applied to Öcalan. It is also applied to Veysi Aktaş, Ömer Hayri Konar and Hamili Yıldırım, who are detained alongside Öcalan.
We should think of it this way: For thirty-nine months no news has been received from the three prisoners, especially Öcalan, who are imprisoned according to the laws of a structure called the state. This lack of communication and news brings to mind many different thoughts.
What is the state aiming to achieve by eliminating all transportation and communication channels? Are there things it wants to keep unknown or unheard, something it feels the need to hide? How important are the objectives or targets for the state that it disregards its own laws and enforces a state of absolute communication blackout in İmralı Island Prison? These questions can be multiplied with further inquiries.
In order to find answers to some of these questions, we can look at the identities of the prisoners, especially Öcalan, who are kept together but in different cells. Öcalan is a figure well known and recognised by the public. He is the founding leader of the PKK [Kurdistan Workers’ Party]. He has been imprisoned for 25 years in İmralı Island Prison. His influence is especially high among Kurds, and there is sympathy for him. The lack of communication and isolation are related to Öcalan’s position.
Öcalan is being deliberately forgotten. His voice is being silenced and his name is being erased. Is it thought that if Öcalan is forgotten and his name is not mentioned, the Kurdish question will disappear? Is it possible for this plan to succeed? If it were possible, wouldn’t his 25 years of imprisonment in an island prison have been enough? Moreover, for the last 39 months, more than three years, Öcalan and the three prisoners with him have had no communication with the outside world.
Their families are not allowed to visit. Despite the families efforts, the authorities rarely feel the need to respond to visit requests. Nor are the prisoners allowed to meet with their lawyers. The prisoners’ legal right to weekly phone calls and correspondence with their families has been effectively banned.
Veysi Aktaş recently completed his 30-year sentence. According to the law, he should have been released. However, his release has been postponed for one year by extending his sentence. Will Veysi Aktaş be released in a year’s time? If the current situation continues, his release is highly unlikely. Similarly, Nasrullah Kuran and Çetin Arkaş, who were once with Öcalan in İmralı, were sent to Marmara (Silivri) Prison in 2016. They are still being held there. Both have completed their 30-year sentences, but their release has been delayed and it is uncertain when they will be freed.
This issue of extending sentences is also linked to Öcalan. It is believed that if they are released, they could provide information about Öcalan’s life in prison, which is why their sentences are being extended.
In summary, we are faced with a strict prohibition that does not even allow Öcalan’s name to be mentioned. Imagine a state that is afraid of the mere mention of Öcalan’s name because it is afraid that it will endanger the state. How should we evaluate this situation? I leave it to the reader to decide.
If Öcalan’s isolation was limited to the prison on İmralı Island, it might be considered less severe. But this is not the case; the isolation goes beyond İmralı and reaches a level that criminalises the whole society. The recent appointment of a trustee for Colemêrg is directly related to this isolation.
The isolation imposed on Öcalan has now become a problem for democracy and freedom in Turkey. It has reached a point where it affects not only the Kurds but also the Turks.
The CHP [Republican People’s Party] became the leading party in the local elections. After the elections, Özgür Özel introduced the concept of normalisation. This concept is indeed important. But why is Turkey not normalising? In reality, Turkey has been searching for its norms for a century. Turkey’s norm begins with the recognition of differences and the granting of their rights.
The Republic was founded on denial. That is why it contains abnormalities. The construction based on the principles of one nation, one language, one religion has paved the way for a century of pain, oppression and exploitation by denying differences and enabling all anti-democratic practices.
True normalisation, therefore, begins with the rejection of denial and, above all, with the genuine recognition of the Kurds. This can be achieved by securing their natural rights through legislation. Consequently, the first step towards normalisation should be to courageously oppose the isolation imposed on Öcalan.
The prominent Kurdish politician and journalist Haydar Ergül was a member of a peace group organised in 1999 as part of a symbolic gesture initiated by the jailed Kurdish leader Abdullah Öcalan, as a part of his tireless efforts for pushing a negotiation process on resolution for the decades-long Kurdish question. In response to Öcalan’s call, Ergül travelled with other Kurdish activists from Europe to Turkey to support the peace process. After 13 years in prison, Ergül was released. He was later put on trial in a case known publicly as the ‘KCK Academy’ case, referring to the Kurdish umbrella organisation KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union), recently acquitted in the case. He is currently the chef editor of Democratic Modernity journal, a two months published periodical on Öcalan’s philosophy of liberation. Haydar Ergül also writes columns for the Yeni Yasam newspaper.
This article was originally published in Yeni Yaşam.
