umpteenth pamuk post
I can't help it, the man gives good link. First, via contrapuntal, Dileep Padgaonkar interviews Pamuk for the Hindu. Lots of good stuff there (despite the annoying repeated mispelling of Atatürk)-- especially on the politics of identity and reform in Turkey, and Pamuk's attempt to be
Also memories of watching Hindi films in İstanbul cinemas (the old movie posters are very cool), a comparison of Crawford Market and the Kapalıçarşı, aka the "Grand Bazaar" (I'm not sure I agree, except maybe in terms of scale and bustle, although it did remind me of several other İstanbul markets, like the Misir Çarşışı and the Balıkpazarı) and a query--"Can you tell me more about the Indian huzun?"--that will no doubt make my dear S. smile.
A few days ago, the NYT carried an article the good news that the attempts (detailed in a previous post) by right-wing lawyer Kemal Kerinçşiz to get new charges brought against Pamuk for insulting the military (he quite rightfully called it a greater threat to democracy than the religiously-based ruling AK Party) have met with failure. Better yet, it reports statements by both Erdoğan and Gül acknowledging that the recent wave of prosecutions under Article 301 of the new TCK (Turkish Penal Code) have been hugely damaging to Turkey's international reputation, and saying that it is possible that "flawed" laws will be changed. One of the things that's kept me busy this week is another wave of editing and translation for Bianet, which has been tracking the issue of Article 301 prosecutions (including those of Pamuk, Hrant Dink, Regip Zarakolu, and others) very closely. Here's a good report on Amnesty International's critique of the law. Basically, Article 301 is a newer version of good ol' Article 159 of the old penal code. The difference, if I understand it correctly, is that the old article (used to repress freedom of expression and political speech for many years) required approval or initiation from the Justice Ministry to start such prosecutions. Under Article 301, however, such permission is unnecessary, which is why right-wing nationalist groups (primarily a group of lawyers calling itself the Jurists' or Lawyers' Union, headed by the aforementioned Kerinçşiz) have used the law in collusion with hardline prosecutors and members of the judiciary to stage the current campaign of intimidation. Although the AK Party leadership is not itself behind this campaign (in fact, the effort seems to be aimed at damaging the AKP's primary goal of EU membership) they are responsible for the flawed penal code and have failed so far to take action to halt the abuses that result from it. In the past, Erdoğan has availed himself of similar provisions to go after a satirical editorial cartoonist who has mocked him in print. I hope, though, that the international outcry over the Pamuk case and other Article 301 prosecutions will result in the law's reform, or better yet, its abolishment.
critically engaged in Turkey's perennial dilemma — how to live in a westernised fashion in a country that is essentially non-western — without inviting the charge of being either parochial or deracinated.
Also memories of watching Hindi films in İstanbul cinemas (the old movie posters are very cool), a comparison of Crawford Market and the Kapalıçarşı, aka the "Grand Bazaar" (I'm not sure I agree, except maybe in terms of scale and bustle, although it did remind me of several other İstanbul markets, like the Misir Çarşışı and the Balıkpazarı) and a query--"Can you tell me more about the Indian huzun?"--that will no doubt make my dear S. smile.
A few days ago, the NYT carried an article the good news that the attempts (detailed in a previous post) by right-wing lawyer Kemal Kerinçşiz to get new charges brought against Pamuk for insulting the military (he quite rightfully called it a greater threat to democracy than the religiously-based ruling AK Party) have met with failure. Better yet, it reports statements by both Erdoğan and Gül acknowledging that the recent wave of prosecutions under Article 301 of the new TCK (Turkish Penal Code) have been hugely damaging to Turkey's international reputation, and saying that it is possible that "flawed" laws will be changed. One of the things that's kept me busy this week is another wave of editing and translation for Bianet, which has been tracking the issue of Article 301 prosecutions (including those of Pamuk, Hrant Dink, Regip Zarakolu, and others) very closely. Here's a good report on Amnesty International's critique of the law. Basically, Article 301 is a newer version of good ol' Article 159 of the old penal code. The difference, if I understand it correctly, is that the old article (used to repress freedom of expression and political speech for many years) required approval or initiation from the Justice Ministry to start such prosecutions. Under Article 301, however, such permission is unnecessary, which is why right-wing nationalist groups (primarily a group of lawyers calling itself the Jurists' or Lawyers' Union, headed by the aforementioned Kerinçşiz) have used the law in collusion with hardline prosecutors and members of the judiciary to stage the current campaign of intimidation. Although the AK Party leadership is not itself behind this campaign (in fact, the effort seems to be aimed at damaging the AKP's primary goal of EU membership) they are responsible for the flawed penal code and have failed so far to take action to halt the abuses that result from it. In the past, Erdoğan has availed himself of similar provisions to go after a satirical editorial cartoonist who has mocked him in print. I hope, though, that the international outcry over the Pamuk case and other Article 301 prosecutions will result in the law's reform, or better yet, its abolishment.
posted by kitabet at 2:23 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home