Staying Alive by Accident: Torture Survivors From Turkey in the UK

92 Pages·2004·4.58 MB·English

: Y
a
A
p
I
*
‘ I
a
-
-~~ ,~~~~~ J_p~
~
~
~~
I
-:
-
—
MEDICAL FOUNDATION
Ihis report was researched and written by
Tary Salinsk ), Research Officer at the Medical
~
oundatiori for the Care of Victims of Torture, and
~
)r ( hristine Miller, retiied consultant epidemiologist.
Specii l thanks are due to Sarah Haacke, intern
mm Ameiican University, Washington DC, who did
ouch of the initial dat collection and contributed to
he anal sis of discrimination in education and during
~
nilitar’ service.
~
The authors’ thanks are due also to colleagues
From the Medical Foundation who read drafts and
made i1uahle comments, especially Sherman Carroll,
~
Duncan Forrest FRCS, Alison Harvey, Sally Verity
Smith and Frol Yesilyurt, and to I ouise Pirouet,
Trustee of Asylum Aid.
We also wish to thank Professor Françoise
F-lampson of the Department of ~ ~w, University of
Essex, Dr Okhan Akhan of the Human Rights
Foundation of Turkey and Jonathan Sugdcn of
Amnesty International for information on aspects of
this report.
© \lediLaI 1-oundation for the Care of Victims of Torture 1999
A registered charity number 1000 340
Published I-ehruarv 1999
1)esiened h~ Tom Salinsk~ — 0186 S 395886
Staying Alive by Accident:
Torture Survivors from
Tur key in the UK
IIII llII1 1I 1111111111101I 11I 1111I1 II1 1111 ll
~ ~
~~ ~~
CONTENTS 303820664W
Summary page 3
Introduction page 6
1. HistoricaJ Background page 8
2. Present Human Rights Situation page 14
3. Torture page 23
4. Characteristics of the Sample page 30
5. Detention page 38
6. Travel to and Arrival in the UK page 41
7. Medical Evidence of Torture page 45
8. Decisions on Asylum Claims page 63
9. Conclusions page 77
10. Recommendations page 84
Bibliograp hy page 87
z
r~n —O~ ~.~~~ ~.~o~~ ~<UEw’Z OE —ZW ~ • • S I.’p._____ ~~~ _L~( ~~~~~— °.~Y S.
~~~ ~~
*
aici
! -‘ ~-t ‘J~ ~8 ~ j E/ ~ ‘~~çmj ~; ~S~O
\
i
~
-~~~~~ 1AU? ~ ~~~~~~_
.~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* ~~~~~~
!
I
~ /)7c.\ ~ j I ~
U’ E - c.‘
iu
F L ) i < -
~ I~E ~ ~ ~~~ ~
~m I~F X a 25? : g
iS~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~4 (~~I)~ ~ T ‘ ‘~~~~~ U’ ~••.~ ~~~
>-
(d - ,
.v - - S ~~~
4
~
a
____________________________________ ~ IC3~1997 Michael S Miller .
c~~s ~ ~~ ~K’~~~\\ ~~~~~~
S
ummary
The Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture
completed forensic medical reports on 78 of its Turkish clients
referred to the Foundation in the period 1st Januiry 1997 to 31st
March 1998. All presented with medical evidence of torture
consistent with their accounts. Care and treatment were offered in
the same period by the Medical Foundation to further Turkish
survivors of torture who did not require forensic medical reports to
support their asylum claims.
Most of the torture we have documented occurs in the context
of the struggle between the Turkish Government and the Kurdish
separatist movement, the PKK The Treaty of Sevres after the First
World War gave Kurds hopes for a state of their own. These were
disappointed when Mustafa Kemal led an armed revolt to establish
a new Turkish nation state. By the Treaty of Lausanne, a new
peace was concluded with the victors, which made no provision for
Kurdish independence. The new Turkish state was intended to be
unitary, and did not recognise ethnic or cultural separateness for
the Kurds. Risings were suppressed with armed force and people
forced to move from their villages which were then burnt md
destroyed. The Turkish Government remains determined not to
permit any cultural pluralism. Violence characterised the initial
relations between the Turkish Government and the Kurds in
Turkey, and still does to this day.
There is no doubt that torture occurs in Turkey. Organisations
that monitor human rights, such as Amnesty International and
Human Rights Watch, attest to it year after year. Inter-
governmental organisations, such as the UN Special Rapporteur on
Torture, the UN Committee against Torture and the Committee for
the Prevention of Torture of the Council of Europe (CPT) all
criticise Turkey for allowing torture to continue. The Turkish
Government itself admits that torture occurs in Turkey.
The measures it takes to combat torture, however, are
insufficient Incommunicado detention enables torture to occur,
shorter periods which were introduced in March 1997 are not
everywhere complied with. Failure to investigate, prosecute, mod
secure convictions and to impose appropriate penalties on those
thought to be responsible for torture are considered by the US
State Department in its report on the events of 1997 to be “the
Staying Alive by Accident Torhire Survivors Iioni Turkey in the UK
single largest obstacle to reducing human rights abuses”.
Perpetrators may literally be getting away with murder
Medical examination during detention and upon release or
court appearance is required by Turkish law, hut intimidation of
doctors and detainees leads to torture not being reported or
documented even when there are clear signs of it In March 1998 a
doctor was charged with malpractice for documenting torture of
six men accused of theft although the charge against the doctor
was later dropped. The Turkish Government has issued circulars
ordering compliance with regulations forbidding the use of torture
and has instituted human rights training for security personnel. It
has also established a Human Rights Minister However, as the
CPT pointed out, these measures are inadequate without more
effective control of the security forces.
The 78 clients in this report left Turkey and sought political
asylum in the UK because they feared further torture All but eight
of the sample were men, most of whom were married, but a good
number had left wives and children behind Most lived in small
towns or villages and were farmers, although some had fled to
large towns to try to escape the attentions of the security forces.
All hut two were Kurds; most had political sympathies for Kurdish
separatist or communist ideas. Most belonged to the minority
religious Alevi group whose members are also harassed. In
‘virtually every case, other members of the family had also been
persecuted. The clients were usually detained repeatedly for a few
days at a time. Only 15 were charged with an offence, and of
these, only three were convicted. All described torture during their
arrests.
Forensic medical reports completed by 25 different Medical
Foundation doctors found scars or other signs that the clients had
been tortured as they described. The time between the last
detention and examination at the Medical Foundation ranged from
se~en months to ten years. Doctors found scarring from beatings,
cigarette burn scars, pmin in feet and shoulders consistent with
reported injuries , and in virtuall y all the clients, often considerable
mental and emotional symptoms. Beating, falaka (beating on the
soles of the feet) electrical torture, suspension and cold water
hosing were the tortures most frequently reported, with
blindfolding, enforced nakedness and threats of death or violence
generally accompanying the physical ill-treatment Similar findings
4 Stoyinq Ahve by Accident Torture Survivors from Turkey in the UK
were reported by other agencies, for example, Physicians for
Human Rights, Human Rights Watch (Helsinki) and the Human
Rights Foundation of Turkey.
Despite the forensic medical evidence and the widely
documented practices of torture in Turkey, the Home Office, which
is responsible for deciding claims of political asylum, does not
usually recognise these people as requiring international protection.
Many of our clients told the Home Office, either at the intervies
~
or in written submissions from their legal representative, that they
had been tortured. We read the accounts of what the clients said to
the Home Office alongside the reasons gisen for refusing asylum.
We found that refusal letters written to clients whom we know told
the Home Office that they had been tortured either ignore or
hardly mention what the clients said about their treatment in
detention. Clients’ own es idence of torture appears to count for
nothing. Ten cases had to wait until the Home Office had seen the
medical evidence before their accounts of torture were considered
and believed, and 32 were still denied international protection esen
when the medical evidence was available.
The Home Office assessment of the human rights situation in
Turkey seriously and dangerously underestimates the risk of
torture or persecution that would be faced by asylum seekers if
=
returned Its assessment also differs in being more favourable than
those made by all the independent commentators whose views are
~~
considered here.
The Home Office’s failure to consider evidence of torture means
~~
that many Turkish torture victims are not being granted the right
to stay in the UK. Their claims to be in fear of further torture are
being ignored, and the UK may consequently be failing to honour
~~
j
its international obligations to protect those at risk
Staying Alive by Accident Torture Survivors from Turkey in the UK 5
Intro duction
The Medical Foundation has always had a large number of
Turkish clients Since its beginnings in 1986, the Medical
Foundation has seen 2800 Turkish clients, some 19% of the total
number of clients. Many sought our help in 1989 when around
3000 Turkish asylum seekers from a limited area of Turkey came
to the UK in the months of May and June. Since then, those
seeking refuge from Turkey in the UK have continued to come for
help from the Medical Foundation in large numbers. The Medical
Foundation is concerned that many of these clients are neither
recognised as refugees nor allowed to stay in the UK for
humanitarian reasons. This is despite their having credible histories
of persecution , and, in many cases, forensic medical reports
documenting their torture.
The Home Office uses two main arguments for refusing asylum.
First, it may call into question the truth of the asylum seeker’s
mccount of persecution in Turkey, often by pointing to apparent
discrepancies or inconsistencies in what they have said. Our
therapeutic work with our Turkish clients and the medical evidence
vve have gathered lead us to find these histories credible Second,
the Home Office perception of the human rights situation in
Turkey is more favourable than that adopted by most other
commentators. We examine these reasons and why we disagree
sith the Home Office assessment in Chapter 8 of this report. In
~
the refusil letters sent to our clients the degree of risk Turkish
Kurds who have been tortured would face if returned to Turkey is,
in our ‘.~iew, dangerously underestimated.
More recently, the Labour Government has been making its
assessments of the human rights situation in refugee producing
countries more publicly available (Fairer, Faster and Fumer 9.4 to
9 6). Earlier in 1998 the Home Office produced country
assessments on 34 out of the 35 countries from which the largest
numbers of asylum seekers come to the UK. The Medical
Foundation, together with several other organisations, saw drafts
of four of these, including that on Turkey. The Turkey country
assessment was withdrawn, following criticisms from the Medical
Foundation and others. Howevei~ the practice of providing publicly
a~ailable country assessments is very much to be welcomed,
especially since for the first time statements are referenced to a
bibliography of sources generally within the public domain.
6 Staying Alive by Accident Torture Survivors from Turkey in the UK
The Medical Foundation has a unique archive of information
ibout types of torture and the context in which it occurs. Our files
ontain reports on the individual experiences of thousands of
orture survivors, what they endured, where they were detained,
vhich authorities were responsible for their torture, and what
‘vents and expressions of opinion led to their being detained and
ortured. The Medical Foundation will be using this material to
omment on the Government’s country assessments Our response
o the Home Office initiative is an additional reason for our
ocusing on the experiences of our Turkish clients at this time It is
arr of our work with our Turkish, as with all our clients, to
nderstand as fully as possible the political and social context in
~
Nhich their torture occurred. Their evidence, our reading of other
,ources, many of which are also used by the Home Office, leads us
o conclusions markedly at variance with those of the Home Office
is regards the credibility of these asylum seekers and the degree of
isk they would face were they to have to return
Staying Alive by Accident Torture Survivors from Turkey vi the UK 7
CHAPTER 1
Historica l Backg round
“All Kurds possess in Turkey, without any restriction, all the
rights possessed by the Turks.”
Turkish Gosernment spokesperson 1925
(quoted in McDowall 1997 p 146)
“Everybody has to be Turkish.”
Turkish Prime Minister Yitdirim Akbulut 1990
(quoted in Cotlinson chap I p 30)
“To be Kurdish is enough.”
Medical Foundation clienr on bLing asked by Home OfficL
Immigration Officer why he had been detained in Turkey
“In Europe, people die by accident; in Turkey, people stay
alive by accident.”
Medical Foundation ciient’s comment
The introductory quotations illustrate the long-standing policies of
the Turkish Gosernment towards the Kurds and how they are
perceived by Kurds themselves. Kurds think of themselves as
forming a distinct group with their own language and culture; the
extent of actual ethnic difference is less clear (McDowall 1997 p 9).
Those in Turkey are now estimated to number around 13 million
and to constitute 23% of the population (McDowall 1997 p 3).
Kurds speak different dialects of the Kurdish language, with
Kurmanji being the principal one in eastern Turkey, and Zaza in
~estern Turkes Turkish Kurds live in the poorer ire-is of the
countr%, predomin-intlv in provinces in the south elst sshich have
been under emergency legislation and in provinces bordering that
irea to ~hich many Kurds were deported betsseen the wars. They’
li~e largely in rural arems, although the Turkish Government’s
8 Staying Alive by Accident Torture Survivors from Turkey in the UK