Figure 1. The Istanbul Convention took its name from Turkey's largest city, Istanbul, where it was signed. Source: Unsplash.
On the dawn of 20 March 2021, Turkish citizens were confronted with the unexpected and alarming decision of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to withdraw the country from an important human rights treaty. Turkey was officially leaving the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combatting Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, better known as the Istanbul Convention (IC). The withdrawal was announced in a presidential decree, which was issued rather hastily and in the middle of the night. This decision has sent shockwaves through a country that has been reeling from high-profile domestic violence cases and femicides [1].
The IC was opened for signature on 11 May 2011 in Istanbul, Turkey. The pact is a legally binding instrument that essentially creates a legal framework for the protection of women by preventing and eliminating violence against women, combating domestic violence and ensuring that criminals are prosecuted. Turkey was the first of the 35 Member States in total to ratify the Istanbul Convention on the same day it was opened, thus demonstrating a strong commitment to protecting the status of women in Turkish society.
On 8 March 2012, which is also International Women’s Day, Law No. 6284, which establishes the incorporation of the Istanbul Convention into domestic law, was passed. In Article 1 states that it is based on the Turkish Constitution and international treaties to which Turkey is a state party.
Figure 2. Since the Justice and Development Party (AKP) (Erdoğan's political party) came to power in 2002, men killed at least 6,732 women in Turkey. Two days after the announcement of withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention, six women were murdered in 12 hours, four of whom were murdered because they wanted to end relationships. Source: Unsplash.
After the arbitrary decision was made public, it was met with great dissatisfaction both within the country, as well as internationally. Constitutional lawyers and bar associations in Turkey strongly opposed the decision, pointing out that the withdrawal from the treaty is clearly against Turkey’s Constitution. This is due to the fundamental constitutional principle that states that the executive cannot usurp the powers of the legislature, as according to Article 90 of the Constitution, the Parliament is requiredto ratify human rights treaties. The moment that a human rights treaty that is passed into domestic law by act of the parliament can simply be repealed by a presidential decree, also means that, in this case, the Turkish President can repeal any existing domestic legislation.
This decision highlights the major problem of violence against women that the Turkish society has been facing for years. In particular, according to the Turkish Ministry of Justice, the percentage of femicide has increased by 1,400 per cent in just seven years. As in 2002, 66 women were murdered, while in 2009 the number skyrocketed to 953. In the same year, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) acknowledged that there is a “climate that is conducive to domestic violence”.
Figure 3. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s ruling has lost a modest amount of support over the past few years. According to polls conducted by independent research groups on May 2020, the 30.7 percent of respondents said they would vote AKP if there was an election on Sunday. Source: Unsplash.
The question that arises from this issue and one that is difficult to unilaterally interpret is why should a decision that jeopardizes the fundamental right of any human being to be protected from all forms of violence be the topic of such a debate. According to the Turkish President, the Convention, which originally provided for the defence of women, ended up undermining family values, increasing divorce rates and promoting homosexuality through its “supposed principles of gender equality and non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation”.
Although it might be challenging to morally and democratically interpret this political move, looking at the Turkish President’s policy as a whole, as well as his justification for his action, it is clear that the decision was made for a variety of reasons. Many argue that one of the goals was to win over the most extreme and conservative circles in Turkey, which make up a large part of its electorate. Given the President's sharp decline in popularity, it seems like he needed to stimulate the extreme religious mindset of his constituents by trying to oppose European movements and institutions. It may seem like the narrative that Turkey wants to join the European Union needs to now be dispelled, since it is more than clear that the country aims at increasing its soft power [2]; trying, through the management of its internal problems – which are certainly not a few – to project its fists outwards, Turkey is willing to trade with the great powers on equal terms, as if it were one of them.
An important question that also needs to be addressed, is what is to become of this unconstitutional state of affairs from the perspective of Turkey’s domestic law. Thousands of people have been protesting in Turkey, urging President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to reconsider his decision to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention. Women’s rights groups, bar associations and citizens have also made clear that they will challenge this decision before Turkey’s Supreme Administrative Court. Yet, given the concerns over Turkey’s executive’s grip over the judiciary, the outcome of such a challenge cannot be foreseen.
Figure 4. Despite the pandemic and its associated restrictions, mass protests took place in Turkey. Women’s organisations have also urged the Council of Europe to act, while some have even filed individual lawsuits calling for the withdrawal to be annulled. Source: Unsplash.
It is important to understand that Turkey's formal withdrawal from the Istanbul Summit is a huge setback for the overall efforts to combat violence against women, as it is believed to have deprived Turkish society of a vital legal tool against violence. The decision was also met with strong criticism by human rights organizations, the Council of Europe and many important figures in the international political arena, including the President of the United States, Joe Biden.
Described by many as “devastating”, the majority of the international community calls on Turkey to reconsider this decision, as it abolishes not only women’s fundamental rights protection but also the Parliament's will and legislative power. Meanwhile, it is more than clear that women will not cave in – in the last few years more and more women have been raising their voices against the misogynistic climate and these voices certainly won’t cease until they are met with full respect and support in their struggle against injustice. There is, therefore, an urgent need to stop the growing efforts to obstruct the ratification of the IC, by deliberately spreading false narratives about it. Member states of the Council of Europe must overcome all political manipulation and unfounded criticism vis-à-vis this landmark text and guarantee all European women the right to live a life free from violence in the 21st century.
[1] Femicide or feminicide is a sex-based hate crime term, broadly defined as "the intentional killing of women or girls because they are female", though definitions vary depending on its cultural context. Feminist author Diana E. H. Russell was the first person to define and disseminate this term in modern times, in 1976.
[2] In politics, the concept of “Soft Power” is defined as the ability to shape the preferences of others through appeal and attraction.
Comments