This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 ISTANBUL 001655 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV PHUM TU AM
SUBJECT: ISTANBUL ADMINISTRATIVE COURT BLOCKS "ALTERNATIVE 
ARMENIAN CONFERENCE"; ORGANIZERS SEEK TO BYPASS DECISION BY 
USING A THIRD VENUE 
 
REF: A. ANKARA 4951 
 
     ¶B. ANKARA 3032 
 
This message was coordinated with Embassy Ankara. 
 
¶1. (U)  This is an action message, see para 13. 
 
¶2. (SBU) Summary: In a controversial decision unveiled just 
hours 
before the start of the "Alternative Armenian Conference," at 
which 
independent-minded speakers planned to challenge Turkish 
orthodoxy 
about the massacre of Armenians in 1915, an Istanbul court on 
September 22 handed down an injunction blocking the event. 
The 
ruling marked the second time the event has been cancelled. 
Most 
legal experts were highly critical of the decision and both 
PM 
Erdogan and FM Gul strongly condemned it.  The European 
Commission 
also reacted vigorously, criticizing the decision and terming 
its 
late delivery a "provocation."  Embassy has expressed 
appreciation 
for the GOT,s reaction and told the MFA the conference needs 
to get 
back on track.  At mid-day on September 23, organizers 
indicated they 
hope to do so by holding the conference at Bilgi University 
on 
September 24, seizing on Justice Minister Cicek's suggestion 
that 
the court decision only applies to Bosphorus and Sabanci 
Universities, as the plaintiffs omitted Bilgi in their 
initial 
filing.  Suggested press guidance is in para 13.  End Summary. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Organizers at Bosphorus and Sabanci universities had 
originally planned to hold the "Alternative Armenian 
Conference" in 
May.  But they were forced to cancel at the last minute after 
Justice 
Minister Cicek angrily denounced them on the floor of 
Parliament as 
"traitors" and asserted that the conference was a "stab in 
the back" 
(reftel B).  At that time, neither Erdogan nor Gul spoke out, 
though 
Speaker of Parliament Arinc did criticize Cicek. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Stung by negative international reaction, however, 
the 
government subsequently encouraged organizers to re-schedule, 
with 
Gul even accepting in principle an invitation to open the 
conference 
on September 23 (though the UNGA ultimately precluded his 
attendance) 
(Ref A).  Opponents in Turkey's nationalist Union of Jurists 
quietly 
filed suit to block the conference, and won provisional 
approval of 
their suit in a September 19 decision by Istanbul's 4th 
Administrative 
Court.  Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not deliver the 
decision to 
the Governor's office until late on September 22, however, 
and by the 
time the decision was relayed to the universities shortly 
thereafter, 
there was no time left to appeal.  The court's decision, 
adopted by a 
split 2-1 vote, is not a final one, but is preliminary, 
pending 
submission of material to the court by the defendants. 
 
¶5. (SBU) The material requested by the court includes 
information on 
the "administrative process" used to organize the conference, 
whether 
any administrative authority was informed about the 
conference, the 
criteria used in deciding on who would speak, whether the 
meeting was 
open to "anyone who would like to express their views," the 
criteria 
"that have been considered in case the meeting has been 
organized for 
limited representation," and how the cost of transportation 
and 
accommodation for the speakers would be financed.  The court 
gave the 
defendants 30 days to produce the required information. 
Court head 
Saadettin Yaman and member Hami Ali Kandil voted in favor of 
the 
decision, while judge Fethi Sayin opposed it, arguing that 
the 
"meeting in question is not an administrative action that can 
be the 
subject of an administrative trial." 
 
¶6. (SBU) In a remarkable reversal of its statements in May, 
the GOT 
reaction to the court decision was swift and negative. 
Erdogan, who 
earlier this week declined to directly address the 
prosecution of 
Orhan Pamuk, was unusually forthright in decrying the ruling. 
 He 
stated that he could not approve such a decision at a time 
when "we 
want a more democratic and freer Turkey," adding that, "I 
cannot 
reconcile the blocking of a platform for ideas, which has yet 
to take 
place, with the concepts of democracy, freedom, and 
modernity." 
 
¶7. (SBU) Gul added that "there are few countries that do as 
much harm 
to themselves as we do."  He ascribed the decision to the 
"last 
attempts of certain circles that try to block Turkey,s road 
on her 
way to EU negotiations on October 3," and said he would not 
be 
surprised to see more such last-gasp efforts in coming weeks. 
Both 
the PM and FM,s statements were carried widely on 
television. 
(Comment: This is the first time we have seen high-ranking 
GOT 
officials make such statements in conjunction with freedom of 
speech. 
End Comment).  Opposition CHP officials also criticized the 
decision. 
Only the opposition True Path Party (DYP) and several fringe 
parties 
expressed support for the decision.  In a strong statement 
issued in 
Brussels, the European Commission condemned the decision, 
describing 
its late delivery as a "provocation," but taking note of 
Erdogan,s 
statement. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Most legal pundits and observers were also quick to 
criticize the decision, agreeing with Sayin that the court 
had 
overstepped its bounds in viewing the meeting as an 
administrative 
action.  Ibrahim Kabaoglu, an expert in constitutional law 
from 
Marmara University, told the press that no judge has the 
legal 
authority to postpone a scholarly meeting and that the 
decision was a 
"first."  Ismet Berkan, editor of the liberal daily 
"Radikal," who 
had characterized Bosphorus's earlier decision to postpone 
the 
conference as a "turning point in terms of academic autonomy 
and 
freedom in Turkey," was equally unsparing regarding the 
court's 
action.  He argued in his September 23 column that if in the 
Turkish 
Republic "respected" universities say that a conference is a 
"scholarly" one, "that conference is scholarly."  Courts, he 
said, 
have no authority to judge the issue one way or another.  "We 
are 
witness," he concluded, "to a court overstepping the bounds 
of its 
authority." 
 
¶9. (SBU) Organizers met for three hours on the evening of 
September 
22 and again on the morning of September 23 to review their 
legal 
options, which they pledged in a September 22 statement to 
defend 
fully.  Seizing on an opening made by Justice Minister Cicek 
(whose 
earlier criticism helped torpedo the conference in May), they 
announced mid-afternoon September 23 that they would both 
appeal the 
ruling and seek to hold the conference at Bilgi University, 
which was 
not cited in the plaintiffs, application to the court, or at 
another 
venue.  (Cicek indicated that the Administrative Court's 
decision 
covers Bosphorus and Sabanci Universities, but does not apply 
to any 
school.) 
 
¶10. (U) Yet to be seen are the plaintiffs' and court's 
reaction. 
Earlier on September 22, Kemal Kerincsiz, a member of the 
Union of 
Jurists (which brought the case) and former president of the 
Nationalist Lawyers' Association predicted that the decision 
was the 
final nail in the conference's coffin, but warned that "if 
you insist 
and decide for the third time to hold this conference, the 
Turkish 
nation will not tolerate it." 
 
¶11. (SBU) Comment: As Gul observed, Turkey has a knack for 
drawing 
attention to its democratic deficiencies at especially 
inopportune 
moments.  With the opening of EU negotiations less than two 
weeks 
off, two Armenian genocide-related resolutions voted out of 
committee 
on Capitol Hill, and the ongoing investigation of novelist 
Orhan 
Pamuk for having dared to claim that there is no freedom in 
Turkey to 
discuss controversial issues like the massacre of Armenians 
(reftel 
C), now was a time to highlight Turkey's ability to openly 
debate 
controversial issues, rather than the reverse.  Embassy 
Ankara has 
already made the point with Turkish officials that the 
conference 
needs to get back on track.  The originators of this latest 
fiasco 
came not from within the GOT but from outside elements that 
would be 
happy to see the EU process fail and that also do not mind 
embarrassing the government.  The GOT has rallied strongly 
and the 
combination of Erdogan and Gul's strong statements and 
Cicek's 
opening may enable organizers to find a way 
around the court ruling. 
 
¶12. Comment continued: It is encouraging that the conference 
may 
still take place at an alternative site.  But even so, 
speakers would 
be under intense pressure.  As reported reftel B, the 
EU-related 
legal reforms have made no meaningful impact on freedom of 
speech. 
We will be encouraging the government to work harder on this. 
 It 
remains to be seen whether the speakers are able to express 
their 
views, and whether doing so lands them in court, as happened 
to 
Pamuk.  End Comment. 
 
¶13. (SBU) Action request: Mission Turkey recommends that 
Department 
adopt press guidance expressing disappointment with the 
decision and 
recognizing the prompt and positive reaction of the 
government. 
Suggested text follows: 
 
Q: Any comment on the decision by a Turkish court to prevent 
an 
academic conference on the Armenian issue that was scheduled 
to begin 
today in Istanbul? 
 
-- We have said many times that the circumstances surrounding 
the 
mass deaths of Armenians at the end of the Ottoman Empire is 
a 
question best left for historians to debate. 
 
-- We have long supported Turkey,s democratization process 
as part of 
its drive to secure membership in the European Union. 
 
-- Prime Minster Erdogan said yesterday that the court,s 
decision is 
inconsistent with that process.  We agree with the Prime 
Minister,s 
observation. 
JONES