Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
The legal committee of the French National Assembly has adopted a bill proposing to criminalize the denial of the Armenian genocide. The penalty for the crime would be a year's imprisonment and a 45,000 Euro fine. In 2001, French law publicly recognized the Armenian genocide, so this is not a law designed to express a sentiment about history, it's a bill to criminalize those who disaffirm the sentiment.
One wonders about the details: Is it criminal only to deny it out loud? Will you be allowed to deny it in the privacy of your own home? What words, exactly, constitute denial? What happens if you think it didn't happen--is that criminal? Is France committed to stopping everyone who gets off a Turkish Airlines flight and asking them, "So, what's your position: genocide or tragic events?" If the latter, will they be arrested immediately? If not, are they really serious about enforcing this law? If not, why are they passing it?
Prime Minister Erdoğan has suddenly discovered an enormous enthusiasm for the value of free expression and has warned of "grave consequences" to Turkey's relations with France if the bill is passed. I assume that he hopes France will follow the Turkish model:
Journalist İlkem Ezgi Aşam has been sentenced to a year in prison for publishing a four-sentence quote in daily BirGün.
An Istanbul court passed down the verdict yesterday, punishing Aşam for publishing a four-sentence quote regarding mass graves in the southeastern province of Bitlis.
Conveying others’ opinions in news piece is a journalist’s most democratic right, Aşam said in court. The court’s verdict first has to be ratified by the Supreme Court of Appeals, however. If convicted, Aşam will become the 67th journalist behind bars in Turkey.
I see a simple way out of this diplomatic impasse: France and Turkey could agree that no form of speech, however objectionable, should be criminalized. (That happens already to be guaranteed in the Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen, both countries' constitutions, and numerous treaties to which both countries are signatory, but I'm just not sure the concept has really taken root in either of them.)
- Comment (13)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
May '11
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
One could just write this off with, " Yeah, well, the French are idiots."
However, we see the same types of speech limitations in other Euro countries. And the limits are expanding as do the punishments.
The question is, "What will be required to turn this around?" Is a total collapse of the EU and a turning out of the current leadership and apparatchiks the only way?
Jul '10
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
While in the United States the duly elected President publicly assembles the greatest enemies list the West has ever seen over at AttackWatch and "Inevitable" Romney grandstands with $10,000 bets that he never said what he plainly and repeatedly said and our rapacious unions try to buy a monopoly on political speech with the Occupy Astroturf movement.
Erdoğan is one more Eastern potentate trying to rassle the vocabulary of the West with ugly results. They should form a club. Putin could cater.
Aug '10
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
"criminalize those who disaffirm the sentiment."
Wow, that is a mouthful. As hard to swallow as to digest.
As I contemplate that, I think I'll go outside and shoot a cloud down to water my lawn.
Jun '10
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
Fortunately, now that we have high-resolution satellite photography, any large-scale genocide will be well-documented in real time, and therefore never happen (in Europe anyway.) Too late for the Armenians, too late for Europe's Jews.
Edited on Dec 16, 2011 at 7:27amMar '11
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
I view this the same way I view hate speech laws... good intentions, but a path to hell that can only destroy liberty in the end.
Dec '10
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
Pilli:However, we see the same types of speech limitations in other Euro countries. And the limits are expanding as do the punishments.
· Dec 16 at 6:30am
You don't need to look across the pond. Just look at my neighbor to the south, Canada. Or look at most college campuses.
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
That Armenians were massacred in the old Ottoman realm in large numbers during the First World War is undoubtedly true. Ethnic cleansing is a charge that could certainly be made. But that the massacres were genocidal -- aimed at eliminating an entire people -- is almost certainly untrue. The Armenians of Istanbul and Aleppo (a sizable population) were left untouched. I know. I was once married in Istanbul to the grand-daughter of one such Armenian, and the lady (no spring chicken) attended our wedding.
So the French are thinking about outlawing statements that are arguably true. That is a disgrace.
Jul '11
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
Paul it does not matter one bit to me whether the statement is factually correct or not. The French have always been one war behind and their tremendous ability to confront racial issues head on by restricting liberty at the point of a gun displays the full folly of their thought.
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
As an Ottomanist, I should note that there are scholars of integrity on both sides of the question, which ultimately comes down to the exact definition of “genocide” one uses. (And, to be a Fachidiot, I'll cite the historian’s cop-out of It’s Not My Period, so my opinion has no more authority than any other well-read layman's.)
Consequently, this is akin to passing a law criminalizing dissent from the proposition that Napoleon is the greatest man in history—all it’s going to do is actually keep people from researching and arguing the very difficult questions involved—and my sense is that no one on either side thinks there’s not an enormous amount of research still to be done to get a more exact sense of what went on in Ottoman Armenia.
It’ll have a chilling effect not only politically, but academically—ironically propping up the worst arguments they are attempting to discredit. (But all this has been said with regard to Holocaust-denial laws…it’s the same argument, just over another country’s history rather than one’s own.)
Sep '10
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
Didn't they prosecute or attempt to prosecute Bernard Lewis on this charge?
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
Bill Walsh: As an Ottomanist, I should note that there are scholars of integrity on both sides of the question, which ultimately comes down to the exact definition of “genocide” one uses. (And, to be a Fachidiot, I'll cite the historian’s cop-out of It’s Not My Period, so my opinion has no more authority than any other well-read layman's.)
Consequently, this is akin to passing a law criminalizing dissent from the proposition that Napoleon is the greatest man in history—all it’s going to do is actually keep people from researching and arguing the very difficult questions involved—and my sense is that no one on either side thinks there’s not an enormous amount of research still to be done to get a more exact sense of what went on in Ottoman Armenia.
It’ll have a chilling effect not only politically, but academically—ironically propping up the worst arguments they are attempting to discredit. (But all this has been said with regard to Holocaust-denial laws…it’s the same argument, just over another country’s history rather than one’s own.) · Dec 16 at 10:37am
Amen.
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
They did, Pseudo-D. If memory serves, he was convicted and fined a franc.
Apr '11
Re: Turkey, France, Freedom of Speech, and the Armenian Genocide
etoiledunord: Fortunately, now that we have high-resolution satellite photography, any large-scale genocide will be well-documented in real time, and therefore never happen (in Europe anyway.) Too late for the Armenians, too late for Europe's Jews. · Dec 16 at 7:24am
Edited on Dec 16 at 07:27 am
We had well documented genocide (by the relatively low standards required in modern law) in Yugoslavia. In Europe. In some cases, with western military support (in the form of British and German troops protecting the killers in a Croatian majority area from Serbian military protection for the minority). It's true that we didn't have as good satellite photography then, but even the best doesn't capture indoor murders. Technology cannot make indecent people decent.