Cihan Aydin recalled that as the Human Rights Association (IHD), they had submitted their views within the Commission’s listening phase, and said, “What matters is how these ideas will be reflected in the reports and how they will influence the process.”
IHD Co-Chair Cihan Aydin spoke to ANF and emphasised that the visit of a delegation from the Parliamentary Commission for Solidarity, Fraternity and Democracy to Imrali Island to meet with Abdullah Öcalan was a highly significant development. Aydin said, “Knowing what was discussed between the lines will strengthen the support of society and civil society for the process in a positive way. Transparency is, of course, important, but sharing certain steps immediately with the public may lead to speculation; we have no objection to this. However, the lack of public information about the general framework of the process is a serious shortcoming.”
Impact of social contribution is being restricted
Aydin argued that the complete absence of publicly shared content regarding the framework law that has been debated for some time has restricted society’s ability to contribute, and said: “If the steps to be taken had been shared with the public in broad terms, we too could have prepared reports drawing on international experiences and supported the process with expert input. At this stage, the process largely remains in the hands of the government, while the Kurdish side has taken critical steps swiftly. These steps show that the Kurdish side is approaching peace sincerely; the government must also urgently take steps that support the idea of a solution and peace.”
Security perspective has brought heavy costs
Aydin noted that the state has approached the issue solely from a security perspective for more than forty years, and that this has resulted in very heavy costs. Aydin said, “If the 2013–2015 solution process had succeeded, the major losses of the past ten to fifteen years would not have occurred. At this stage, sitting around a table and speaking is extremely valuable. Since its foundation, the IHD has insisted on a peaceful and just solution to this issue. We continue to insist on this today, and we are therefore pleased with the current process.”
If the state overcomes its phobia, the process will accelerate
Aydin pointed to indications that the state, in the context of developments in Syria, views the Kurds as a security threat. Aydin also stated: “If this phobia is overcome, the process will advance much faster and in a healthier way. We consider the Republican People’s Party (CHP) refusal to join the Commission’s visit to Imrali as a ‘disappointment’. This visit was not about finding out what Abdullah Öcalan would say; it was for the parties represented in Parliament to overcome the psychological threshold regarding peace. It was a ground for confrontation and dialogue. Still, we consider it important that the CHP has stated it is not opposed to the process.”
The need for a third-party monitoring mechanism
Cihan Aydin stressed that one of the fundamental shortcomings of the process is the absence of a third-party monitoring mechanism and added: “Global experiences show that a third party accelerates conflict-resolution processes. We believe that a process open to oversight, one in which both civil society and, if possible, a third party are involved, would function in a healthier way. As the IHD, we will not only observe the process closely; we will also share our views, proposals and findings with both the public and the parties involved.”