Oya Ersoy, Co-Chair of the Human Rights Association (IHD), assessed the report prepared by the National Solidarity and Brotherhood Commission established in the Turkish parliament. She said the report creates an important ground for discussion in some areas but contains significant shortcomings, particularly regarding human rights, justice, the language of peace and democratization.
Ersoy emphasized that, after more than forty years of conflict, establishing mechanisms to confront the truth and strengthening social consensus are essential for achieving lasting peace. She noted that the process cannot advance solely through legal regulations but must also be supported by the shared will of social and political actors.
Ersoy said that discussing peace in Turkey at a time when wars are intensifying around the world presents an important opportunity. She said: “At a time when so many wars are taking place, discussing peace in Turkey is an important opportunity. The beginning of a process in which weapons are set aside in the Kurdish question from the outset, the cessation of violations of the right to life and the establishment of a commission in parliament are important positive steps in this process.”
Ersoy also stated that despite numerous meetings and consultations, the proposals submitted by the IHD were not included in the parliamentary report on the Kurdish question. She also said: “As far as I know, the commission established in parliament held 21 meetings. If I am not mistaken, the views of 137 civil society organizations, academics, former government representatives and former speakers of parliament were heard in this process. However, despite all these meetings and consultations, the proposals we submitted as IHD were not reflected in the report.”
The language of the report is definitely not the language of peace
Oya Ersoy stressed that her most fundamental criticism of the report concerns the language used. Ersoy said, “The more than forty-year conflict created a deeply polarizing and violence-based language. For the process to succeed, this language must change. The government defines the process as ‘disarmament’ or the liquidation of the organization; what we understand is that it should evolve into a peace process.”
Ersoy stated that the wording of the commission report is problematic and added: “The word ‘peace’ is almost never mentioned in the report and the Kurdish question is not even named. Yet this is a multidimensional issue that has lasted for more than forty years, during which serious violations occurred in the social, political and human rights spheres.”
Ersoy also emphasized that the association is directly affected by the process and drew attention to the human rights violations experienced during the conflict period.
Ersoy said: “We are also a party to this process. Our presidents and co-chairs were subjected to armed attacks; our members were abducted and disappeared in unsolved murders. Some of our members were prosecuted, imprisoned or forced to leave the country simply because they defended human rights and peace.
This conflict period created serious polarization; it was a time when those in power prioritized a discourse of hatred and violence and labeled the opposition as ‘terrorists’. If a new period emerges with peace and democracy, the language must first change. Polarizing, hateful and nationalist rhetoric must end. In examples around the world, language is decisive in conflicts. We do not see such a language in the commission report; this is the issue we criticize the most.”
Honorable peace is not possible without truth and justice
Ersoy drew attention to the human rights violations that occurred during the forty-year conflict and said the process caused both collective and personal trauma. She said, “During the forty-year conflict, multidimensional violations such as village evacuations, unsolved murders, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial executions took place. These caused serious collective and personal trauma in society; there is almost no segment that has not been affected. We can cite thousands of examples, most recently the October 10 Massacre.”
Ersoy stated that the report does not include a framework for transitional justice or confronting the past and emphasized that the state must face its history. She also said: “The report contains nothing about transitional justice or an apology for the massacres. It is extremely important that the truth is not manipulated. The state must acknowledge and confront the violations committed in the past and its own crimes. Without doing this, a just and honorable peace is not possible.”
Ersoy also stated that the suffering of the Saturday Mothers and the Peace Mothers is not reflected in the report and stressed the need to establish truth commissions. She said: “We do not see the suffering of the Saturday Mothers and the Peace Mothers, who were listened to with interest in parliament and whose pain was said to be shared, reflected in the report. Unlike the process in 2015, we also do not see a language that acknowledges past violations, such as when then-Prime Minister Erdoğan said, ‘If the Diyarbakır (Amed) Prison had a tongue, it would speak.’
One of the foundations of a just and lasting peace is the establishment of truth and justice commissions. The fact that this is not included in the report will not make us abandon our demand. We consider the commission report an important stage, but we remain determined to voice our demands and to continue our struggle until the end.”
We do not see concrete steps from the state
Ersoy criticized the sixth section of the report for failing to detail the legal process and said that no concrete steps have been taken by the state. She noted that the report links the process to disarmament but does not present a coordinated roadmap. Ersoy also emphasized that the process cannot be limited only to disarmament and that no regulation has been introduced regarding political prisoners and seriously ill detainees in prisons.
Ersoy said, “Many political figures and media workers who have never taken up arms, who advocate a peaceful solution or who are imprisoned simply because of their views are being held in prisons such as Silivri and similar facilities, including names like Selahattin Demirtaş, Figen Yüksekdağ and Osman Kavala.”
Ersoy also stated that prisons have increasingly turned into spaces of pressure against the opposition. She said that facilities such as Silivri, Sincan and other prisons have become places where opposition figures, many of whom once struggled together, are being held, adding that members of the association who defend human rights and do not share the government’s views are also in prison.
A third-party oversight is necessary in this process
Ersoy stressed that the disarmament process should not be left solely to the executive branch and that a third-party oversight mechanism is necessary. She stated that the executive cannot be both a party to the process and its supervisor, adding that an independent monitoring mechanism involving human rights defenders and civil society is needed. Ersoy also said that their association is ready to take an active role in such a mechanism.
Ersoy also criticized the report for presenting the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Constitutional Court as if they were acts of goodwill. She emphasized that these rulings must already be implemented under Article 90 of the Constitution of Turkey and international conventions.
Ersoy stated that, as of 2025, decisions concerning many individuals, including Selahattin Demirtaş, Can Atalay and Osman Kavala, have not been implemented by Turkey. She added that despite infringement procedures, Turkey remains the only country that has failed to enforce such rulings and that the implementation rates cited in the report do not reflect reality.
Process cannot advance without transparency
Oya Ersoy said transparency is crucial for the continuation of the process and stressed that it cannot move forward without it. She also criticized the lack of implementation of democratization measures, stating that political control over the judiciary must end and that the independence of the judiciary, particularly the Council of Judges and Prosecutors, must be ensured. Ersoy emphasized that these steps must be implemented without delay.
Leave a Reply