Public Disclosure on the “So-Called Peace Declaration”


As Istanbul Medeniyet University, we believe that the “So-Called Peace Declaration” is an unacceptable text that exceeds the boundaries of demanding justice and freedom of expression since it

  • defines the efforts to abolish the ditch operations by the terror organization PKK that limit and even eliminate local residents’ right to live and to bring daily life back to normal in the region as state terror by using expressions such as “Deliberate and planned slaughter” and “massacre and intentional banishment against the entire region and chiefly Kurdish population”;
  • regards the efforts toward forming cantons and obtaining autonomy as innocent demands and the demands that threaten the very existence and integrity of state and its indivisible unity with the nation as innocent efforts to find a political solution and asks for a roadmap along these lines;
  • defines terrorist actions that threaten the rights and freedoms of the citizens of the Turkish Republic as innocent deeds and perceives the state reflex against terrorists as “state violence against innocent citizens”, and
  • serve the defamation efforts against Turkey in the international arena by turning the existing situation inside out and invite foreign intervention.   

Given the fact that law is a system of codes that is not limited to the simple definition of “law for law’s sake” but can be explained on the basis of securing the existence of the deeds and actions of both the individual and the state which affect one another, it is clear that freedom of expression can only be exercised to the limit of the indivisible unity of the state with the country and nation. In this context, although the public opinion clearly expects that the deeds and actions that transgress these limits as in the So-Called Peace Declaration and the state’s self-protection reflex against these should be interpreted in the light of the developments that transpired during the drafting of the declaration, Constitutional Court still views it as a case of freedom of expression; thus, we invite the Court to identify the limits of personal rights and freedoms in this particular case and define the limits by which the state can protect itself. For the recent decision of the Constitutional Court has tremendously increased the people’s need to be satisfied by a concrete explanation that goes beyond abstractions in such tangible cases.

We would like to express our concern that terrorist activities might escalate unless necessary action is taken and underline the need to avoid any mistakes. 

Respectfully announced to the public.

Istanbul Medeniyet University Rectorate