Lawyers in al-Tabqa: continuing to deny leader the "right to hope" is violation of international standards

The "right to hope" is one of the established principles in European human rights law, and it was reinforced by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in its landmark 2013 ruling in the case of Vinter and Others v. the United Kingdom, where it ruled that life sentences without any legal possibility of review or release constitute inhuman treatment and violate Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

In this context, two human rights activists in the Al-Tabqa region expressed their concern over the absence of any legal steps to implement this principle in the case of leader Abdullah Ocalan, who has been imprisoned for more than 25 years.

Lawyer Mahmoud al-Ghabash, a member of the Lawyers' Union in Al-Tabqa, stated that leader Abdullah Ocalan "meets all the objective conditions to activate the right to hope, whether in terms of the length of detention, his advanced age, or health conditions," adding that "the failure to apply this right reflects political motives that go beyond legal considerations and represents a tool to pressure the Kurdish people and an attempt to erase their civil and political rights."

Al-Ghabash pointed out that the ministerial committee of the European Council had given Turkey, in its session on September 20, 2023, an opportunity to review its penal system related to life imprisonment, especially concerning the case of leader Abdullah Ocalan, without Ankara making any substantial amendments. He mentioned that "continuing to ignore these calls constitutes a violation of Turkey's obligations as a party to the European Convention on Human Rights."

As for lawyer Ahmed Mohamed Khader, he pointed out that "the continuous deprivation of the leader from communicating with his family and lawyer, and the lack of transparency regarding his health condition, constitutes a double violation of fundamental rights." He explained that "life sentences in modern legal systems are often reviewed after 20 years, yet no review has been granted in this case, despite the leader being over seventy years old, which warrants humanitarian release."

In his turn, lawyer Mahmoud Hamsho pointed out that "the fundamental reason for this Turkish insistence on ignoring the right to hope is the nature of the political and intellectual project it carries, which contradicts the prevailing national policies." He added, "The continuation of this approach undermines Turkey's credibility before the international community and is an indication of its failure to respect its human rights obligations."

The two human rights activists concluded by emphasizing that the implementation of the "Right to Hope" is not just a legal obligation, but represents a gateway to transitional justice and political stability. They stated that the leader's case has become a benchmark for measuring countries' commitment to human rights, urging international institutions to exert real pressure to ensure Turkey's adherence to its human rights commitments.

T/S

ANHA