D-TR_PV(2013) - European Parliament

EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee
D-TR_PV(2013)0215
MINUTES
of the meeting of 14 February 2013, from 09.00 to 12.30 and from 15.30 to 18.00,
and 15 February 2013, from 10.00 to 11.45
Ankara
The meeting was opened at 9.00 on 14 February 2013, by the Co-Chairs, Mr Afif Demirkiran
and Helene Flautre.
Mr Demirkiran opened the meeting highlighting the significance of the Joint Parliamentary
Committee and suggested it is a cornerstone for EU-Turkey relations. He mentioned that
although the accession talks have recently slowed down, he hopes the process will gain new
impetus and momentum. He affirmed that Turkey will make every effort to proceed in the
reform process, stating that the Grand National Assembly has already implemented a number
of significant reforms, including the establishment of a cross-party Constitution Conciliation
Committee which seeks to create a smooth path for Turkey's entry into the EU.
Mr Cicek, the speaker of the Grand National Assembly, stressed the importance of EUTurkey relations and the significance of the JPC as an instrument for establishing a sound
foundation for EU-Turkey relations. He mentioned two key issues on the JPC's agenda which
include EU-Turkey relations and the ongoing crisis in Syria. He deplored the continuing
humanitarian disaster and the lack of action by the international community. He revealed it
took the death of a quarter of a million people in Bosnia and Herzegovina before the
international community intervened and he argued that this should not be repeated in Syria.
He mentioned the European Union as a union of intent, purpose and targets, stating that
Turkey would like to share these values and move forward. He insisted Turkey has always
been oriented towards the West with the creation of various movements to instill Western
style liberties established during the final years of the Ottoman Empire and with the
establishment of the Turkish Republic in 1923. He described Turkey’s modernisation project
and its desire to create a contemporary state and society. He added that since the1963 Ankara
Agreement, Turkey has made efforts for integration, and Turkey’s eventual target has been
full membership.
He stated that Turkey's target has always been modernisation, and if Turkey is to be integrated
into the EU, the time has come to decide and that Turkey will not diverge from the path of
democratisation regardless of the EU’s response. He noted Turkish public opinion on the EU
has changed, and while at the start of the process, 60% of the Turkish population were in
favour of EU integration, this number has now dropped to below 50%. He proclaimed that
excitement on the Turkish side has decreased and will continue to do so if the EU does not
show any interest in Turkish membership. He acknowledged the shortcomings of Turkey and
reassured the EU that Turkey is doing all that is in their power to tackle these deficiencies,
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
United in diversity
EN
however, Turkey urges the EU to provide constructive criticisms and reminds the audience
that all reforms in Turkey are implemented in the context of terrorism which further
complicates the process.
He drew the audience’s attention to the PKK, stating that in 1984 this terrorist organisation
was responsible for the massacre of civilians; however, it was not labelled as a terror
organisation outside of Turkey at the time. There are still international organisations which do
not label this organisation as a terrorist one. He criticised the lack of respect towards
international treaties and agreements, indicating that Turkish provisions on the prosecution
and deportation of terrorist groups have not been respected by the international community.
He invited members of the international community to help and facilitate Turkey in their fight
against terrorism He declared that Turkey would like to harmonise itself with the EU, and
hopes that the two parties can work together in a concerted fashion.
Ms Flautre underlined that the blockade by France of the chapter on regional development
has been lifted which has raised hopes and indicated that general elections have the ability to
change the approach of a country. Flautre also stressed the negotiations on the Kurdish issue
were highly significant and the European Parliament, which has debated the issue, also
supports the ongoing peace process. She highlighted the importance of the process both for
political freedoms and for the future of the region.
1.
Adoption of the draft agenda
The draft agenda was adopted.
Ms Papadopoulou claimed that the 70th meeting of the EU-Turkey JPC did not take place
because Turkey does not recognise the Republic of Cyprus.
Mr Demirkiran reassured Ms Papadopoulou that her concern will be mentioned in the
minutes.
2.
Adoption of the draft minutes of the 69th EU-Turkey JPC of 13-14 June 2012,
Strasbourg
The minutes were adopted.
3.
EU-Turkey Relations and the State of Play of Accession Negotiations
Mr Ripert, Head of the EU Delegation to Turkey, emphasised that the recent Council
conclusions clearly underlined the importance of Turkey for the EU and emphasised that
negotiations are by far the best framework for relations to flourish. This was also mentioned
by Prime Minister Erdogan at a recent meeting with EU Ambassadors, where he declared
2013 would be a year of new trust. He recalled the basis for this was established by Member
States in December 2012 who had agreed on the most positive and forward looking Council
conclusions on Turkey in years. Member states stressed that accession negotiations are by far
the best tool to allow relations to flourish and highlighted the benefits of the positive agenda
for EU- Turkey relations.
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
2/23
On the question of visa and migration, he stated the Commission has prepared a roadmap
which will ultimately lead to visa-free access to the EU for all Turkish citizens. While there
are challenging requirements on the roadmap, he insisted all elements would be subject to
discussions with Turkey. He insisted the Commission is open to any suggestions by Turkey,
and if the objective can be attained through other means, these would be considered.
He argued that recent developments were an excellent basis for relaunching Turkey's EU
accession process but that further action needs to be taken and an increase in negotiations and
relations is needed to raise the momentum. Turkey also needs to do its share such as a full
alignment with the standards of the ILO to open chapter 19 on social policy and employment.
He also added that further alignment on public procurement legislation is needed to meet EU
standards and stricter rules for granting state aids in line with the Competition rules in the
customs union are required.
He insisted a breakthrough could be achieved if Turkey tackles issues concerning
fundamental rights including freedom of expression, freedom of the media, the right to
security, the right to a fair trial, the freedom of assembly and association and a change in th
the Anti-Terror Law and the Penal Code.
He welcomed the establishment of a national ombudsman, a national human rights institution,
the adoption of the third judicial reform package, and the recent adoption of the right to
defence in ones mother tongue, particularly the Kurdish language in courts as important steps.
Additionally, he said Turkey has full support in its courageous initiative to put an end to the
fighting in the South East. In his view, this is a unique opportunity to put an end to terrorism
and solve the Kurdish issue, and the broad support from stakeholders is a clear token of
Turkish peoples will to finally embark on a path of peace and reconciliation. He declared that
Turkey has the full support of the EU in this process, including through assistance
programmes.
On the draft Constitution, he declared that the EU supports the participatory process
established by the AK Party, as the new constitution needs to be based on the broadest
possible consensus and reflect the aspirations of the society at large. He also claimed 2013
offers a fresh chance for a real breakthrough in the UN process, aiming at a lasting and
comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus issue. He also stated efforts should recommence to
ensure full non-discriminatory implementation of the Additional Protocol of the Association
Agreement to all EU member states which would subsequently provide a significant boost to
accession negotiations.
He also declared fundamental rights are at the heart of the EU project and any EU accession
process; it is also at the heart of the reform process in Turkey for which the EU has provided
an appropiate framework. He concluded that Turkey has the support and solidarity of the EU,
particularly in light of its impressive efforts to host the refugees from Syria. He recalled the
message of High Representative and Vice President of the European Commission, Catherine
Ashton on 12 February which extended heartfelt condolences for the bombing in Hatay on 11
February and strongly condemned the act, stating the EU stands by Turkish authorities in the
fight against all forms of terrorism.
Mr Thompson, representing the Irish Presidency of the EU, underlined the importance of
both the EU to Turkey and Turkey to the EU. With reference to a statement of Prime Minister
Erdogan concerning Turkey's interest in the Shanghai process, he argued that Turkey, like EU
member states, is looking for new markets, however, this does not detract from Turkey’s EU
vocation.
3/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
He acknowledged that negotiations have stalled since 2007, but insisted the EU is trying to
increase the momentum with the opening of negotiations on chapter 22, one of the more
difficult chapters. He hoped opening the chapter will create a virtuous circle as the
atmosphere between the EU and Turkey has become poisonous in the last few years. He
declared Turkey has many friends throughout the EU and needs to demonstrate that the
reform process is as vigorous as it was in the period up to 2007. In his view, it is disturbing to
see so much anti-EU criticism and at the same time a strong desire for accession. He
concluded that Cyprus has long been a thorn in the flesh of the relationship between the EU
and Turkey, however, if prospects open up and if the UN has the support of the EU and
Turkey, it will be possible to move things forward.
Ms Flautre welcomed the new positive tone adopted by the Irish Presidency.
Minister Bagis began his presentation by referring to Ankara as the heart of the Republic and
the Parliament as a strong symbol of Turkish democracy. He declared that the role of Turkey's
accession to the EU does not go through the approval of certain circles or certain countries but
through the Turkish Parliament as with every reform process. He specified that full accession
to the EU has been the AK Party's target since its rise to power in 2002. During this period,
approximately 20.000 laws have been adopted which constitutes a unique progress and reform
record and one which will continue. He also stated the Turkish Grand National Assembly is
and will continue to be an actor in the accession process and despite political blockings since
the last JPC, Turkey continues in its path to reform.
He informed the audience that for the first time Turkey has drafted, for the purpose of selfassessment, a parallel progress report which is an illustration of the reforms implemented. He
stated that during the last 2 ½ years, no single chapter has been opened, and that Prime
Minster Erdogan has delivered a message of commitment to EU Ambassadors to accelerate
the accession process and that the EU should demonstrate the same will. He noted he does not
think Turkey will tolerate another presidency where no new chapter will be opened. He
welcomed that France has finally agreed to open Chapter 22, as Turkey was afraid the whole
process was about to end. On the other hand, the opening of one chapter every 2-3 years is not
sufficient, he stated. The process has to accelerate and during the Irish Presidency, he hopes to
witness the opening of chapters on economy, education and culture, and energy. The Minister
deplored the veto of one EU Member State on opening the energy chapter and at the same
time, he called for the opening of chapter 23.
Minister Bagis stressed that Turkey continued its reforms despite the hesitations of the EU
and informed that Turkey has passed the third judicial reform package and the fourth is
opened for signatures by the end of March 2013. He emphasised the importance of this reform
process and suggested political blockage should be removed as the EU is testing Turkey's
patience and facing a sincerity test with regard to Turkey's accession. He emphasised that
today, the EU needs Turkey as much as Turkey needs the EU. He affirmed Turkey has
strategic preferences and that it is time to decide for Turkey. He further stated that Turkey has
been subject to a process which has not been the case for any candidate country, insisting that
Turkey is not an insignificant country that can be kept at the door, as it is not valueless with
its accession postponed and prevented at all stages. He highlighted Turkey's accession to the
EU as a source of hope and excitement for other countries. He concluded that Turkey has
strong traditions and is always determined to resolve problems, and he hopes 2013 will be a
new era for EU-Turkey relations.
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
4/23
Mr Demirkiran expressed hope for progress on the visa issue and called on the JPC to
support this. Furthermore, he expressed the view that Ms Oomen-Ruijten's resolution on the
Commission's last Turkey Progress report was both significant and balanced.
Ms Oomen-Ruijten stated her report calls for "constructive dialogue" and engagement,
which was hardly reflected in Minister Bagis' assessment. Moreover, she welcomed the
presence of Members of the Constitutional Committee of the Turkish Parliament. In her view,
the fourth judicial reform package will bring new hope, especially for media
freedoms.Addressing herself to Minister Bagis; she called for a constructive cooperation in
this shared process.
Ms Flautre opened the debate with Minister Bagis.
Ms Koppa argued that Ms Oomen-Ruijten expressed the EP delegation's feelings very well
with regard to the dialogue between the two sides. She claimed that Turkey is at a critical
point characterised by three central elements, including the opening of chapters, negotiations
on the Kurdish issue and the deteriorating condition of human and fundamental rights. While
she acknowledged institutional progress, she noted that few things happen in practice on the
protection of human rights, that freedom of speech is a great concern, especially press
freedom. She noted that her concerns are the common battle against terrorism and referred to
allegations of the existence of PKK training camps in Greece. She insisted these are very
strong allegations against a member state, calling for hard evidence to prove this.
Mr Oran stated the CHP sees these issues as state policy. He supported the efforts of
Minister Bagis, such as an increase in the budget to facilitate the engagement process with the
EU. Oran posed a rhetorical question to the Minister in relation to the number of journalists in
prison in Turkey. He referred to the 61 journalists in prison who are labelled as terrorists by
the AK Party but who have been listed as accredited journalists by international organisations.
He questioned the Minister as to why nothing has been done in the past 7 years and whether
there are any devlopments on this matter.
Mr Duff referred to Mr Cicek's call for a reappraisal of Turkey's accession process. He noted
the changing nature of the EU, with fiscal integration apparent and a federal construct as well
as a federal economic government as its natural product. This transformation poses grave
questions for the EU as the concept of a multi-tier Europe implies that some member states
will be on the outer rim. He asked the Minister whether the changing nature of the EU may
prompt questions about the type of membership that may suit Turkey best.
Mr Gür mentioned the positive move by France and expressed support for full membership.
He questioned the Minister about the "unilateral approach" taken by the AK Party and what
kind of steps will be taken by the government and civil society in response to the move by
France including the possibility of a more collective approach.
Mr Koumoutsakos noted that with the French agreement on the opening of a chapter, the
JPC was taking place in a more positive atmosphere. He stated that irrespective of this, the
Minister gives a sharp and unjust criticism concerning the way the EU operates and the
blockage of the opening of the energy chapter in particular. Furthermore, he drew attention to
the present debate on the future of the EU; whether it should continue to be a single free
market or a more federal structure in which member states would surrender their national
remits and responsibilities. He enquired about Turkey's opinion on the future of the EU.
5/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
Mr Ramazanoglu mentioned the use of funds provided to Turkey, and whether the Turkish
side of the JPC could function as an accreditation agency to facilitate applications and enable
these programmes to be better implemented.
Ms Papadopoulou mentioned that civil society organisations had expressed concerns of a
democratic deficit in Turkey, and she stated there has been no concertation process on the
Turkey Progress Report with Members of the opposition. In reference to the Cyprus issue, she
dismissed the claims of the Minister, arguing that by boycotting the Cypriot Presidency of the
Council, Turkey expressed that it did not recognise an EU institution. Furthermore, she
presented an official declaration from Cyprus, indicating that Cyprus is not opposed to
Turkey's accession to the EU, however, that with the opening of negotiations, a unanimous
declaration was adopted by all EU member states requesting Turkey extend the Ankara
protocol to all member states including the Republic of Cyprus. She declared that as Turkey
failed to do so, member states unanimously blocked 8 chapters. She asked the Minister
whether there was a political will on Turkey's side to turn this page.
Minister Bagis in response to a point raised by Ms Oomen-Ruijten insisted that the Turkish
Progress Report does not aim to contradict the European Parliaments Progress Report, instead
the Turkish Report aims to compliment the EU report and seeks to provide the Turkish
perspective on reforms. In relation to the PKK camps in Greece, he indicated this information
is also available in the Greek press. In response to Mr Oran, he replied Mr Oran should have
received the draft at secretariat level, furthermore, stating that the developments are also
available in the press including the level of negotiations, progress and the various
impediments that exist. He insisted the Shanghai Agreement is not an empty threat and that
the Turkish government has a decisive approach to develop ties.
In response to Mr Koumoutsakos, he argued that the opening of the energy chapter is more in
the interest of the EU since 75% of the EU´s energy needs run through Eastern and Southern
parts of Turkey. Furthermore, he insisted that if the Annan Plan was adopted, Greek Cypriots
would not have been on the verge of bankruptcy today and he called for joint efforts to break
the Cyprus deadlock.
With regard to Mr Ramazanoglu's contribution, he questioned the information concerning
figures. Finally, he noted that in relation to the allegation of a deficit of democracy in Turkey
levied by Ms Papadopoulou, there are numerous views on democracy, freedom of speech and
the state of freedom of speech. It is, however, important to be able to sit and discuss what is
taking place. Concerning the declaration that was read, he noted that he has great respect for
this, but he has no right to vote in Cyprus.
Mr Ripert responded to the point on parliament being a clearing house for the
implementation of IPA programmes, and stated that this procedure is at present incompatible
with EU procedure on the implementation of funds. He further informed that the majority of
programmes are managed in a decentralised fashion, and that the Turkish government is
responsible for the implementation of these projects in line with the rules the EU has set out.
Beyond the vote on annual envelopes, however, there is no parliamentary input project by
project as it would make the process much more complicated. That being said, however, the
priorities take into account the views of the parliaments for one simple reason, the EPA funds
aim at supporting alignment to acquis communautaire as well as to get the economy at the
same level as the EU- therefore priorities have been identified which take account of the
political approaches both sides have.
Ms Flautre responded to Mr Oran, stating that Mr Walesa is chair of the Ad Hoc Delegation
for the monitoring of journalists on trial in Turkey. She mentioned that half of the journalists
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
6/23
are accused of belonging to the KCK, and the freedom of expression and media is a very
important and relevant point here. Furthermore, she questioned the CHP's attitude with regard
to the Kurdish issue.
Mr Ozdalga noted that Mr Duff underlined a matter of extreme importance. He insisted that
there are significant changes in the EU including a financial crisis and budgetary issues.
Furthermore, he suggested that the future of the EU is also something Turkey looks at with
great interest, and he noted that perhaps the solution would be a two tiered Europe, with optouts available. He was uncertain whether there is space for this in a federal structure.
He stated that if Turkey is to become a member of the EU, it would not be interested in
participating in a strong federal structure, however Turkey would opt for being part of the
Eurozone.
Mr Szymanski expressed understanding for the bitter feelings shared by Minister Bagis and
claimed that the bureaucratic accession process poisons EU-Turkey relations at the expense of
mutual interests. He suggested that the new EU structure could be an opportunity for new EUTurkey relations. He stated he would like to hear more about whether Turkey would want to
join a federal structure as the EU Turkey believes to join will no longer exist at the time they
would join.
Ms Nazliaka claimed that both Prime Minister Erdogan and Minister Bagis have been
unclear on the question of Shanghai. She further insisted that the CHP is very decisive and
interested in full membership of the EU, and that the CHP does not want this process to be
sidetracked with alternative structures.
Ms Theocharous expressed her disappointment with the Minister's tone. She insisted Turkey
has to recognise the acquis communautaire and recognise the Republic of Cyprus before
entering the EU. She noted that with the elections in Cyprus, no Cypriot government will
open chapters 23 or 24 if rights of Cypriot citizens, both Turkish and Greek continued to be
violated. Furthemore, she claimed that if Turkey continues to threaten Cyprus and shed doubt
on its national sovereignty, chapter 15 too will be blocked. In response to Mr Thompson, she
declared that the "thorn" in relations between the EU and Turkey is not Cyprus, rather, it is
the occupation of the Cypriot land. Furthermore, she claimed Turkey is shooting itself in the
knees as it is hindering any possibility for energy development in the EU.
Mr Kazak, in agreement with a previous remark made by Ms Flautre, insisted that although
the Cyprus issue is an important and painful one, there are other issues to discuss. He
welcomed the latest positive developments, including the French decision to open up a
chapter and he hoped this would continue with other member states that have blocked
chapters for purely political reasons. He stated that the latest meeting with PM Erdogan gave
a clear signal of Turkey's commitment to the accession process, even if some of his
statements, particularly on the initiative to further deepen relations with the Shanghai
Cooperation, may have been perceived as an alternative to EU accession. He claimed that this
is not an alternative, but an indication that Turkey wishes to play a greater role in
international relations, and a willingness to expand relations with other countries and regions.
Moreover, he welcomed Turkey's decision on real estate belonging to the Orthodox Bulgarian
church which is an important gesture. Yet he noted that major steps still need to be taken,
particularly in relation to judicial reform, constitutional reform, and support of all political
classes and civil society is of crucial importance.
7/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
Ms Stassen noted that her party has fundamental concerns regarding Turkey's accession. She
claimed that she is not against Turkey or cooperation with Turkey by increasing trade
relations, however, this is not the same as EU membership she said. As her party has
repeatedly said, Turkey would be a good neighbour but not a member of the family because
Turkey is not geographically and culturally European. In her view, Turkey does not have the
same principles and values that are important for the West. She additionally noted that
developments demonstrate Turkey does not belong in the EU, including the freedom of
expression, which is a crucial Western value, which has been put under pressure in Turkey.
She also noted that Turkey is still occupying the northern part of an EU country, which has
been illustrated in Ms Oomen-Ruijten's report. We can cooperate, but membership is a no go,
she said.
Mr Oyan argued that the accession process is long and protracted and there is a lack of
sincerity, openness and trust. During 2004-5, there were talks about a privileged partnership
but there was a threat it might turn into a dead end road. We need to redefine our aims and
where we are going, he said.
Mr Koumoutsakos identified the questions on Turkey's vision of Europe, and whether
Turkey was ready to concede its sovereignty to a federal Europe, or would Turkey push
Europe towards a looser cooperation? He enquired about the reactions of future colleagues in
the EU, as this will be a criterion to assess Turkey's candidacy.
Ms Papadopoulou emphasised that human rights, the Kurdish and Cyprus issues are major
obstacles to Turkey's accession, as was pointed out in Ms Oomen-Ruijtens and the
Commissions official report. She added that nobody is against Turkey per se, but that
occupation is another matter. She insisted Cyprus is an EU member state and this should be
respected.
Mr Duff claimed that there could be a credible, alternative, durable form of membership and
integration of Turkey with the EU that would fall short of full accession. He stated that he was
not talking about the old cliché of privileged partnership, but an associate membership,
including adhesion of Article 2 of the Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of fundamental rights.
He noted that Turkey has to discover a means of deepening that reflection on alternative
forms of membership. He stated that in the course of 2013-2014, there will be a grand debate
between member states but also between political parties, and it would be excellent if Turkish
political parties were to be part of that discussion, including the MHP and BDP. He claimed
the confrontational situation between the AK Party and the CHP could be made a lot more
fruitful, less sterile were it to be placed more firmly inside a European dimension, which is
pluralistic and granted upon undertaking values and principles. At the heart of these values is
respect for fundamental rights, he noted, and if one was to drive that agenda, the seemingly
intractable problem of Cyprus would be resolved. He regretted the EU has been afraid to be
more constructively engaged, at the same time he would like Turkey to drop its suspicion that
the EU is on the Cyprus issue partial and prejudiced. He concluded that as part of a deeper
engagement between political parties in Turkey and between the parliaments, we ought not to
be afraid to address the Cyprus question.
Ms Topcu deplored that discussions were not directed to solving problems, and old
prejudices had come to the forefront. She claimed that statements to the effect that Turkey is
an Islamic country and not of a European nature are not constructive, calling for a concerted
approach to resolve these issues. She expressed the view that prejudices must be overcome
and a common vision be developed.
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
8/23
Ms Koppa asked what form of union, and what form of relationship Turkey would want. She
noted that her group is against Mr Duff's idea of an associated membership to keep the
dialogue alive with Turkey, and full membership must remain the objective. She also
suggested associate membership not only concerns Turkey or candidate countries, it also
concerns member states of the EU.
Ms Flautre called for a structured discussion linking EU-Turkey relationship to issues that
are raised on the EU project, including the role of parliaments and budgetary issues. It is
important that political parties and authorities in Turkey are a part of this discussion on the
future of the EU.
Mr Ozdalga claimed that an "a la carte Europe," with different rules and regulations in the
EU is incorrect, and that one of the alternative scenarios is the federalist one which Turkey is
unlikely to favour.
Mr Koumoutsakos questioned whether Turkey was ready to surrender national sovereignty,
including budgetary and taxation matters to Europe.
Mr Duff informed that in the spring of 2015, a convention will be called to redraft the Treaty
of Lisbon, and as an accession country, Turkey will have observer status at the convention.
He insisted that it will be extremely important that Turkey's political stance and posture is
formed and clarified at the time.
The first session closed on 14 February 2013 at 12.30.
9/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
The second session opened on 14 February at 15.30 and closed at 18.00
4.
New Constitution in the Framework of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms
Mr Demirkiran welcomed the four representatives of the Constitution Conciliation
Committee.
Mr Önder claimed that all Members of the Constitution Conciliation Committee have legal
backgrounds besides him as he is a high school graduate, who was imprisoned for 16 years
during the fascist dictatorship. Recalling a personal experience, which took place in the
Turkish Parliament he deplored that individuals are discriminated on different grounds on a
daily basis in Turkey. He insisted that the Turkish Republic has a responsibility towards its
citizens to ensure equality before the law as this has not existed in reality. He stressed the
importance of a new Constitution as a charter that will uphold equality for citizens of Turkey.
Mr Bal indicated that the process of drawing up the constitution began as a three-fold
investigation in his party. Firstly, the MHP analysed the methods adopted by other countries,
secondly, they examined the Turkish context and recalled that Turkey has renewed its
constitution more than any other country in the world. Finally, his party observed the
suggestions and recommendations made by civil society organisations and NGO's. He insisted
that the drafting of the constitution is the responsibility of the nation as it must be adopted and
internalised by everybody. He indicated that a constitution should not be based on ethnic
sources or religious beliefs, as provisions that create such conditions are an obstacle to
equality.
Mr Turmen stated that the Turkish government is drafting a new constitution as the 1982
Constitution no longer meets the needs of Turkish people. He suggested Turkey must adapt to
a modern understanding of human rights and overcome serious problems and the constitution
will be an opportunity to ensure this. So far, he noted the Conciliation Committee has agreed
on 30 of 70 articles on fundamental rights and that it has been difficult to find a common
ground on the articles addressing secularism as the four parties are in disagreement. He stated
the CHP would like secularism to be defined and addressed in the constitution, along with the
abolishment of obligatory religious lessons and provisions protecting sexual discrimination.
He expressed concerns for the AK Party's proposal to install a presidential system in Turkey
and the increasing powers of the Prime Minister, arguing that Turkey would thus have a full
unity of power rather than a separation of powers which is a danger to democracy in Turkey.
Mr Iyimaya claimed that Turkey has suffered tremendously for human rights and that the AK
Party has sufficiently dealt with these issues by broadening the protection of fundamental
rights. He insisted that the greatest coup against democracy was committed by the Turkish
military who undermined democracy over the past 50 years by staging numerous coups.
Mr Buquicchio stressed two important points on his agenda, firstly, the need for the adoption
of a new Constitution and the need for such a Constitution to be based on a broad consensus.
He welcomed the progress made on the constitutional issue in the last year, but expressed
some concerns, insisting that the aim is for Turkey to have a better Constitution which is fully
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
10/23
in line with the values of the Council of Europe Turkey had subscribed to 60 years ago.
He stated that the new Constitution should contribute to the progress of Turkish democracy,
strengthening of the rule of law and to the better protection of fundamental rights. He
expressed concerns about the independence of the judiciary with recent proposals.
He insisted that the adoption of a new Constitution has to be based on a broad consensus
within parliament and society, which requires willingness to compromise from all sides. A
Constitution should not be the product of a temporary majority but reflect a broad agreement
of the main political forces he argued. He therefore welcomed the decision to establish a
Conciliation Committee composed of the political parties represented in parliament.
Additionally, he claimed that the result of the Conciliation Committee should not be a
majority vote but a compromise text. He claimed that a referendum may seem desirable for a
new constitution even if there is no constitutional obligation to hold one as a referendum
contributes to its legitimacy. However, a referendum cannot replace an absence of consensus
or deficiencies in the earlier procedure he stated.
He expressed concerns about the excessive centralisation of the country and the lack of
respect for minority rights, especially Kurdish rights. Moreover, he highlighted the
experiences of the Venice Commission, which shows that in countries which have known
authoritarian traditions in their past, a presidential or semi-presidential regime is problematic
as checks and balances to presidential power tend not to be very effective in such a context.
He argued that as the Turkish parliamentary system has provided stability to the country in
the last decades, there is no reason to move to a different system. On the contrary, he claimed
the powers of parliament to scrutinise executive action should be strengthened rather than
weakened.
He welcomed the constitutional referendum of 2010 which introduced, together with other
reforms, important new rules for the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors. He expressed
concerns, however, about proposals which would again exclude most judges from electing
members of the High Council and reserve this right to judges of the highest courts.
Additionally, he noted that the proposals to make most of the members of the High Council
political appointees were alarming. While the Venice Commission does not object to
parliament electing some members of the High Council, this should, however, concern only a
minority of the members of the Council he stated.
He insisted the role of the executive powers should be minimal in appointing members of the
High Council as this may lead to a domination of the High Council by the majority party and
to a politicisation of the judiciary, which is not in line with European standards.
With respect to the rules of the current Constitution, which provide for a very limited role of
the Grand National Assembly in the election of constitutional judges, he stated that the Venice
Commission would favour a stronger role for parliament in electing constitutional judges in a
manner ensuring an adequate representation of candidates preferred by the opposition.
Ms Flautre expressed satisfaction that the JPC allowed the Venice Commission to contribute
to the work of the conciliation committee; she also emphasised the need to base a new
Constitution on a broad consensus.
Ms Koppa asked whether the fourth judicial reform package will address the concerns the EU
shares on the law on terrorism, pre-detention and journalists in prison. She conveyed the
disappointment of the Socialist Party with regard to the deterioration of fundamental rights in
Turkey, especially in relation to the recent case with Pinar Selek and the world famous
musician, Fazil Say, who is accused of insulting religious beliefs on the same grounds of
Orhan Pamuk.
11/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
Mr Oran expressed his disappointment concerning lasting and inefficient constitutional
debates and too little support by the EU. Furthermore he criticised the intransigency of the
governing party and expressed fear that Turkey would develop into a party centred state with
authoritarian rule.
Mr Szymanski praised the government's involvement of all the major political parties in the
process of the constitution. He expressed his concerns about property issues that have been
raised in connection with the Orthodox and Catholic churches, and enquired about the
position of non-Muslim communities on the constitution?
Mr Oyan suggested over politicisation of the presidential, judicial and Supreme Court
systems should be avoided, including the appointment of judges and prosecutors and inquired
about the changing order of articles in the constitution.
Mr Kazak expressed his reservations on the balance of power in Turkey with the new
constitution and enquired as to how this would be upheld.
Ms Papadopoulou agreed with Mr Buquicchio's presentation and insisted that Turkey needs
an alignment with the principles of the EU and the Council of Europe on the independence of
the judiciary and the protection of human rights. Furthermore, she questioned whether women
and civil society organisations have been invited to participate in the drafting of the
constitution.
Mr Erdemir suggested that if the EU is interested in promoting democracy, fundamental
rights and freedoms and pluralistic governments in its neighbourhood and around the world,
the EU should approach the Turkish case with great care as Turkey is perceived by some as a
model and influential in the Middle East and North Africa.
Ms Keller claimed the constitution is a great opportunity which holds the key to resolving
many issues, including the Kurdish issue and violence against women. She questioned the
Committees approach to environmental protection and the comments and recommendations
from the public.
Mr Duff insisted that it would be more helpful if Turkey was not as secretive on the
Constitution as the pressure of public opinion on this exercise would be very helpful and it
would force Turkey to be more flexible and constructive. Finally, he asked whether the draft
included, either implicitly or expressly, a clause that will allow the pooling of national
sovereignty inside the EU framework.
Ms Danişoğlu commenting on Mr Turmen's previous remarks concerning the risk of a
presidential system argued that discussion of such a system was needed and would facilitate
to reach a consensus.
Mr Ramazanğlu stated that Mr Iyimaya had well presented the core of the problem and
asked for comparative elements from other candidate countries.
Ms Flautre noted that a discussion on decentralisation, local or regional governance has not
yet been opened, and asked whether participants would like to express their positions on these
matters.
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
12/23
Mr Iyimaya welcomed the fact that for the first time in Turkish history, civilians are drafting
the constitution, with equal representation and consensus as the main guides.
Mr Duff stated that there was much discussion on Article 6 and added that his party believes
in consensus and conciliation. Moreover he reminded that despite internal challenges the
historical possibility to create a strong constitution should not be missed.
Ms Flautre claimed that while both France and Turkey uphold secularism, they have
different ideas of secularism, that secularism has become a word which people interpret in
their own way, and it may be important to have a definition.
Mr Iyimaya responded that Article 2 of the French constitution mentions a separation of
church and state - in the spirit of what was conceived the principle of secularism.
Mr Turmen criticised the recent AK Party's proposals for the High Council of Judges and
Prosecutors which puts the body at risk of political manipulation and control.
Ms Flautre expressed her criticism of members of the CHP only condemning the negative
aspects of the AK Party's proposals, while the party has never recognised the progress made
in the judicial system.
Mr Bal emphasised that there is a pressure on the conciliation committee with regard to
timing. He also stated that his party has expressed concerns should a presidential system be
implemented and that such a system would not correspond to the demands of the people.
Mr Onder condemned the lack of attention on regional and local authorities, noting that the
parties present have not discussed this topic as they consider regional and local administration
as a partitioning power. He noted that the BDP would like to divide Turkey into 20 or 25
districts and decentralise government. He expressed his sorrow for the words of Ms OomenRuijten who stated that in a democracy, hunger strikes (carried out by Kurdish prisoners and
public) were an unfathomable initiative, an expression that was shared by the ruling
government he claimed.
Mr Demirkiran replied that Mr. Onder cannot deny the progress that has been made in the
past 10 years.
Mr Buquicchio welcomed the modifications to the Anti-Terrorism Law proposed by the
Justice Ministry and he criticised the two proposals concerning the judiciary, including the
appointment of judges to the High Council. In relation to the Constitution, he proposed a
triangular meeting between representatives of the Turkish Parliament, the Conciliation
Committee and the Venice Commission to foster debate and discussion.
Ms Flautre and Mr Demirkiran made concluding remarks and the first session drew to an
end.
13/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
The third session opened on 15 February at 10.00.
5.
The Situation in Syria and Its Impact on Turkey and the EU
Minister Davutoglu began his presentation by stressing that both the EU and Turkey should
seek to find a common basis and common values upon which to work. During the Cold War,
he noted that Europe was divided into two blocks, with cities and countries divided, and after
the war, the EU, NATO and the entire Euro Atlantic world's performance kicked in. He said
there was a major geopolitical earthquake in 1989 with the collapse of the Berlin wall, and a
change in the entire Balkan region. Now, he stated, there is a major financial earthquake in
the region.
He stressed that in the Balkans the transition to democracy after the war was assisted through
the support of the EU and the transatlantic bond, however, the reaction of the EU and Turkey
in Bosnia and Herzegovina was disgraceful. In Nagorno-Karabakh and Georgia, however,
Turkey supported citizens in the midst of a humanitarian crisis and this is significant as
Turkey has a responsibility towards the peoples of this region due to its history.
He highlighted the lessons the international community should learn from these tragic events
that they should be more stringent and avoid making the same mistakes, especially in light of
the ongoing crisis in Syria. He argued that Syrians have not received adequate humanitarian
support and that a death toll of 70,000 Syrians has been insufficient to push the international
community to intervene in this region. He also mentioned that Turkey would like to include
the Arab League, Iran and Egypt in assisting Syria by issuing joint declarations and finding a
way to act together.
He proceeded to explain what he describes as the Earthquake of 2001 with the invasions of
Iraq and Afghanistan. He stated Turkey plays an important role in resolving the humanitarian
and military crises of all regions. He highlighted Iraq in particular, where he argues Turkey
has become a point of reference for the Iraqis and the Kurdish area of Iraq. This is in contrast
to the role assumed by the EU, he underlined, arguing that due to the economic crisis, the EU
has become introverted and the notion of dealing with crises beyond its borders has become a
luxury.
He reminded the audience of the case of Poland following the Second World War and how it
emerged from the war with the assistance of Germany and other EU countries.
Moreover, he argued that Egypt is also in need of the international community's support to
maintain the structures within the country, and to prevent it from deteriorating further. He
called on the international community to provide an urgent support package to prevent a
serious decline in Egypt's economy. He also suggested the international community should
respond to the winds of change taking place in the Middle East region. He described the
perceptions of many commentators, who have insisted the Syrian conflict is of a religious or
ethnic nature. He argued this was not the case, and that the principles and values Europeans
have defended zealously on the continent are the ones which people are defending in Tunisia,
Libya and Egypt and across the Middle East. He mentioned that there have been significant
democratic changes in these countries, with elections and the writing up of constitutions.
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
14/23
He informed that there are currently 3.5 million people displaced in Syria, 182,000 refugees
and over 100,000 unofficial refugees. He highlighted that Turkey has established numerous
schools, hospitals, workshops and courses for Syrian refugees in Turkey including 17 camps,
72 schools and 1280 teachers to help their transition into their new life. While he argued
Turkey has contributed more than the entire EU, he indicated that this is Turkey's
humanitarian responsibility.
He communicated the willingness of the Syrian National Council to enter into a political
discussion and resolve the ongoing crisis. He expressed the concerns many hold with regard
to the Council being an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood; which he declares is
inaccurate. He claimed the international community and the United Nations Security Council
were losing their credibility and urgent dialogue was required with Syrian groups who were
not involved in the bloodshed.
He concluded that had Turkey been a member state of the EU, the country would have
intervened in the EU-Mediterranean policy as Turkey is the single unifying force in the
Mediterranean and the Middle East that is ready to defend all democracy demands wherever
they emerge in the world.
Ms Flautre stated that the European Parliament shares the Ministers concerns on Syria.
Ms Koppa argued that Syria is a far more difficult case than other Arab spring countries as
there are many external actors who treat the conflict as a zero sum game, with far reaching
consequences for their strategic position.
Furthermore, she raised three questions. Firstly, she argued that while the conflict may not be
of a religious nature, the escalation of violence has radicalised some rebels and fighters with
Salafist and Jihadist tendencies. Additionally, there is a growing perception that a Sunni
uprising against an Alawite regime could emerge and result in a growing confessionalisation
of the conflict. Secondly, she argued that the parties at war are increasingly receiving support
from external actors, with a war where international, regional and internal conflicts are fought
and one major stake is the role of Iran. Finally, she emphasised the increasingly difficult
position Turkey is in, with a growing threat by developments along the Turkish border, and
being overburdened by refugees from Syria. She enquired whether Turkey's position as the
"role model" in the region is threatened by the escalating radicalisation and
confessionalisation in the region.
Mr Oran insisted that if Turkey is to have a presidential system, there is a risk this change
may turn into an authoritarian regime as Mr Buquicchio of the Venice Commission has
argued. Oran emphasised that while Minister Bagis defended democratic and parliamentary
systems to countries in transition, in Turkey, the Minister has supported a presidential system.
Mr Koumoutsakos questioned the credibility of Turkey if she has good relations with Iran,
and enquired as to whether Turkey feels Assad should end in the war crimes tribunal like
Milosevic.
Mr Ozdalga claimed that there are no similarities between Egypt and Syria, instead, he
suggested, Syria should be compared to Iraq. He argued that there seem to be two possible
disasters in the Middle East, a nuclear war and a sectarian war. He mentioned that the UN
special envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, stated that there is no military solution to the conflict and
therefore political negotiations should prevail. In the absence of political negotiations,
however, he questioned the future of Syria.
15/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
Mr Szymanski agreed with the Minister that while, "conflicts in the region are not religious
in nature," he insisted that the Minister cannot deny that the religious freedoms of Christian
minorities are endangered in the region including Syriacs, Coptics and Orthodox Christians.
Secondly, he mentioned the role of Turkey's accession status in the EU and Turkey's NATO
membership as assets for Turkey's role in the Middle East region and questioned whether EU
candidacy is still an asset or is becoming a problem for soft power.
Mr Erdemir reaffirmed the CHP is saddened by the tragedy in Syria and that the party
supports non-violent and non-sectarian initiatives to build a democratic, pluralistic and secular
Syria.
Erdemir emphasised the CHP has serious reservations on Turkish foreign policy, stating that
the AK Party has double standards and are complicit in terrorist attacks on innocent civilians.
Erdemir claimed that the Minister has not voiced criticisms of the authoritarian regimes and
human rights violations of Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Furthermore, he argued
that Turkey does not support the democratic oppositions in these countries who happen to be
Shia Muslims. He further highlighted the released leaked documents between Davutoglu and
the Crown Prince of Qatar on October 25th 2011, which reveals the Minister asking the
Prince to pressure Al-Jazeera for its critical reporting on Turkish foreign policy. Erdemir
underlined that this kind of pressure on the freedom of press is unacceptable. Moreover, he
enquired whether Turkey recognises the Al-Nusra front, the Al-Qaeda jihadists in Syria as a
terrorist organization, and whether Turkey condemns the Al-Nusra front in the indiscriminate
killings of civilians as well as the grave human rights violations they have carried out.
Mr Sahin insisted that there are double standards in the international community's response
to Syria and highlighted the hypocrisy of the EU, UN and Western civilization for turning a
blind eye to the bloodshed of Muslims in Syria.
Ms Theocharous noted she will inform the Cypriot Parliament on the content of the meeting.
She questioned the legitimacy of the Minister's claim that Turkey is concerned about the
human rights of the people in the Mediterranean, since the rights of Cypriots continue to be
violated by the presence of the Turkish army in the region.
Mr Duff enquired whether Turkey was making any contributions to fighting Islamic
fundamentalism in the Sahel, in particular in Mali.
Minister Davutoglu stated that one must be careful when making accusations, particularly on
the Cyprus question. He compared the violation of human rights both on the Greek and
Turkish Cypriot sides and insisted that had the Annan plan been ratified in 2004, the presence
of Greek and Turkish Armies on the island would be only symbolic by now. He stated the
Turkish army is present to preserve the legitimate rights of Turkish Cypriots and that there is
no violation of international rights. He expressed hope that Cyprus will be reunited once
again.
He shared Ms Koppa's concerns that there may be a risk of the conflict turning into a religious
or sectarian nature. With reference to the Teheran Agreement he explained that Turkey's
relations with Iran are good neighbourly relations such as the Tehran Agreement, and
although the two parties may have their differences on issues such as Syria, they cannot close
their communication channels. He claimed that as long as Assad is in Syria, there will be no
legitimate elections as it would be like having elections in Serbia with Milosevic present. He
stated that as with all tyrants, Assad too will leave.
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
16/23
Furthermore, in reply to Mr Oran's remarks on the presidential system he argued that there are
two systems in a democracy, the presidential and parliamentary ones. He referred to the US
and Brazil as both emerging and deep rooted democracies, where a presidential system is in
place. He claimed that a presidential system is not the opposite of a democracy; it is a
derivative of democracy and he insisted that some parliamentary systems can also be
interpreted to be authoritarian.
Addressing Mr Koumoutsakos with regard to the practices of democratic governance in
Muslim countries, he stated there is no ground to imply that there cannot be democracy in
Islamic countries. While there are extremists in these countries, there are also racist threats in
Europe which are a danger to democracy.
In response to Mr Szymanski, he declared that Christians are a part of the culture, tradition
and heritage of the region and they should therefore be protected. He criticised Mr Erdemir's
claims that Turkey adopts a religiously biaised approach on an international platform, and he
claimed that if this was the case, Turkey would not have agreements with Iran, vote against
sanctions on Iran at the UNSC or send Turkish troops to Lebanon in a region where
Hezbollah is dominant. Similarly, he recalled that Turkey mediated between Iran and Saudi
Arabia, and that he was the first Minister to visit Bahrain and criticise the government. He
claimed that Turkey does not intervene in the domestic affairs of one country, but if a demand
comes from the public, the Turkish government aims to respond to that in a peaceful and
amicable way.
He dismissed the claims about Al Jazeera, stating that the greatest war in this region at the
moment is a psychological war. He claimed that although Turkish people are free to criticise
the government, they should also have some faith and trust in the intelligence of their
country's leadership.
In response to Mr Duff, he stressed that there are many provocations in West African, that
Turkey tries to prevent extremist movements in the region but they would not like to expose
the region as an area of risk as economic and humanitarian aid is needed.
Ms Flautre thanked the Minister, Members of the Parliament and guests.
The meeting closed on 15 February 2013 at 11.45.
17/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
ПРИСЪСТВЕН ЛИСТ/LISTA DE ASISTENCIA/PREZENČNÍ LISTINA/DELTAGERLISTE/
ANWESENHEITSLISTE/KOHALOLIJATE NIMEKIRI/ΚΑΤΑΣΤΑΣΗ ΠΑΡΟΝΤΩΝ/RECORD OF ATTENDANCE/
LISTE DE PRÉSENCE/ELENCO DI PRESENZA/APMEKLĒJUMU REĢISTRS/DALYVIŲ SĄRAŠAS/JELENLÉTI ÍV/
REĠISTRU TA' ATTENDENZA/PRESENTIELIJST/LISTA OBECNOŚCI/LISTA DE PRESENÇAS/LISTĂ DE PREZENŢĂ/
PREZENČNÁ LISTINA/SEZNAM NAVZOČIH/LÄSNÄOLOLISTA/DELTAGARLISTA
Бюро/Mesa/Předsednictvo/Formandskabet/Vorstand/Juhatus/Προεδρείο/Bureau/Ufficio di presidenza/Prezidijs/Biuras/Elnökség/
Prezydium/Birou/Predsedníctvo/Predsedstvo/Puheenjohtajisto/Presidiet (*)
Bureau Members of the European Parliament
Hélène FLAUTRE
Maria Eleni KOPPA
Georgios KOUMOUTSAKIS
Co-Chairman, Greens/EFA
Vice Co-Chairman, S-D
Vice Co-Chairman, EPP
Bureau Members of the Turkish Parliament
Mr. Afif DEMİRKIRAN
Mr. Sait AÇBA
Mr. Umut ORAN
Co-Chairman
AK Parti
Vice Co-Chairman
AK Parti
Vice Co-Chairman
CHP
Членове/Diputados/Poslanci/Medlemmer/Mitglieder/Parlamendiliikmed/Μέλη/Members/Députés/Deputati/Deputāti/Nariai/Képviselõk/
Membri/Leden/Posłowie/Deputados/Deputaţi/Jäsenet/Ledamöter
Members of the European Parliament
Andrew DUFF
Metin KAZAK
Franziska KELLER
Antigoni PAPADOPOULOU
Laurence STASSEN
Eleni THEOCHAROUS
Jarosław Leszek WAŁĘSA
Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN
Tarja CRONBERG
Member, ALDE
Member, ALDE
Member, Greens/EFA
Member, S-D
Member, NI
Member, EPP
Member, EPP
Rapporteur, EPP
Chair of Iran Delegation to the EP, Greens/EFA
Members of the Turkish Parliament
Mr. Nazmi Haluk ÖZDALGA
Mr. Ali ŞAHİN
Ms. Halide İNCEKARA
Mr. Mehmet Sayım TEKELİOĞLU
Mr. Yıldırım Mehmet RAMAZANOĞLU
Mr. Cem ZORLU
Mr. Yüksel ÖZDEN
Mr. Faruk IŞIK
Mr. Ebu Bekir GİZLİGİDER
Ms. Mesude Nursuna MEMECAN
Mr. Abdülkadir Emin ÖNEN
Mr. Mehmet Kasım GÜLPINAR
Mr. Ercan CANDAN
Ms. Aylin NAZLIAKA
Mr. Aykan ERDEMİR
Ms.Ayşe Eser DANIŞOĞLU
Ms. Şafak PAVEY
Mr. Oğuz OYAN
Ms. Zuhal TOPÇU
Mr. Ahmet Kenan TANRIKULU
Mr. Lütfü TÜRKKAN
Mr. Nazmi GÜR
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, AK Parti
Member, CHP
Member, CHP
Member, CHP
Member, CHP
Member, CHP
Member, MHP
Member, MHP
Member, MHP
Member, BDP
18/23
Заместници/Suplentes/Náhradníci/Stedfortrædere/Stellvertreter/Asendusliikmed/Αναπληρωτές/Substitutes/Suppléants/Supplenti/
Aizstājēji/Pavaduojantys nariai/Póttagok/Sostituti/Plaatsvervangers/Zastępcy/Membros suplentes/Supleanţi/Náhradníci/Namestniki/
Varajäsenet/Suppleanter
Jürgen KLUTE
Konrad SZYMAŃSKI
Substitute, GUE/NGL
Substitute, ECR
187 (2)
##
193 (3)
##
49 (6) (Точка от дневния ред/Punto del orden del día/Bod pořadu jednání (OJ)/Punkt på dagsordenen/Tagesordnungspunkt/Päevakorra
punkt/Ημερήσια Διάταξη Σημείο/Agenda item/Point OJ/Punto all'ordine del giorno/Darba kārtības punkts/Darbotvarkės punktas/
Napirendi pont/Punt fuq l-aġenda/Agendapunt/Punkt porządku dziennego/Ponto OD/Punct de pe ordinea de zi/Bod programu schôdze/
Točka UL/Esityslistan kohta/Föredragningslista punkt)
##
##
Наблюдатели/Observadores/Pozorovatelé/Observatører/Beobachter/Vaatlejad/Παρατηρητές/Observers/Observateurs/Osservatori/
Novērotāji/Stebėtojai/Megfigyelők/Osservaturi/Waarnemers/Obserwatorzy/Observadores/Observatori/Pozorovatelia/Opazovalci/
Tarkkailijat/Observatörer
##
По покана на председателя/Por invitación del presidente/Na pozvání předsedy/Efter indbydelse fra formanden/Auf Einladung des
Vorsitzenden/Esimehe kutsel/Με πρόσκληση του Προέδρου/At the invitation of the Chair(wo)man/Sur l'invitation du président/
Su invito del presidente/Pēc priekšsēdētāja uzaicinājuma/Pirmininkui pakvietus/Az elnök meghívására/Fuq stedina tal-President/
Op uitnodiging van de voorzitter/Na zaproszenie Przewodniczącego/A convite do Presidente/La invitaţia preşedintelui/Na pozvanie
predsedu/Na povabilo predsednika/Puheenjohtajan kutsusta/På ordförandens inbjudan
Cemil ÇİÇEK
Ahmet DAVUTOĞLU
Egemen BAĞIŞ
Ahmet İYİMAYA
Rıza Mahmut TÜRMEN
Faruk BAL
Sırrı Süreyya ÖNDER
Speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Minister for EU Affairs and Chief Negotiator
Chair of the Justice Committee, Member of the Constitution Conciliation
Committee on behalf of the AK Parti (JDP)
Member of the Constitution Conciliation Committee on behalf the CHP
(RPP)
Member of the Constitution Conciliation Committee on behalf the MHP
(NMP)
Member of the Constitution Conciliation Committee on behalf the BDP
(PDP)
Former Co-Chairman of the JPC
Yaşar YAKIŞ Former Co-Chairman of the JPC
Lütfi ELVAN Former Co-Chairman of the JPC
Political Party Group Deputy Chairman
Ahmet AYDIN, AK Parti GNAT Group Deputy Chairman
19/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
Chairs of the International Committees in GNAT
- Volkan BOZKIR, Chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
- Emrullah İŞLER, Chair of the Turkish Delegation to the Parliamentary; Union of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation
- Zeynep Armağan USLU, Chair of the Turkish Delegation to the Parliamentary ; Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean
- Fazilet DAĞCI ÇIĞLIK, Chair of the Turkish Delegation to the Inter-Parliamentary Union
- Tevfik Ziyaeddin AKBULUT, Chair of the Turkish Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean
- Mevlüt ÇAVUŞOĞLU, Former Co-Chair of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Member of the Turkish Delegation
to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
- Osman Taney KORUTÜRK, Member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
- Ayşe Gülsün BİLGEHAN, Member of the Turkish Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
Съвет/Consejo/Rada/Rådet/Rat/Nõukogu/Συμβούλιο/Council/Conseil/Consiglio/Padome/Taryba/Tanács/Kunsill/Raad/Conselho/
Consiliu/Svet/Neuvosto/Rådet (*)
H.E. Mr Kenneth THOMPSON, Ambassador of Ireland
Комисия/Comisión/Komise/Kommissionen/Kommission/Euroopa Komisjon/Επιτροπή/Commission/Commissione/Komisija/Bizottság/
Kummissjoni/Commissie/Komisja/Comissão/Comisie/Komisia/Komissio/Kommissionen (*)
##
Европейска служба за външна дейност/Evropská služba pro vnější činnost/EU-Udenrigstjenesten/Europäischer Auswärtiger
Dienst/Euroopa välisteenistus/Ευρωπαϊκή Υπηρεσία Εξωτερικής Δράσης/European External Action service/Servicio Europeo de
Acción Exterior/Service européen pour l'action extérieure/Servizio europeo per l’azione esterna/Eiropas Ārējās darbības
dienests/Europos išorės veiksmų tarnyba/Európai Külügyi Szolgálat/Servizz Ewropew għall-Azzjoni Esterna/Europese dienst voor
extern optreden/Europejska Służba Działań Zewnętrznych/Serviço Europeu para a Acção Externa/Serviciul european pentru acţiune
externă/Európska služba pre vonkajšiu činnosť/Evropska služba za zunanje delovanje/Euroopan ulkosuhdehallinto/Europeiska
avdelningen för yttre åtgärd (*)
##
Други институции/Otras instituciones/Ostatní orgány a instituce/Andre institutioner/Andere Organe/Muud institutsioonid/
Άλλα θεσμικά όργανα/Other institutions/Autres institutions/Altre istituzioni/Citas iestādes/Kitos institucijos/Más intézmények/
Istituzzjonijiet oħra/Andere instellingen/Inne instytucje/Outras Instituições/Alte instituţii/Iné inštitúcie/Druge institucije/Muut
toimielimet/Andra institutioner/organ
##
##
Други участници/Otros participantes/Ostatní účastníci/Endvidere deltog/Andere Teilnehmer/Muud osalejad/Επίσης Παρόντες/Other
participants/Autres participants/Altri partecipanti/Citi klātesošie/Kiti dalyviai/Más résztvevők/Parteċipanti oħra/Andere aanwezigen/
Inni uczestnicy/Outros participantes/Alţi participanţi/Iní účastníci/Drugi udeleženci/Muut osallistujat/Övriga deltagare
Delegation of the EU to Turkey
H.E. Mr Jean-Maurice RIPERT, Ambassador, Head of the Delegation
Michal MILLER, Chair of the Department of the Press and Information, Counselor on Political Affairs
Francois NAUCODIE, Counselor on Political Affairs
Aycan AKDENİZ, Responsible for Political Affairs
Stefano FANTORINI, Counselor
Lara SCARPİTTA, Office for Foreign Policy
Duccio STADERINI, Directorate General for Humanitarian Aid
Council of Europe
Gianni BUQUICCHIO, Chair of Venice Commission
Ministry of Justice
Kenan ÖZDEMİR , Vice Counsellor
Dr. Zeki YILDIRIM, Vice Director General of Legislation and Scrating
Remzi GEMİCİ, Vice General Directorate of Prisons and Detention Houses
Cengiz TANRIKULU, General Directorate for EU Affairs
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
20/23
Şener DALYAN, Director of Department for Human Rights
Kubilay İNAN, Director of Department for Strategy
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ambassador Selim YENEL, Permanent Representative of Turkey to the EU
Ambassador Hasan GÖĞÜŞ, Deputy Undersecretary
Korkut GÜNGEN, Vice General Directorate
Can DİZDAR, Vice General Directorate
Evren DAĞDELEN AKGÜN, General Directorate
Pınar ŞENTÜRK SEVİ, General Directorate
Berk ECE, General Directorate
Ministry for EU Affairs
Ambassador M. Haluk ILICAK, Undersecretary
Dr. F.H. Burak ERDENİR, Deputy Undersecretary
Dr. Mehmet CANGİR, Deputy Undersecretary
İbrahim BAYRAM, Director for Civil Society, Communication and Culture
Seval İSKENDER, Director for Accession Policy
Selçuk BAYRAKTAR, Director for Research and Documentation
M. Süreyya SÜNER, Director for Financial Cooperation
Sadi KÜNDÜROĞLU, Consultant
Nuri CİHANGİR, Consultant for Press
Yavuz Selim KIRAN, Consultant
Banu TERZİOĞLU, Consultant
Cemil CENGİZ, Consultant
Bilal YAKINBAŞ, Consultant for Press
Çağrı ÇAKIR, Coordinator of Department of Political Affairs
Ferda AKGÜL, Coordinator of Department for Accession Policy
Rüveyda KÜÇÜK, Expert on EU Affairs
Ayşegül ER, Assistant Expert on EU Affairs
Ezgi Gizem DURUMEL, Assistant Expert on EU Affairs
Özgür BOZÇAĞA, Assistant Expert on EU Affairs
Ministry of Economy
Serpil OĞUZ , Vice General Director
Salih Ahmet ÜSTTEN, Head of Department
Doğan BOZDOĞAN, Expert
Staff of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey
Dr. İrfan NEZİROĞLU, General Secretary
Dr.Bahadır YAKUT, Director of Department of Foreign Affairs and Protocol
İhsan KIZILTAN, GNAT Speaker’s Consultant on Foreign Affairs
Tolga Ş. ATİK, Vice Director of Department of Foreign Affairs and Protocol
Sinem ŞİRANLI ÇİFTÇİ, Staff of JPC Secretariat
Fatih BAYDAR, Staff of JPC Secretariat
Büşra ERGEZEN, Staff of JPC Secretariat
Ayşegül SEZER, Staff of JPC Secretariat
Ömer Faruk KILIÇKAYA, Staff of JPC Secretariat
Mustafa DURMAZ, Staff
Cemal ÇÖPÜRGENSLİ, Staff
Ayça SELÇUK , Staff
Açelya TEMEL, Staff
Hakan SAĞDIÇ, Staff
Mehmet YILMAZ, Staff
21/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
Секретариат на политическите групи/Secretaría de los Grupos políticos/Sekretariát politických skupin/Gruppernes sekretariat/
Sekretariat der Fraktionen/Fraktsioonide sekretariaat/Γραμματεία των Πολιτικών Ομάδων/Secretariats of political groups/Secrétariat des
groupes politiques/Segreteria gruppi politici/Politisko grupu sekretariāts/Frakcijų sekretoriai/Képviselőcsoportok titkársága/Segretarjat
gruppi politiċi/Fractiesecretariaten/Sekretariat Grup Politycznych/Secr. dos grupos políticos/Secretariate grupuri politice/Sekretariát
politických skupín/Sekretariat političnih skupin/Poliittisten ryhmien sihteeristöt/Gruppernas sekretariat
PPE
Jan-Willem VLASMAN
S&D
Francisco GUERRA
ALDE
Rune GLASBERG
ECR
##
Verts/ALE
Ali YURTTAGÜL
GUE/NGL
##
EFD
##
NI
Sarah NUYTS
Кабинет на председателя/Gabinete del Presidente/Kancelář předsedy/Formandens Kabinet/Kabinett des Präsidenten/Presidendi
kantselei/Γραφείο Προέδρου/President's Office/Cabinet du Président/Gabinetto del Presidente/Priekšsēdētāja kabinets/Pirmininko
kabinetas/Elnöki hivatal/Kabinett tal-President/Kabinet van de Voorzitter/Gabinet Przewodniczącego/Gabinete do Presidente/
Cabinet Preşedinte/Kancelária predsedu/Urad predsednika/Puhemiehen kabinetti/Talmannens kansli
##
Кабинет на генералния секретар/Gabinete del Secretario General/Kancelář generálního tajemníka/Generalsekretærens Kabinet/
Kabinett des Generalsekretärs/Peasekretäri büroo/Γραφείο Γενικού Γραμματέα/Secretary-General's Office/Cabinet du Secrétaire
général/Gabinetto del Segretario generale/Ģenerālsekretāra kabinets/Generalinio sekretoriaus kabinetas/Főtitkári hivatal/Kabinett tasSegretarju Ġenerali/Kabinet van de secretaris-generaal/Gabinet Sekretarza Generalnego/Gabinete do Secretário-Geral/Cabinet Secretar
General/Kancelária generálneho tajomníka/Urad generalnega sekretarja/Pääsihteerin kabinetti/Generalsekreterarens kansli
##
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN
22/23
Генерална дирекция/Dirección General/Generální ředitelství/Generaldirektorat/Generaldirektion/Peadirektoraat/Γενική Διεύθυνση/
Directorate-General/Direction générale/Direzione generale/Ģenerāldirektorāts/Generalinis direktoratas/Főigazgatóság/Direttorat
Ġenerali/Directoraten-generaal/Dyrekcja Generalna/Direcção-Geral/Direcţii Generale/Generálne riaditeľstvo/Generalni direktorat/
Pääosasto/Generaldirektorat
DG PRES
##
DG IPOL
##
DG EXPO
Thomas GRUNERT, Benjamin REY, Marianne LORENTZEN
DG COMM
##
DG PERS
##
DG INLO
##
DG TRAD
##
DG INTE
##
DG FINS
##
DG ITEC
##
Правна служба/Servicio Jurídico/Právní služba/Juridisk Tjeneste/Juristischer Dienst/Õigusteenistus/Νομική Υπηρεσία/Legal Service/
Service juridique/Servizio giuridico/Juridiskais dienests/Teisės tarnyba/Jogi szolgálat/Servizz legali/Juridische Dienst/Wydział prawny/
Serviço Jurídico/Serviciu Juridic/Právny servis/Pravna služba/Oikeudellinen yksikkö/Rättstjänsten
##
Секретариат на комисията/Secretaría de la comisión/Sekretariát výboru/Udvalgssekretariatet/Ausschusssekretariat/Komisjoni
sekretariaat/Γραμματεία επιτροπής/Committee secretariat/Secrétariat de la commission/Segreteria della commissione/Komitejas
sekretariāts/Komiteto sekretoriatas/A bizottság titkársága/Segretarjat tal-kumitat/Commissiesecretariaat/Sekretariat komisji/
Secretariado da comissão/Secretariat comisie/Sekretariat odbora/Valiokunnan sihteeristö/Utskottssekretariatet
##
Сътрудник/Asistente/Asistent/Assistent/Assistenz/Βοηθός/Assistant/Assistente/Palīgs/Padėjėjas/Asszisztens/Asystent/Pomočnik/
Avustaja/Assistenter
##
* (P) = Председател/Presidente/Předseda/Formand/Vorsitzender/Esimees/Πρόεδρος/Chair(wo)man/Président/Priekšsēdētājs/Pirmininkas/
Elnök/President/Voorzitter/Przewodniczący/Preşedinte/Predseda/Predsednik/Puheenjohtaja/Ordförande
(VP) = Заместник-председател/Vicepresidente/Místopředseda/Næstformand/Stellvertretender Vorsitzender/Aseesimees/Αντιπρόεδρος/
Vice-Chair(wo)man/Vice-Président/Priekšsēdētāja vietnieks/Pirmininko pavaduotojas/Alelnök/Viċi President/Ondervoorzitter/
Wiceprzewodniczący/Vice-Presidente/Vicepreşedinte/Podpredseda/Podpredsednik/Varapuheenjohtaja/Vice ordförande
(M) = Член/Miembro/Člen/Medlem./Mitglied/Parlamendiliige/Μέλος/Member/Membre/Membro/Deputāts/Narys/Képviselő/
Membru/Lid/Członek/Membro/Membru/Člen/Poslanec/Jäsen/Ledamot
(F) = Длъжностно лице/Funcionario/Úředník/Tjenestemand/Beamter/Ametnik/Υπάλληλος/Official/Fonctionnaire/Funzionario/
Ierēdnis/Pareigūnas/Tisztviselő/Uffiċjal/Ambtenaar/Urzędnik/Funcionário/Funcţionar/Úradník/Uradnik/Virkamies/Tjänsteman
23/23
PE471.559 v◄01►
EN