UN special rapporteur warns ECtHR that Turkey’s broad counterterrorism laws risk arbitrary prosecutions

28.04.2025

By Turkish Minute

Source:https://www.turkishminute.com/2025/04/28/un-special-rapporteur-warns-ecthr-that-turkeys-broad-counterterrorism-laws-risk-arbitrary-prosecutions/

A United Nations human rights expert has warned Europe’s top human rights court that Turkey’s vague counterterrorism laws violate the international principle of legality, risking arbitrary prosecutions, the Stockholm Center for Freedom reported.

In an amicus brief filed on April 1 and recently made public, Professor Ben Saul, the UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, urged the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to strictly apply protections against retroactive criminal punishment in the case of Yasak v. Türkiye. An amicus brief is a submission by a non-party intended to provide expertise or insight to assist the court in its deliberations.

The case involves Şaban Yasak, a former university coordinator, who was convicted of membership in an armed terrorist organization over alleged ties to the faith-based Gülen movement, inspired by the late Muslim cleric Fethullah Gülen.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been targeting followers of the Gülen movement since corruption investigations revealed in December 2013 implicated then-prime minister Erdoğan as well as some members of his family and inner circle.

Dismissing the investigations as a Gülenist coup and a conspiracy against his government, Erdoğan designated the movement as a terrorist organization and began to target its members. He intensified the crackdown on the movement following an abortive putsch in 2016 that he accused Gülen of masterminding. The movement strongly denies involvement in the coup attempt or any terrorist activity.

Yasak’s conviction, like thousands of others in Turkey, was based largely on testimony from defendants who struck plea bargains in exchange for leniency. Yasak argues that the Turkish laws applied to him were vague and unforeseeable, violating his rights under Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Article 7 of the convention protects individuals from being convicted under laws that are unclear or retroactively changed, meaning laws that criminalize actions only after they have been committed. It requires that laws must be written clearly enough for people to know, in advance, whether their actions are criminal. According to Professor Saul, the key issue is that Turkish law did not make it reasonably clear that Yasak’s alleged activities would be treated as a criminal offense.

In his submission, Saul stressed that criminal laws, especially those concerning terrorism, must be narrowly and precisely defined. He warned that when terrorism laws are drafted too broadly or vaguely, governments can misuse them to punish peaceful activities such as journalism, political opposition or humanitarian work, undermining fundamental freedoms protected under international human rights law.

While courts are allowed to interpret laws over time, Saul warned that any interpretation must be reasonably foreseeable. He explained that small clarifications are acceptable, but sudden or expansive reinterpretations that disadvantage defendants, or that alter the meaning of the law in a surprising way, violate the protections enshrined in Article 7. In his view, an unpredictable judicial expansion of a criminal law is just as harmful as a vague statute itself.

Saul also urged the court to consider international best practices when evaluating terrorism laws. He noted that under United Nations standards, a terrorist act must involve serious violence intended to cause death or major injury, combined with a clear political, ideological or religious purpose, such as intimidating a population or coercing a government. He stressed that laws should not criminalize humanitarian activities, public protests or dissenting opinions merely because they oppose government policies or challenge dominant narratives. Protecting humanitarian workers, journalists and peaceful activists from wrongful prosecution is essential, he argued, to prevent abuses of counterterrorism powers.

The special rapporteur further warned that Turkey’s counterterrorism laws, particularly those criminalizing membership in terrorist organizations, have long been criticized for being vague and overly broad. In many cases, individuals have been convicted without clear proof that they participated in or supported violent acts, undermining the requirement of intent that should underpin criminal responsibility.

Human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have repeatedly criticized Turkey’s counterterrorism measures as politically motivated, warning that many individuals have been prosecuted merely for having social or professional ties to the Gülen movement, or for exercising their right to free expression.

The Grand Chamber of the European court will hear arguments in Yasak’s case on May 7, 2025.

The case follows the court’s landmark 2023 ruling in Yalçınkaya v. Türkiye, in which the ECtHR found that Turkey had violated the convention by applying terrorism laws retroactively and unpredictably.