A 12-article bill that had long been on the agenda as part of the Peace and Democratic Society Process and was publicly debated as the “Framework Law” was passed by the General Assembly of Parliament with 468 votes. The entry into force of the legislation was made conditional on the National Security Council (MGK) determining and confirming that all structures linked to the PKK/KCK had dissolved themselves and completely laid down their arms.

The legislation, regarded as a critical step in establishing the legal basis for the process, does not include the “right to hope,” which has emerged as one of the most important issues in the public debate. The exclusion from the law of the “right to hope,” which includes reconsideration of long-term and aggravated life sentences, particularly the physical freedom of Leader Apo and his right to conditional release, has triggered new debates in political and legal circles.

Tevgera Jinên Azad (TJA) activist and politician Çağlar Demirel spoke to ANF about the issue.

Çağlar Demirel said the importance of the Framework Law lies in the fact that, for the first time, a historical and structural issue such as the Kurdish question has begun to be discussed by the state itself in its own parliament on a legal basis, and said: “The Framework Law has become the first law in all these years to be submitted by the Republic of Turkey to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. For the first time, an attempt has been made to establish a framework for pursuing legal and democratic politics concerning the process. Historically, the Kurdish question has been addressed through policies of denial, assimilation, annihilation and extermination. The fact that parliament has to discuss this issue today did not arise by itself. We reached this point as a result of the Kurdish Freedom Movement’s struggle over many years.

What made this possible is the struggle of the Kurdish Movement. We reached this point as a result of the Kurdish People’s Leader’s tremendous resistance, struggle and negotiations.”

This is a process that affects not just Turkey but the entire Middle East

Demirel said that the process cannot be considered solely within Turkey’s borders and that developments in the Middle East also played a role in the emergence of the Framework Law, continuing: “This process is part of a process that affects not only Turkey but the geopolitical situation in the Middle East. All of this has created a situation that makes the establishment of the Framework Law essential. Reaching a stage where the existence of the Kurdish question is acknowledged is significant in itself. However, such a deep-rooted and historical problem cannot be solved by a single law. Everyone knows that such a huge problem cannot be resolved all at once, through one law or one Framework Law. Nevertheless, the step that has been taken is important for the process to move forward.

When we look at its content, does it fully meet the demands? Of course not. There are many aspects that need to be criticized in terms of its language, tone, approach and discourse. It is not a Framework Law that puts forward an approach capable of resolving the problem completely. We can say that it provides a framework for what will come next and what it will pave the way for. What is important is that, at the point we call the root law, it should become a genuine root law. Its branches and offshoots need to expand progressively and find their place in law across all sections of society.”

Abdullah Öcalan’s physical freedom should have been included in the law

Çağlar Demirel pointed out that one of the most important shortcomings of the Framework Law is the absence of any provision concerning Öcalan’s physical freedom, saying: “The expectation was that the Kurdish People’s Leader, whom you regard as a negotiator and who has been held in isolation in İmralı Prison for years, would be included in this law. The fact that Öcalan has not achieved physical freedom, and even that a reference to the period before 2005 has been left in place, is not an acceptable situation. This is a step. We consider it a legal framework that could pave the way for the freedom, the physical freedom, of the Kurdish People’s Leader. We hope that additional laws will be passed and that this will be expanded as soon as possible.

One of the issues with which society is most dissatisfied is that the Kurdish People’s Leader’s role as negotiator and chief negotiator …