Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, E/CN.4/2006/95/Add.1, March 22, 2006 – Turkey
550. On 30 September 2005, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning Kaos GL Gay and Lesbian Cultural Research and Solidarity Organization, based in Ankara, Turkey. This organization was established eleven years ago, and operates a drop-in centre providing social and cultural support to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, in addition to advocating for measures to end discrimination and violence. It also publishes a magazine that has been registered as a legal publication in Turkey since 1999. According to information received, on July 15 2005, “Kaos GL Gay and Lesbian Cultural Research and Solidarity Organization” applied to the Ministry of Interior for recognition as a non-governmental organization. The Ministry initially approved the request, but now the Ankara Deputy Governor has responded by launching a lawsuit to close the organization. In a letter dated 15 September, Turkish officials threatened to close down the organization, on the grounds that it allegedly violates a provision in the Turkish Civil Code that forbids “establishing any organization that is against the laws and principles of morality.” The letter stated that a court procedure had been opened to dissolve the organization. Concern was expressed that the reported court procedure was an attempt to close “Kaos GL Gay and Lesbian Cultural Research and Solidarity Organization” and impedes on the right to form, join and participate in non-Governmental organizations, associations or groups, as set down in the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders.
555. By a letter dated 10 November 2005 the Government responded to the communication of 30 September 2005. The Government stated that the Office of the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor found that there were no legal grounds for launching a lawsuit against KAOS GL and dismissed the application of the Ankara Governor on
15 September 2005. Futhermore, the Government stated that it believed that the Chief Public Prosecutor set a good precedent with this decision.
link to full text of the Report: