The leader of the predominantly Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) was sentenced to six months imprisonment today for calling the leader of the PKK "Mr Öcalan". Ahmet Türk used the title repeatedly during a speech he gave in January; the court in Diyarbakır ruled that this was "praise of a crime and a criminal" under the Turkish penal code, and that his position as a party leader meant that his words had added gravitas.
The punishment is harsh and overblown. Ahmet Türk does not deserve to go to prison for giving Abdullah Öcalan a courtesy title. But that does not make him right. Öcalan is a criminal, tried under Turkish law, serving a life sentence on the island of İmralı. He deserves a title no more than Hermann Göring or Saddam Hussein.
Dropping titles for convicted criminals is a convention that news outlets in the West tend to follow. The BBC's styleguide says on the matter: "In criminal cases, a defendant is Guy Fawkes or Mr Fawkes until any conviction, when he becomes Fawkes".*
Which makes it all the more annoying when pieces like this appear on the BBC News website. This is a separate story concerning Öcalan - rumours about his health - written by the BBC's correspondent in Istanbul, Sarah Rainsford, and she will keep referring to Öcalan as "Mr".
It's worth thinking for a moment why. I would love to dismiss it as a careless mistake but she, like Ahmet Türk, uses the phrase "Mr Öcalan" repeatedly. Perhaps the BBC is not dropping the title because of the international controversy surrounding Öcalan's trial. "The trial was not fair and conclusive," it could be argued. And in a way, they would be right. But if you don't trust the Turkish judgement, trust the European one: the Council of Europe ruled only a matter of months ago that Öcalan did not need a retrial.
But even that argument is redundant for the BBC, as this story reporting Ahmet Türk's conviction demonstrates. Not a "Mr Öcalan" in sight. So it seems the Rainsford story is an isolated incident.
It is the trade of a pedant to pick at such small details in Sarah Rainsford's story. In the same way, it is the trade of a pedant to pick at such small details in Ahmet Türk's speech. The Turkish state authorities have had it in him for months - only last week, he was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for handing out party literature in Kurdish and not sanctified Turkish.
Both Sarah Rainsford and Ahmet Türk are wrong. Neither should be punished. But that doesn't follow through for Turkey's nationalists. They are, after all, the greatest pedants of all.
8 comments:
I have to agree on the harshness of the punishment extended to Mr Türk. Surely, a fine would have been more appropriate. Under no circumstances can a custodial sentence be viewed as acceptable in this case. As for Sarah Rainsford, she is an employee of an institution that is infected with the mental assumptions and reflexes of the soft left. Most irritatingly of all, the BBC still refers to the PKK as a "guerilla" or "separatist" movement rather than what it really is.
May I underline the similarity between the recent Armenian genocide denial bill in France and punishing someone who calls someone "Mr."? I think both are ridiculous.
PS: What if I call my dog as Mr.Big? Am I insulting the humanity by calling a dog "Mr." or am I insulting my dog?
Dear baris,
if it is ridiculous, then why noone calls;
Mr.Hitler,
Mr.Mussolini,
Mr.Pol Pot,
Mr.Noriega,
Mr.Somoza,
Mr.Hussein,
Mr.Bin Laden etc.
I would still say "Mr Bin Laden" in any piece I write because he has still not faced trial. Plain and simple.
Dear Mr. sadettin koçak,
I googled "Mr. Bin Laden" (with quotations" and had about 171,000 results. Even Tom Friedman calls it Mr. Bin Laden (Would you prefer links?) Now, how would you verify that noone calls "Mr Bin Laden?"
if you are trying to suggest the bbc is pro-pkk because a correspondent used the title mr then your argument is sorely misplaced.
there is also significant difference between the turkish 'sayin' and the english 'mr'.
Is there a difference? Please, do tell.
Post a Comment