The circus begins again. I don’t know why this is starting again. Here’s a clip from the story to explain:
Istanbul’s ?i?li Third Civil Court of First Instance dropped the case in a 2006 ruling on the grounds that there had been no violation of the individual rights of the plaintiffs in Pamuk’s remarks. The plaintiffs appealed the court decision.
After reviewing the local court’s ruling, the Court of Appeals nullified it on the grounds that there was no definition of individual rights in the Turkish legal system and that the scope of individual rights was not definite.
The civil suit is entirely separate from the charges levied against Pamuk under Article 301.
Furthermore:
“It has been left to the judiciary to decide on what goes into the definition of individual rights. Both in legal doctrine and judicial rulings, it is acknowledged that individual rights include individuals’ physical, emotional and social values as well their profession, honor and dignity, freedom, health, race, religion and bonds of citizenship,” read the court ruling. The court noted that the plaintiffs had a legal right to file a complaint over Pamuk’s remarks because they were linked with citizenship bonds. The court asked for the review of the case in consideration of the fact that the plaintiffs had a legal right to file such a case.
It sounds like awful reasoning on the part of the Court of Appeals, regardless of my partiality to Pamuk. It opens the door for all kinds of specious claims. Some ultra-nationalist judge with a personal grudge against Pamuk is setting aside common sense just to attack him.
Betcha this ruling won’t stand.
I’m now in the process of trying to convince Bill to record for YouTube a video of himself shrieking hysterically, tears and snot dripping from his cheeks, howling, “Leave Orhan alone!”