Dilek Kurban from Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV) says: "Until now official figures were around 350 thousand and policies were formulated based on these figures. All these policies should be reconsidered."
The results of institute's long anticipated research on forced migration or - to use the international terminology - internal displacement were finally made public.
Kurban underlines the fact that even the quantitative findings of the report are enough grounds to reevaluate all policies on internal displacement.
She draws attention to the fact that the report gives the answer to the most crucial question regarding policy making:
"This is the quantitative dimension of internal displacement which has occurred during the last twenty years from 14 provinces formerly ruled under the State of Emergency. According to the report, the number of IDPs is between 953,680 and 1,202,200 people."
The Institute carried out its quantitative study with approximately 6,000 representative households in fourteen provinces from which migration occurred - Adıyaman, Ağrı, Batman, Bingöl, Bitlis, Diyarbakır, Elazığ, Hakkari, Mardin, Muş, Siirt, Şırnak, Tunceli, Van-, ten provinces that received significant migration - Ankara, İzmir, Adana, Mersin, Bursa, Antalya, Malatya,Manisa, Kocaeli and households that represent the rural and urban regions of the other 57 provinces.
NGOs' involvement needed in policy making
Assistant Secretary to the Ministry of Interior Zekeriya Şarbak also commented during TESEV's international conference on "Internal Displacement in Turkey and Abroad" that the state had provided 345 thousand people with a total aid of 57 million YTL between the years of 2002-2006.
Kurban says: "The report shows that the number of IDPs is at least three, even four times as much as the official numbers. To develop effective solutions for any given problem, one needs first to properly diagnose it. Here, what should have been done as a first step was done last. All government policies developed so far have been designed on the basis of the official numbers which fall far below of the actual number of IDPs" and adds:
"The mistakes which have been made up to this point should not be repeated. Policies should be based on concrete data - not on estimates which are not supported by research. Furthermore, all government programs should be developed with the participation of civil society organizations and IDPs themselves."
Among the findings of the report Kurban draws attention to the following:
Half of the IDP population has not heard of the Return to Villages and Rehabilitation Program (RVRP):
According to the report among those who migrated from the fourteen provinces due to security related reasons and who were at least fifteen years old at the time of migration, 50.1% has heard of RVRP, 53.4% has heard of the Compensation Law and 79.0% has heard of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Among these, 25.1% have applied to the RVRP, 37.1% have petitioned the Compensation Law and 8.9% have filed suits with the ECHR.
Kurban said that these numbers are worrisome since all IDPs have a right to petition the Compensation Law and summed up the urgent measures to be taken as:
The deadline for filing petitions for the Compensation Law is January 3, 2006. This deadline should be immediately extended for at least another year.
The state should disseminate information on both the Compensation Law and the RVRP. The dissemination of information should be done in both Turkish and Kurdish and with the effective use of media. For instance, the Kurdish broadcasts on the Turkish Radio and Television (TRT) can be used for this purpose.
"The resources should be reexamined"
Kurban thinks that the findings of Hacettepe's study point to a need to reexamine resources as well.
According to the report, "55 percent of the population who migrated due to security reasons and did not yet return to their places of origin want to go back."
However, drawing attention to the findings of the same study that the majority of those who returned did so without any assistance and that the needs of most returnees were not met, Kurban remarks "This finding shows that the IDPs have been left to their own devices. The RVRP itself as well as the resources should be reexamined because while 55% want to return only 25% have applied to RVRP."
"Special policies should be developed for IDPs who do not wish to return"
According to the report those who do not wish to return to their places of origin are 45%. This is a significant portion of the population. Kurban thinks that the policies aimed at the IDPs who wish to remain in their new places of urban settlement should also be reevaluated.
"Aside from a pilot project implemented by the Van Governorship starting with September 29, no government policy has yet been developed regarding urban IDPs."
"The report is consistent with the stories of IDPs."
Kurban says that if one reads between the lines of the report, it is consistent with the findings of previous researches, which were either denied or ignored. She gives a few examples:
Both the PKK and the state are responsible: "When the report mentions migration for security related reasons; these reasons are listed as fear for the safety of one's life and property, eviction of villages whose security cannot be ensured, pressure to join the terrorist organization, demand to become village guards, prohibitions on the use of pastures. But the subjects of these acts are not identified. For instance who exerted pressure on these people to become village guards? We know from many studies that of course the pressure to join the terrorist organization comes from the PKK. And the pressure to become village guards from the state. Thus, the report proves that the narratives of IDPs are true.
The village guard system and ongoing clashes constitute obstacles to return: "The obstacles to return are listed as economic concerns, lack of infrastructure and security concerns. The security concerns are of two kinds: Village guards and the presence of PKK in the places of residence. Thus, as we always stress not abolishing the village guard system is an obstacle to return. So is the continuance of clashes."
People say that the security forces evicted villagers from their villages: "According to the report half of the security related migrations happened without notice. In cases where notice was given, it was almost always oral. The report does not specify by whom the notice was given. Once again, we know from other studies that the security forces were the ones that gave these notices. The report also confirms that village evictions were the reason behind migration."
Kurban sees the report as a "delayed yet positive step. It should be congratulated." Yet, she thinks that in order to "see the complete picture" regarding Turkey's internal displacement problem the survey questionnaire and the findings of the qualitative study should also be made public.
"Herein lies the responsibility of the State Planning Organization which coordinated the study. This data is in their hands and a participatory democracy necessitates transparency and sharing of information."
Kurban informs us that in the speech he gave during the press conference the Minister of Interior Abdülkadir Aksu said that they would evaluate and take into consideration the findings of the report; that policies would be formulated in line with the UN Guiding Principles and taking into account the choices of IDPs and that they were "aware of the socio-economic and psychological problems of urban IDPs."
Kurban says "This is a statement of political will" and adds "we should note this and closely monitor the implementation."(TK/EK/EÜ)
* Translation to English by Elif Kalaycıoğlu.
