Via HRW:

Turkey’s Prime Minister has called a historic Roma (Gypsy) district in Istanbul “ugly” as the government plans to evict its ancient residents in the name of development.

A U.S. government agency has sent a letter of protest to PM Erdogan urging to reconsider planned destruction of Sulukule, one of the oldest Romani settlments in Europe.

A petition is available for your signatures.

1. Even from the pre-electoral campaign period, the public activities of different political bodies resulted in the atmosphere of intolerance in our society. Unfortunately the calls for tolerance, made both by competent international organizations and by the Human Rights Defender  were  ignored. Even more, the atmosphere of intolerance turned into mutual hatred after the tragic events on the March 1.  

2. The events of March 1 started from the forced dispersal of the demonstrators in the Azatutyun square early in the morning. It was officially announced that there was an accumulation of  weapons in the place of demonstration, and Police officers simply tried to inspect the area but faced tough resistance. 
The Human Rights Defender’s position is that the authorities should clarify some issues.  Notably, who, when and under what circumstances there was made a decision to disperse peaceful demonstration by using force early in the morning of March 1, whether the demonstrators were presented an official warning of corresponding searching and whether the participants refused or resisted, and whether the use of force was adequate to the situation.  
 

The aforementioned issues are conditioned by the announcement of the demonstrators  that early in the morning without any warning, they were attacked and severely beaten. It is difficult for us to reveal the truth but there is an unanswered question.   What was the reason that the police imposed restrictions on     the activities of journalists, for us to get full impartial information. The fact of such  prevention  was officially confirmed by  “Erkir  media” and “ALM” television broadcasters. 

3. People near the French Embassy are a part of our society, they are not burglars or hooligans. They were convinced that they were citizens of Republic of Armenia who illegally suffered violence from law enforcement   bodies.  

The Police suggested  to make a procession  and hold a demonstration near Matenadaran. What was the reason that the people who could lead the demonstrators, did not do that, but at the last moment announced that the demonstrators did not obey them. Еventually what was the reason that demonstrators disagreed with both  law enforcement bodies and with the representatives of Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s electoral headquarter. Perhaps, the reason was the early morning events? Perhaps so many wounded and 8 dead persons were the result of this disagreement? The Defender deeply condoles with the relatives of the victims.  

4.  Current activities of some mass media, mainly TV broadcasters directed to the increase of the tension in atmosphere is at least doubtful. Particularly, it is continuously broadcasted the announcements of high level officials stating to punish or call to trial only those who participated in March 1 demonstrations. 
Why the issue of possible illegal actions and corresponding responsibilities of  law enforcement bodies are not discussed.  
        
5. The presidential decree of 01.03.2008 introducing a state of emergency imposes restrictions on civil and constitutional rights.  Thus, according to  subpoint 4 of the 4th point of the decree, mass media reports on domestic political matters may include only official information. Whereas, according to the information, received by the Defender, the activities of «A1plus», «Lragir» informational internet portals have been suspended.     In connection with it, the head of the National Security told the Defender that the reason for such extreme measures is that the internet providers of the corresponding sites are located abroad. According to the head of the National Security  the latter were warned about the restrictions  prescribed by the decree, but they refused to stand to them justifying that they act within the legislation of their own state.  
         

The  subpoint 3 of point 4 of the aforementioned presidential decree provides that law enforcing bodies have the right to restrict the free movement of people, means of transport and execute searching. The complaints received by the Defender indicate that in a result of broad interpretation of the mentioned subpoint the right of people to enter Yerevan city is inadequately eliminated.  

 Besides, the defender receives complaints concerning mass arrestments which is аcompanied by, according to applicants, violations of criminal procedural norms.  As for this question the Defender had a telephone conversation with the RA Prosecutor-General, who eagerly offered to present the list of all arrested people to the office of the Defender. 
Nevertheless, some representatives of law enforcing bodies tried to prevent the Defender from executing his powers. Such case happened at the RA Police Yerevan department Qanaqer-Zeytun police station.

6.We think that the present situation is conditioned by rough governing system, over-centralization of power,  artificial essence of system of checks and balances, social and economic polarization, combination of business and authorities,  absence of public control over authorities, deficiency of civil liberties. So it is the situation which has been continuously mentioned by me as the Human Rights Defender of RA, that we have systematic problems in the sphere of the protection of human rights in Republic of Armenia. All these results in the fact, that one big part of our society feels apart from the administration, has a total distrust towards public institutes, electoral mechanisms, justice and mass media. 

A certain part of political bodies tried to make use of the situation for its narrow political interests following not the way of dialogue, but the one of confrontation. Of course, the authorities have their part of responsibility in the current situation.  
There are two ways to solve the situation: illegal, that is leading to deadlock and legal. The deadlock would be the situation when  the political arena becomes deserted and a total feeling of fear would be formed. The other way must be based on  real democratic mechanisms, human rights must be considered  as a highest value or a headstone, and the way of dialogue and cooperation must be followed up.   

It is reassuring that this way is preferred by the newly elected president. It shows that the coming government tries to follow the legal way. It is characteristic that a proposal of cooperation is made by a  political leader, whose political party, forms the majority in the Parliament.   
I’m sure that even in this situation the possibility of dialogue and political way of peaceful solution of the existing disagreements is not exhausted.

Human Rights Watch, in a press release posted at its website, has criticized Armenia’s government for police brutality against post-election protesters:

Armenian police on March 1 used excessive force and violence to disperse demonstrators protesting peacefully against recent election results, Human Rights Watch said today. Following the crackdown on demonstrators, President Robert Kocharian decreed a state of emergency in Yerevan, the capital, until March 20, 2008. There was a heavy police presence overnight in central Yerevan. According to Arminfo news agency, the police have surrounded and sealed off the opposition news agency A1+, preventing its employees from entering or leaving the building.  
 
“The Armenian government should refrain from using violence and make clear that it won’t tolerate excessive use of force by police,” said Holly Cartner, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “A political crisis doesn’t give the government carte blanche in how it responds to demonstrators.”  
 
Several witnesses told Human Rights Watch that at 6.30 a.m. on March 1, Armenian special police forces violently dispersed a rally protesting against alleged electoral fraud that had entered its 11th day on Yerevan’s Freedom Square, beating demonstrators with truncheons and iron bars. Some were fleeing when police attacked them. Dozens are reported to have sustained severe injuries and more than 100 protestors were arrested. Armenia’s first president Levon Ter-Petrosian, who was the main opposition challenger in last month’s presidential poll, remains under effective house arrest as police cordoned off his home. Also on March 1, at least six opposition leaders were detained for organizing illegal demonstrations.  
 
Kocharian’s press office reported that under the state of emergency public gatherings and strikes will be banned and freedom of movement as well as non-government public broadcasts will be severely curtailed. Internet and satellite reception has been cut in Yerevan.  (not sure if this is true – Blogian)
 
Later in the morning, protesters gathered in front of the French Embassy in downtown Yerevan. Their numbers grew substantially during the day, as did the police presence. A demonstrator told Human Rights Watch that police were equipped with rubber truncheons, electric-shock devices, and water cannons. The rally was still continuing in front of the embassy when the state of emergency was announced after police were reported by news organizations to have fired in the air to disperse the demonstrators.  
 
Opposition demonstrations followed the February 19 presidential election, after the Central Election Commission declared Prime Minister, Serzh Sargsian the winner with 53 percent of the vote. According to official tallies, opposition challenger Ter-Petrosian won 21.5 percent of the vote. Tens of thousands of Ter-Petrosian supporters took to the streets in downtown Yerevan on February 20 to protest the declared election results and what they believed to have been electoral fraud. The protests continued peacefully on Freedom Square for the next 10 days, with some demonstrators camping out on the square in tents.  
 
The mayor of Yerevan previously called on the opposition to end the rally on Freedom Square, as the demonstrators had no permit. The Yerevan mayor’s office issued a statement on February 25 saying the protests were unauthorized and urging demonstrators to call a halt to them. Two days later the Armenian police issued a statement urging an end to the demonstrations.  
 
At about 6:30 a.m. on March 1, a few hundred opposition supporters were in their tents when police arrived and started to disperse them. Information about approaching interior troops began to reach demonstrators shortly after 6:00 a.m. A 30-year-old eyewitness, who requested anonymity for fear of retribution, told Human Rights Watch that several rows of Special Forces in riot armor, with helmets, plastic shields and rubber truncheons, started approaching from the left and right sides of Freedom Square. The witness said that police, without prior warning, sprayed water and descended on the demonstrators, using rubber truncheons and electric prods.  
 
“People started running towards Northern Avenue, but were chased by the police,” the witness told Human Rights Watch.  
 
The witness was among those who fled, running together with his father and younger brother, but police caught him from behind and beat him on his back and head with a rubber truncheon.  
 
“I momentarily lost consciousness after a blow on the head, and fell,” he told Human Rights Watch. “When I came to my senses, my brother was carrying me away from the square. My head was bleeding and my hat was all covered in blood.”  
 
The witness required seven stitches on the right side of his forehead. He sustained bruises to his right hand, back and legs. Fearing arrest he refrained from going to a hospital and sought medical assistance from a private doctor. His father and brother also sustained cuts and bruises on their backs and heads, but did not require urgent medical assistance.  
 
An Armenian human rights advocate told Human Rights Watch of several similar descriptions of the police action given to her by other witnesses.  
 
The police operation lasted for about 15 to 20 minutes, but as news about it spread, more people started heading towards the square. At least two eyewitnesses described separately to Human Rights Watch how police attacked, beat, and detained groups of 20 to 30 people who attempted to gather near the square.  
 
A member of parliament from the opposition Heritage Party, Zaruhi Postanjian, told Human Rights Watch that she arrived at the Yerevan Central Police Station around 9:00 a.m. to see police cars bringing detainees to the station, transferring them to other vehicles, and taking them to different locations. She stayed there for an hour and counted at least 100 detainees. According to Postanjian, two ambulances were also parked in front of the station and in one of them she saw a young man who appeared unconscious and had blood stains on his face and body. She also described a child she believed to be between 10 and 12 years old, bearing clear marks from beatings. Human Rights Watch could not confirm the nature or cause of their injuries.  
 
According to Avetik Ishkhanian of Armenia’s Helsinki Committee, police arrested several opposition leaders, including Aram Manukian, Alexander Arzumanian, Hrant Bagratian, Vahagn Haiotsian, and Vahagn Khachatrian, charging them with the criminal offence of organizing an unsanctioned public rally. According to the opposition news website Lragir, Aram Manukian and Hrant Bagratian were released later during the day.  
 
Postanjian told Human Rights Watch that in one case a journalist, Gagig Shanshan, was arrested and held in Zeitun district police station in Yerevan, but several hours after his arrest his lawyer still had no access to him.  
 
“Even in a state of emergency, those in detention and facing criminal charges are entitled to due process rights, and should have access to a lawyer,” said Cartner.  
 
Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, to which Armenia is a party, set out the safeguards which should accompany those deprived of their liberty, and access to a lawyer is one of those safeguards.  
 
Government information sources showed police footage of arms stockpiles that allegedly were discovered at Freedom Square after the demonstration was dispersed, including truncheons, guns, grenades, and gas capsules. The report was vehemently denied by the opposition.  
 
“The Armenian government prides itself on having a democratic image,” said Cartner. “Beating peaceful demonstrators is inconsistent with that image and violates its obligations under human rights law.”  

Although Armenia’s presidential election is largely seen as “generally democratic” by most observers, there have been some cases of serious violations and human rights abuses by now president-elect Serzh Sargsyan’s regime. Although Sargsyan’s main competetor (the former president Levon Ter Petrosyan) hasn’t been any better – if not worse – in treating his political rivals in the past, it is disturbing that serious human rights violations have happened during Tuesday’s election.

The ‘worst’ documented account, as told by Human Rights Watch, is the following:

Abovian, about 20 kilometers from Yerevan  
Larissa Tadevosian, a proxy for Ter-Petrosian, has told Human Rights Watch that she went to polling station 28/7 in Abovian at approximately 7:30 a.m. Three large, athletic men approached her, and two of them dragged her out of the polling station. Tadevosian struggled to free herself, but was dragged across the yard and shoved into a car. The three men drove Tadevosian to a deserted area outside the town. After taking her out of the car, one man beat her on the head and face. “They told me that I should be silent and not say anything more about the elections,” she told Human Rights Watch. “They threatened to rape me. They threatened to harm my family.” The men then left Tadevosian in the deserted area and drove away.  
 
Tadevosian was unable to return to the polling station because of her condition. She went directly to the police, who ordered a forensic medical examination. Two days after the attack, she complained of headaches, dizziness, and other medical problems.  
 
Gurgen Eghizarian, a proxy for Ter-Petrosian and a former deputy head of the National Security Service, received information that election observers at polling station 28/6 in Abovian had been kidnapped and beaten. He has stated that he went to the polling station together with Erjan Abgarian, a 68-year-old Ter-Petrosian proxy and former head of the customs service. Election commission representatives and observers there denied that they had seen anything happen to the observers, but Eghizarian demanded that the senior election commission representative sign a statement about what had happened. While at the polling station, a group of seven or eight men armed with pistols attacked Eghizarian, his son, and Abgarian, beating them on the kidneys, ribs, and back. Eghizarian told Human Rights Watch that the men also threatened him and the others saying, “Sargsian will be president, and if you go against him, you will be killed.” He suffers headaches and has a bruise on his forehead as a result of the assault.  
 
A senior official for Ter-Petrosian told Human Rights Watch that at least three other proxies were beaten in Abovian on election day.  
 
Another Ter-Petrosian proxy who wished to remain anonymous told Human Rights Watch that large, athletic men would arrive periodically at another polling station in Abovian and would take prospective voters aside “for a little chat,” apparently in order to influence their votes. These same men also spoke to election commission officials, observers, and candidates’ proxies, and threatened them should they speak out about any violations. This same proxy told Human Rights Watch that in mid-afternoon some men took him aside and threatened him and told him, “You didn’t see anything.” He claimed that these men were responsible for stealing and falsifying ballots and stuffing the ballot box at this polling station. Police stood by and did not respond. This proxy stated that he continued to fear for his safety and had sent his children to another location and was reluctant to leave his own apartment.  

I just noticed that the website of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute has finally been updated with a somewhat professional design on January 19, 2008.

The website has also posted a previously unpublished interview with Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink who was assassinated exactly a year ago in Istanbul. Talking about the circumstances that led to the establishment of Agos, the Armenian newspaper that Dink edited, he said:

The word Armenian was considered to be an abuse; the Turks connected the Armenians with the Kurdish Worker Party (PKK) or with ASALA (the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia). There was a great anxiety and trouble in the community when the Karabagh problem was discussed in Turkey.
We lived like a worm. We heard what was on TV but could do nothing. We apposed, cried, told that all these were lie but could not speak loudly. We need to break the wall, it was necessary.

One day the Patriarch Ghazanchyan invited us and told that there was a photo of an Armenian priest and [Pkk leader] Abdullah Odjalan in the “Sabah” newspaper and there was written under the photo “Here is the fact of Armenian and PKK collaboration”.

Then His Holiness stated that it was a lie, the priest was not an Armenian. He asked me and my friends who were with me at that time what we thought about all that. I expressed my point of view and suggested that it’ll be meaningful if we invite a press- conference. It was a brave action, all the local and international press came and it was a great success. The impression was indescribable.

After the meeting I suggested that it was nonsense to invite a conference on every occasion, we had to take definite steps. And I suggested publishing a newspaper.

Talking about minorities in Turkey, Dink said:

You will not find anything connected with minorities especially the Armenians in any textbooks. There are facts on minorities only in the textbook of the National Security. In the elementary school there is not even a sentence like “Ali gives the ball to Hakob”; Ali will always give it to Veli. When we observe them we are nowhere.
Only in the textbooks of National Security you may find the word “Armenians” which will take place in the unit of unprofitable groups which play bad tricks with Turkey.

A friend was telling me yesterday that a certain field of psychology, developed in France, studies the memory of the  perpetrator group in genocides.  In a hundred years, it is thought, the forgotten crime evokes discussion and condemnation of the genocide among the descendants of the perpetrators.  

Only seven years before the centennial anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, there are still only a handful Turkish scholars who openly write and acknowledge the Armenian Genocide.  But given the fact that these scholars literally risk their lives and everything else they have, their existence is amazing.  Moreover, Turkey’s millions-of-dollars-campaign to attract non-Turkish scholars in the genocide denial “scholarship” has produced a pool of few professors who, I guess, don’t mind being the devil’s advocate as far as the devil is paying well.

This is, perhaps, the reason that the ultra-nationalist “deep state” apparatus in Turkey is freaking out that the list that has included Taner Akcam, Fatma Gocek, Elif Shafak and others is growing.

Mehmet Sait Uluışık, a Turkish-born Circassian, has only recently started researching the role of his own ethnic group – the Circassians – in perpetrating the Armenian Genocide although Mr. Uluışık is careful not to use the word ‘genocide.’

But Turkish nationalists already know that they can’t label Uluışık a “traitor” because the Circassian researcher is not investigating the genocide as a whole but is instead specifically looking into the role that his own people – a Muslim group from the Caucasus – played in the massacres.  Moreover, in Turkey’s attempt to deny, justify and downplay  the Armenian Genocide some have talked about “the Circassian genocide,” with a reference to persecution of the Circassian people under Tsarist Russia.

So yes, Mr. Mehmet Sait Uluışık is more dangerous for the Turkish apparatus than any other scholar so far.  And, so, he was recently denied entry to his homeland.

Here is a press release, received in e-mail, from Mr. Uluışık about what happened at the Turkish airport:

Notice to Press and Public

      My name is Mehmet Sait Uluışık and I was born in Eskişehir (Turkey) on July 10, 1959. On November 20, 2007, at Yeşilköy Airport (Istanbul), without presenting any justification but based upon an order from the Ministry of the Interior, I was declared a suspicious person, denied entry into Turkey and sent back to Berlin on the first return flight.

      I have been living in Germany since 1984 and have worked as a journalist and publisher since 1992. Because of my Circassian ethnic background I have been interested in Circassian history and since 2005 have stopped working actively as a journalist and publisher and started devoting all of my time to gathering documents on the subject.

      I was stripped of my Turkish citizenship in 1991 because of my failure to perform obligatory military service (based on Order #1956, dated June 7, 1991, supported by Statute 403, Section 25, paragraph ç). Since 1997, the year I became a German citizen, I have been entering and exiting Turkey regularly without incident.

      I was not provided with the official reason for denying my entry into Turkey. Despite this, based upon information that I was able to gather from contacts I made, the reason I was denied entry into Turkey is apparently to prevent my performing research at the Presidential Ottoman Archives (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşiv, hereinafter “BOA”) in Istanbul.

      There is a very simple reason why my entry to Turkey was blocked instead of directly prohibiting my research at the archives. If the latter had occurred, it would have made an obvious statement that would have belied the arguments of the governing AK Party administration that “Our archives are open to all. Everyone’s welcome to come in and examine them,” or “let the historians form a commission.” By using a different strategy and preventing my entry into the country, it allows for the raising of a suspicion that there are perhaps other issues in my personal background.

      Recently, I started to wonder about the history of Circassians and I want to write a book about the subject. The actual topic that interests me is “Did the Circassians play any role in the events of 1915 and if so, what?” Also, I have been trying to find the answers to the question, “What was the relationship between Circassians and other minorities during the period in question, prior to that and afterwards?” For the past two years, I have been working in a regular, disciplined manner at the BOA and systematically gathering documents on the subject. A large part of my life during the past two years has been taken up this way at the archives in Istanbul.

      During my work at the archives I was frequently blocked in my efforts by the employees, who are known as followers of Turkish-Islamic synthesis (mostly supporters of the Turkish nationalist party). I believe that the denial of my entry into Turkey was the result of efforts by these same individuals. At the airport I was presented with a “Record of Denial of Entry” form. On the form was all of my identification information. This information taken from my German ID card is available in only one place, and that is the Presidential Ottoman Archives.

      The police officer at the airport informed me that the order [to deny entry] came directly from the Ministry of the Interior, not from the General Directorate of Security. Based upon his investigation of the issue, parliamentarian Mr. Ufuk Uras informed me that the entry denial did not come from the Ministry of National Defense nor did it have anything to do with military service.

      Since the issuance of the entry denial on Nov. 20, 2007, I have made no effort to broadcast this information. I believed that the ban was an effort to discredit the AK Party administration. I had hoped that the AK Party administration would quickly rectify the situation when it so obviously contradicts the government’s policies as stated to the public. I tried to remain silent because if the incident were revealed, it would create an obstacle in Turkey’s relations with the European Union and lead the way to lowering opinion towards the current administration and Turkey in general, especially after recent discourse regarding the events of 1915. I tried to resolve it through private channels.

      Unfortunately both my own efforts and those of my attorney to reach the authorities within the AK Party have come to a standstill. I was unable to get anywhere with my efforts. That leaves only one option: letting the public know, through the media, about a mindset that attempts to prevent an individual from conducting research in the archives by denying them entry into the country.

      It is obvious what sort of difficulty is going to befall someone like me who is doing nothing other than gathering documents in a systematic manner from the archives, if a government that claims “Our archives are open to all; we welcome the formation of a historians commission” turns around and not only denies that person access to the archives but even entry to the country itself. Nothing that Turkey and its administrations say on the subject can be considered credible. One can only smirk at a statement like “Let’s solve our problems from the past” when it comes out of a mindset that views working in the archives and gathering documents as criminal. This can only be answered with the statement, “Do your homework first, then open up the archives to everyone.”

      I want this disrespectful action against me resolved immediately and my work, which has been delayed because of it, compensated for as soon as possible.

      Respectfully,

      Mehmet Sait Uluışık

      Jan. 2, 2008 – Berlin

The murderer of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink wasn’t a minor at the time of the assassination in January of 2007:

According to Turkey’s NTV:

The man standing trial for the January 19, 2007, slaying of Dink has been named as Ogun Samast. Till now, the media have been forbidden to publish Samast’s name as he was believed to be under the age of 18 when he allegedly shot Dink outside the office of the newspaper Argos, of which he was the editor.

However, the results of medical tests conducted on Samast revealed he is currently 19 years of age, meaning he was not a minor when the allegedly gunned Dink down in Istanbul.

Samast is standing trial for the murder of Dink along with a number of other men accused of involvement in the crime or inciting Samast to commit the shooting.

Detained a few days after the shooting, Samast, who has links to far right wing Turkish groups, admitted to killing Dink.

Summarizing the death of a 17-year-old Armenian-American girl who was initially refused transplant by her health insurance company, filmmaker Michael Moore states on his website that “justice delayed is justice denied.”

The death of Nataline Sarkisyan from Glendale California has sparked national outrage and the Sarkisyan family’s celebrity lawyer Mark Geragos, another Armenian-American, says he wants the insurance company, Cigna, charged with manslaughter.

According to the Associated Press via Washington Post:

[…] 

They took my daughter away from me,” said Nataline Sarkisyan’s father, Krikor, with tears in his eyes at a news conference at his lawyer’s office.

The Philadelphia-based insurer had initially refused to pay for the procedure, saying it was experimental. The company reversed the decision Thursday as about 150 nurses and community members rallied outside of its office in Glendale in suburban Los Angeles. Nataline died just hours later.

The insurer “maliciously killed” Nataline because it did not want to bear the expense of her transplant and aftercare, said family attorney Mark Geragos. He did not say when or in what court he would file the civil lawsuit.

Geragos also said he would ask the district attorney’s office to press murder or manslaughter charges against Cigna, an allegation that one legal expert described as difficult to prove and “a little bit of grandstanding.”

[…]

Few realize that the United States is the only western country without universalized health coverage.  But even those who have health coverage often become victims of privatized health insurance companies.  Michael Moore argues in his movie Sicko, that I watched last week, that insurance companies are like any other business.  They “lose money” every time they approve a medical procedure.

I myself had to get the approval of my insurance company couple of days ago to get an important health test.  Although the results are not too bad, had the insurance company not approved the test I’d not find out my situation and not get a treatment.  Why should an insurance company approve a medical test assigned by my doctor?

The issue of health care will become a major, if not the major, issue of the presidential elections.  It seems most Americans are over the “communistic” paranoia in regards to reformed health care.  I am not sure if universal health care is the solution, but there must be reforms.

On a not so important note, it is interesting that Moore’s film had a reference to another Armenian-American, Dr. Kevorkian, and that Armenian composer Aram Khachaturian’s famous music was played in the film.

“The Executive Board of the International Press Institute (IPI), the global network of editors, media executives and leading journalists, has named Hrant Dink, former editor-in-chief of the bilingual Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos, as one of its World Press Freedom Heroes,” reads the Dec 10, 2007, IPI press release.

IPI, that has also produced the shortest film (25-seconds long) honoring Hrant Dink, states:

[…]
“Hrant Dink’s nomination as our 52nd World Press Freedom Hero is a tribute to his bravery, but also an acknowledgement of his significant contribution to freedom of expression and press freedom in Turkey,” IPI Director Johann P. Fritz said.

Dink, a well-known Turkish-Armenian editor and columnist, was murdered in Istanbul on 19 January 2007. He had received numerous death threats from Turkish nationalists who viewed his journalism as treacherous.

Dink was shot twice in the head and once in the neck by a Turkish nationalist outside the offices of the newspaper he founded in 1996. He had faced legal problems for denigrating “Turkishness” under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code in his articles about the massacre of Armenians during the First World War. In July 2006, he lost an appeal over a suspended six-month prison sentence handed down for violating Article 301. His prosecution stemmed from an article in 2004 about the 1915-17 massacres of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire. Aside from this criminal case, Dink was also facing prosecution for a second article condemning his conviction.

Born on 15 September 1954, Dink was best-known for reporting on human and minority rights in Turkey and for advocating Turkish-Armenian reconciliation. In a February 2006 interview, he said he hoped his reporting would pave the way for peace between the two peoples. “I want to write and ask how we can change this historical conflict into peace,” he said.

At his funeral on 23 January, 100,000 people marched in protest at his assassination, chanting, “We are all Armenians” and “We are all Hrant Dink.” Since his death, calls for the repeal of Article 301 have become increasingly vocal.

The Dink murder trial opened in Istanbul on 2 July. 18 people were charged in connection with his assassination.

The IPI award was formally handed over to his widow, Rakel Dink, on 10 December in Vienna. “The murder of Hrant Dink deprived Turkey of one of its most courageous and independent voices and it was a terrible event for Turkish press freedom in general,” Fritz said. “Hrant Dink is one of at least 91 journalists murdered so far in 2007. In most cases, these murders occurred with impunity. We call on governments around the world to ensure that those responsible for these heinous crimes are brought to justice.”

FYI UPDATE: Just noticed that ArmeniaLiberty.org has also posted an article on the same topic. I wanted to make sure to give them a credit, although my source wasn’t ArmeniaLiberty.org and their post appeared in Google News after I published this entry.