On 27 February 2026, one year after Kurdistan Workers\u2019 Party (PKK) leader Abdullah \u00d6calan issued a call for \u201cPeace and a Democratic Society\u201d, a 7-member independent international delegation concluded its first mission to observe legal developments in the ongoing peace process in Turkey in relation to the Kurdish issue.<\/p>\n
The Independent Legal Mission on the Peace Process in Turkey (the Mission) was formed under the auspices of the European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights (ELDH) and Association for Democracy and International Law (MAF-DAD). In addition to lawyers affiliated with these organisations, the Mission was also constituted with the institutional participation of the International Bar Association\u2019s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI), the Union of Italian Penal Chambers (UCPI) and Esculca.<\/p>\n
On 2 March, the preliminary observations and findings were presented by\u00a0IBAHRI Programme Lawyer Eleonora Scala\u00a0at a side event to the 61st session of the United Nations Human Rights Council\u00a0titled \u2018Rights of Minorities \u2013 The situation in the Syrian Arab Republic and in T\u00fcrkiye\u2019. Organised by the Movement Against Racism and for Friendship Among Peoples\u00a0(MRAP), the side event featured\u00a0Professor Nicolas Levrat, the United Nations appointed Special Rapporteur on minority issues.<\/p>\n
The Mission included the following Delegates:<\/p>\n
Urko Aiartza Azurtza, Co-President of ELDH \u2013 European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights<\/p>\n
Raquel Crespo Castro, Secretary of Esculca<\/p>\n
Devrat, Advocate-on-Record, Supreme Court of India<\/p>\n
Clemens Lahner, (member of ELDH \u2013 European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights)<\/p>\n
Wendy Lyon, Socialist Lawyers\u2019 Association of Ireland, member of ELDH \u2013 European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights<\/p>\n
Ezio Menzione, Union of Italian Penal Chambers<\/p>\n
Eleonora Scala, International Bar Association\u2019s Human Rights Institute.<\/p>\n
On Thursday 4 June, a comprehensive report of preliminary observations arising from the Mission\u2019s first visit to Turkey has been presented at a press conference at the European Parliament.<\/p>\n
The objective of the Mission is to assess ongoing developments related to the peace process in the Turkish\u2013Kurdish conflict and to contribute, from an independent and legally grounded perspective, to the achievement of a just and lasting peace. Guided by the principles set out in the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Peace (A\/RES\/71\/189), the Mission seeks to promote a resolution rooted in justice and respect for human rights through dialogue, neutrality, and rigorous legal analysis, while fully respecting the sovereignty and institutional framework of the Republic of Turkey.<\/p>\n
The Mission situates its work within the broader context of the Turkish\u2013Kurdish conflict, a complex and evolving issue involving questions of identity, governance, and political participation. Since 1984, the conflict involved armed hostilities between the Turkish state and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), alongside ongoing legal and political debates concerning cultural rights, decentralisation, and the application of counterterrorism legislation. The issue engages multiple branches of law, including constitutional law, international human rights law, and, in certain periods, international humanitarian law. Despite earlier attempts at de-escalation, including the 2012\u20132015 \u201csolution process,\u201d structural challenges and competing political interpretations continue to shape both the conflict and the prospects for peace.<\/p>\n
Basque lawyer Urko Aiartza Azurtza, Co-President of ELDH, that they met with a wide range of actors from different segments of society and sought to understand both the opportunities presented by the current process and the challenges it faces.<\/p>\n
Aiartza said: \u201cOne of the messages we heard repeatedly was that the parliamentary commission represents an important constitutional development. We share this view. The commission has created a democratic and parliamentary space for discussion that did not previously exist. However, it must also be understood that this is only a first step and that a comprehensive framework has not yet been established.\u201d<\/p>\n
He added that while many of the stakeholders they met welcomed these consultations, they also expressed concerns about the limited participation of society in the process and the inadequate representation of women.<\/p>\n
\u201cAlthough this is recognized as an important step, it was particularly emphasized that a lasting peace process must be embraced by all segments of society. I would like to stress this point as well,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Aiartza continued: \u201cOne of the key messages repeatedly conveyed to us was that the Kurdish issue cannot be addressed solely through a security perspective, and we fully agree with this assessment. Ending violence is, of course, of vital importance. However, correctly defining the nature of the problem is a prerequisite for achieving a successful and lasting solution. While the end of violence is necessary, many stakeholders emphasized the importance of addressing the underlying issues at the root of the conflict. These include matters such as language rights, national identity, democratic participation, cultural recognition, and equal citizenship.\u201d<\/p>\n
Aiartza also emphasized Abdullah \u00d6calan\u2019s role in the process, stating: \u201cAnother issue that was discussed extensively during our meetings was the situation of Abdullah \u00d6calan and the concerns surrounding it. Regardless of political views, all of the interlocutors we met acknowledged the decisive role that Mr. \u00d6calan has played\u2014and continues to play\u2014in the initiation of the current process. In this context, his conditions and status are regarded as an important factor for the future development of the process. We are all aware of this\u2014ourselves, Turkish society, and the lawmakers in Turkey alike.\u201d<\/p>\n
Recommendations<\/strong><\/p>\n The report lists the following recommendations in a constructive and forward-looking spirit, with a view to supporting ongoing efforts toward a peaceful, democratic, and sustainable resolution of the issues discussed:<\/p>\n Participation of civil society<\/strong><\/p>\n a. Further steps could be taken to establish formal consultation mechanisms between government institutions and civil society organizations.<\/p>\n b. Particular attention is encouraged to ensuring that participation is accessible and inclusive, including through the provision of adequate language and interpretation services.<\/p>\n c. The regular publication of progress reports regarding the peace process and legislative reforms, may contribute to transparency, accountability, and public trust in the process.<\/p>\n Representation<\/strong><\/p>\n There appears to be broad recognition of the important role of Mr. \u00d6calan in initiating the current phase of the process, and his continued relevance remains significant, as reflected in his recent message of 27 February 2026.<\/p>\n a. If dialogue is to advance in a constructive and structured manner consideration could be given to his detention conditions being within a transparent and clearly defined legal framework, so as to enable structured, confidential, and lawful communication with relevant actors. Such communication may, where appropriate and in accordance with applicable law, involve representatives of the Kurdish political movement, competent Turkish authorities, and, where relevant, other national and international interlocutors.<\/p>\n b. In this context, attention may also be drawn to the binding force of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, including the 2014th \u00d6calan v. Turkey (2) decission, as well as the evolving interpretation of international human rights standards concerning long-term detention, human dignity, and the preservation of prospects for reintegration, often referred to as the \u201cright to hope.\u201d<\/p>\n A Comprehensive DDR Framewor<\/strong><\/p>\n Consider the adoption of a comprehensive legal framework for DDR. This should include the adoption of a temporary and clearly defined legal framework regulating the disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of former members of armed organizations. Such a framework could be preceded by, and grounded in, a structured process of\u00a0direct engagement and negotiation among the parties to the conflict<\/strong>, recognizing that sustainable DDR processes require political agreement and mutual confidence.<\/p>\n a. Legal guarantees may accompany or precede disarmament measures to provide certainty regarding the legal status of participants. In this regard, advancing an effective DDR process would benefit from the prior establishment of a clear legal and technical framework ensuring that reintegration takes place under appropriate legal and security guarantees. International experience suggests that carefully designed legal arrangements, combined where appropriate with third-party technical expertise and confidence-building measures, can contribute significantly to building trust between the parties and within society at large.<\/p>\n b. \u00a0Such a framework could include an independent disarmament verification mechanism. Verification should be objective, transparent, and auditable, involving relevant state institutions and international, independent observers where appropriate.<\/p>\n c. \u00a0In parallel, consideration could be given to the use of existing executive and administrative instruments to enable timely and flexible confidence-building steps without necessarily requiring comprehensive legislative reform. For example, administrative acts could facilitate the return of individuals who left the country to avoid prosecution, by lifting existing entry bans where appropriate. Similarly, the use of decree-based mechanisms\u2014drawing on precedents from past emergency governance practices\u2014could allow for the adoption of targeted measures addressing specific legal or procedural obstacles to reintegration. Exploring such avenues in a systematic manner could provide additional practical tools to support early progress and build momentum in the process.<\/p>\n Strengthen Compliance with Judicial Decisions<\/strong><\/p>\n Consider further measures to ensure the effective enforcement of judgements from the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of T\u00fcrkiye. Particular emphasis should be placed on the timely and good-faith execution of final judicial decisions, in line with obligations arising under Article 46 of the European Convention on Human Rights and within the existing constitutional and legal framework. In this regard, attention should be drawn, among others, to ECtHR judgments such as\u00a0Selahattin Demirta\u015f v. Turkey<\/em>,\u00a0Kavala v. Turkey<\/em>,\u00a0\u00d6calan v. Turkey\u00a0<\/em>and Constitutional Court decisions such as [\u015eerafettin Can Atalay (3)<\/em>\u00a0[Plenary], App. No: 2023\/9974466].<\/p>\n Expand Democratic Participation and Political Rights<\/strong><\/p>\n a. Consider reviewing political party legislation, to ensure that party closure procedures meet strict democratic standards and are applied only in exceptional circumstances.<\/p>\n b. Further steps could be explored to strengthen local democratic governance by ensuring that municipal administrations operate according to democratic standards and representative legitimacy.<\/p>\n c. In this context, measures related to restore the authority of elected municipal representatives removed under the \u201ctrusteeship system\u201d as a step towards facilitating dialogue and building trust within affected communities, may merit reflection.<\/p>\n d. Consider safeguards to ensure the rights of elected representatives and political actors to participate in democratic processes without undue criminalization, including through possible review of relevant criminal and anti-terrorism legislation to ensure alignment with international human rights standards.<\/p>\n e. Amend legislation governing demonstrations and public gatherings to ensure compliance with international standards.<\/p>\n Linguistic and Cultural Rights<\/strong><\/p>\n a. Consider further developing policies acknowledging the linguistic and cultural diversity of Turkey\u2019s population.<\/p>\n b. In particular, additional legal and policy frameworks could be explored to support mother tongue rights and the use of Kurdish and other languages in: education, cultural activities, and local public services.<\/p>\n c. Such measures should be grounded in an inclusive and pluralistic understanding of citizenship\u2014one that fully recognizes and accommodates the Kurdish identity, alongside other cultural identities, as an integral part of the democratic fabric of the state.<\/p>\n Women\u2019s Participation and Inclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n a. Consistent with the principles of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, efforts could be made to ensure meaningful participation of women in peace negotiations, political dialogue, and reintegration programs.<\/p>\n b. Consider strengthening mechanisms to investigate and address sexual and gender-based violence related to the conflict.<\/p>\n Transitional Justice<\/strong><\/p>\n Consider exploring transitional justice mechanisms, including the possible establishment of an independent body to investigate unresolved cases. In this regard, the creation\u2014by law\u2014of an independent, adequately resourced, and internationally supported Truth, Justice and Accountability Commission should be considered, with a clear mandate to investigate, document, and publicly report on serious human rights violations committed by all parties to the conflict. Its scope should explicitly include:<\/p>\n – Enforced disappearances and cases of missing persons;<\/p>\n – Political killings and alleged extrajudicial executions;<\/p>\n – Torture, ill-treatment, and other grave human rights violations;<\/p>\n To ensure effectiveness and public legitimacy, such a mechanism should be endowed with:<\/p>\n – Powers to access official archives, summon witnesses, and ensure protection of victims and testimonies;<\/p>\n – A victim-centred approach guaranteeing meaningful participation, recognition, and the right to truth;<\/p>\n – The capacity to make binding or strongly authoritative recommendations on reparations, institutional reform, and where appropriate, referral for prosecution;<\/p>\n This framework should be complemented by:<\/p>\n – A comprehensive reparations programme (including restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, and symbolic measures);<\/p>\n – Targeted institutional reforms in the security and judicial sectors aimed at ensuring accountability and non-repetition;<\/p>\n – Mechanisms for periodic review and international accompaniment to reinforce credibility and trust.<\/p>\n Anchoring these measures in law and linking them explicitly to the broader DDR process would signal a clear commitment to accountability, reconciliation, and the reconstruction of a shared and inclusive civic order.<\/p>\n ‘Continued engagement can contribute to advancing a peaceful and durable resolution process’<\/strong><\/p>\n “The Mission wishes to underline that the above recommendations are interrelated and mutually reinforcing, and that progress in one area may contribute positively to developments in others. Their potential impact lies not only in their individual implementation, but also in their capacity to contribute to a broader environment of trust, legal certainty, and democratic resilience.<\/p>\n It is recognized that the pace, sequencing, and modalities of any reforms remain a matter for the relevant national authorities and stakeholders. In this regard, a gradual, inclusive, and good-faith approach, grounded in dialogue and respect for the rule of law, may provide the most sustainable pathway forward.<\/p>\n The Mission remains confident that continued engagement, supported where appropriate by international experience and standards, can contribute to advancing a peaceful and durable resolution process.”<\/p>\n