Switzerland: Political arrest warrants
01 September 2000
On 14 September, negotiations about the extradition order issued by Turkey against Naci Öztürk took place in the Slovenian town of Koper. The former Dev Sol activist was granted asylum in Switzerland in 1985 and was naturalised in June 2000. A month later, as a Swiss citizen, he decided to go on holiday to Croatia, but was arrested at the Slovenian border due to an arrest warrant issued by Turkey and put out by Interpol. Since 17 July, he has remained in detention awaiting extradition. Turkey is accusing him of double murder and an attack on a police station.
Marcel Bosonnet, Öztürk's Swiss lawyer, commented to the weekly newspaper WoZ that the negotiations had allayed some of his client's fears. The fact that the warrant itself is mainly based on the Turkish political criminal law, should tell the court that the arrest warrant as well as the extradition order were unlawful, with the sole purpose of political persecution. Bosonnet is expecting a decision in two weeks time.
The case of Naci Öztürk shows that refugees are only really safe in the country that granted them asylum. Outside the narrow borders of Switzerland, they risk getting caught up in the machinery of international police cooperation. Although Interpol statutes explicitly forbid cooperation on political questions, this does not hinder Turkey or other oppressive regimes using Interpol channels for the persecution of opposition forces abroad.
The case of Öztürk is merely one example of this practice. In 1990, the Kurdish refugee H.Y., who had an accepted asylum status in Germany, was arrested in Switzerland and only released after the intervention of lawyers. In 1995, the Kurd A.K., resident in Zurich, wanted to go on holiday to Tunisia. Despite the existence of a Turkish arrest warrant, the Tunisian authorities did not arrest him, but they sent him back to Switzerland on the next flight. A Kurdish woman, who had received her asylum status in the Netherlands, was arrested by German police in 1997 when she crossed the border. She was only released 40 days later because Turkey failed to deliver a well-founded extradition order.
All these cases would have been preventable, if those affected had been informed by the respective asylum granting countries about the actions taken against them by the Turkish police forces. In the case of Naci Öztürk, the Federal Police Office (Bundesamt für Polizei - BAP) did not act on the international arrest warrant dated July 1999, nor on two previous extradition orders. The BAP was obviously aware of the political character of the Turkish request, yet failed to inform Öztürk and thereby allowed him to walk into a trap. BAP spokesman Jürg Pulver at first claimed that such a warning would constitute "favouritism" and was therefore punishable. Giving out information on existing arrest warrants, they claimed, was generally inadmissible.
This statement, however, is questioned by Rainer Schweizer, professor for public law in St Gallen. Schweizer is also a member of the internal control commission of the Interpol General Secretariat in Lyon. Although confidentiality was essential to international police cooperation, he said, it would have to end when undemocratic regimes started to use cooperation for political persecution and where those concerned were at risk. The BAP, he claims, clearly could have warned Öztürk.
This assessment is supported by the Swiss Interpol-regulation, which allows individuals to be informed if it "takes place according to the interest of the concerned." Schweizer says that it should now be assessed whether this loose regulation should be turned into an official obligation. For Socialist Party (SP) whip Gaby Vermot, Alexander Tschäppät (SP) and Franziska Teuscher (Green Party), who took the issue to the BAP in August, the question is no more if, but how refugees should be informed about politically motivated arrest warrants.
Demanding information now
The Swiss da