- ANF
- ISTANBUL
- Saturday, 18 July 2026, 14:33
Although 12 years have passed since the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) issued its 2014 “right to hope” judgment concerning Abdullah Öcalan, Turkey has yet to implement the ruling. The Court found that the lack of any possibility of conditional release for prisoners serving aggravated life sentences constitutes a violation of human rights. Despite the judgment, no legislative changes have been introduced.
Likewise, the Process for Peace and a Democratic Society, initiated around a year and a half ago with the aim of resolving the Kurdish issue, has not led to any concrete steps on this matter.
Legal experts and human rights advocates continue to emphasize that implementing the “right to hope” ruling is essential, both in terms of Turkey’s obligations under international law and the broader discussion on a democratic resolution to the Kurdish question.
Lawyer Cemal Demir spoke to ANF about the legal significance of the ECHR ruling on the “right to hope,” the responsibilities of the Council of Europe, and the importance of the decision for the ongoing efforts toward a democratic resolution of the Kurdish issue.
“The Right to Hope is not a privilege, but a fundamental human right”
Demir emphasized that the ECHR’s 2014 ruling is legally binding under the European Convention on Human Rights, stressing that the “Right to Hope” is neither a privilege nor a political choice, but a fundamental human right.
“The issue of the “Right to Hope” has been under discussion since March 2014. This is because Kurdish leader Abdullah Öcalan, along with several other individuals sentenced to life imprisonment, filed applications with the European Court of Human Rights. After examining these applications, the Court issued an important judgment.
In its assessment under the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights prohibiting torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, the Court concluded that it is unacceptable for any person to be kept in prison until the end of their life without the possibility of release. This is why the concept became known as the “Right to Hope”.
What is at issue here is not a privilege. Nor is it a benefit that the state may choose to grant at its discretion. It is a fundamental right arising simply from being human. That is precisely what the European Court of Human Rights recognized. Completely depriving people of any hope of regaining their freedom under certain conditions is contrary to human rights. Therefore, this ruling constitutes a binding provision of international law.”
“The Council of Europe is monitoring the ruling, but there has been no concrete outcome”
Demir recalled that the implementation of ECHR judgments is supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, stating:
“Once the European Court of Human Rights delivers a judgment, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe is responsible for monitoring whether it has been implemented. In other words, there is a follow-up mechanism. The lawyers representing Abdullah Öcalan have, for years, submitted the necessary applications to ensure the implementation of this ruling. The Council of Europe has also placed the issue on the agenda during a number of its meetings.
However, despite all these efforts, it cannot be said that Turkey has taken any serious or concrete steps toward implementing the judgment. The Council has once again put the matter on its agenda and granted Turkey additional time to make the necessary legal arrangements. Yet, even after the deadline expired, no legislative amendments have been introduced.
Not only has the judgment remained unimplemented, but no new political will has been demonstrated to fulfill its requirements.”
“Sanction mechanisms are not being enforced”
Demir argued that the Council of Europe should not limit itself to issuing recommendations, stating:
“The Council of Europe has a range of mechanisms at its disposal. If member states fail to implement ECHR judgments, the Council can initiate sanction procedures against them. Under international law, measures such as the suspension of membership are also possible.
However, to date, we have not seen these mechanisms being put into practice. Instead, concerns are expressed and recommendations are made. This situation raises serious questions about the Council of Europe’s own role and mission.”
“Historic steps have been taken in the peace process”
Referring to Abdullah Öcalan’s Call for Peace and a Democratic Society issued on 27 February 2025, Demir said that the appeal marked a significant turning point:
“On 27 February 2025, Kurdish leader Abdullah Öcalan made a truly historic call. The Call for Peace and a Democratic Society opened the door to a new era, not only for Turkey but also for the democratic resolution of the Kurdish issue.
Following this appeal, the Kurdish freedom movement and the relevant institutions took highly significant and historic steps toward achieving lasting peace, advancing a democratic solution, and leaving the period of armed conflict behind.
Despite this, it cannot be said that the state has responded with the same level of commitment.”
“Öcalan’s physical freedom is a fundamental demand”
Demir said that the Kurdish people regard Abdullah Öcalan’s physical freedom as a central demand of the ongoing process, stating:
“The Kurdish people view Mr. Abdullah Öcalan’s physical freedom as inseparable from their own freedom. They see their own freedom reflected in the freedom of the Kurdish leader.
For this reason, one of the primary demands voiced at rallies, mass gatherings, and democratic demonstrations is his physical freedom.
This demand was also expressed loudly at the regional rallies held recently in four different locations. The public emphasized that, for this process to succeed, Abdullah Öcalan’s living and working conditions must be changed and the way must be opened for his physical freedom.”
“The process cannot move forward or succeed without Öcalan’s physical freedom”
Demir argued that changes to Abdullah Öcalan’s conditions of detention are essential if the Process for Peace and a Democratic Society is to achieve lasting results. He concluded:
“Without ensuring physical freedom, it is not possible for this process to move forward or succeed. This is because the Kurdish leader is one of the principal interlocutors in this process. The Kurdish people see Mr. Abdullah Öcalan as the embodiment of their political will.
Therefore, if a lasting and democratic solution is to be achieved, the necessary legal framework must also be established. Ensuring his physical freedom is an indispensable step, both for allowing the process to advance in a balanced manner and for fulfilling the requirements of the law. Only in this way can a genuine foundation for a lasting solution be created.”
