Education without Permission Revisited

Alexandre Borovik has posted an update to the unfolding Education without Permission story. The school has been reopened, but the Turkish authorities still plan on pressing charges for “education without permission” against the school’s founder, Ali Nesin. Nesin plans on defending himself on constitutional grounds. (Interestingly, the Turkish constitution explicitly grants the right to teach and learn arts and sciences on constitutional grounds.)

7 Responses to “Education without Permission Revisited”

  1. Joseph Bruno says:

    It sounds quite reasonable to require courses to be licensed. Otherwise wouldn’t Islamist bomb-making be a reasonable scientific subject?

  2. Walt says:

    I would take that course if offered at an accredited university.

  3. a says:

    Joseph Bruno: Only Islamist? I think the comment should be terrorist bomb-making, or bomb making in general.

  4. Koray says:

    I haven’t been following this in the Turkish press. However, from what I see online, there have been a number of problems, including construction of the premises and use of utilities.

    But, I saw no elaboration on the issue of permission to teach. Probably that’s going to be cleared out by the court. Even the prime minister has been made aware of the problem and he seems to have made a statement to the tone of “let the guy resume teaching”, so I doubt that they’ll have any more problems.

    The islamist bomb making class joke is actually not far off. Turkey has been plagued with terror for several decades now, and there’s always the threat of fundamentalists brainwashing. It’s no surprise to me that the law enforcement overreacted.

  5. Johan Richter says:

    Requiring a permit to teach is a rather blatant violation of the freedom of speech and it isn’t understandable at all that the law enforcement would react the way it did. Anyway I’d guess that the fear isn’t so much for bomb-making classes as that some teachers might speak , GASP HORROR, Kurdish if they didn’t get permission.

  6. Johan, you’ve walked right into one of the biggest blunders people tend to make: you speak about “freedom of speech” as if it has some natural, inherent meaning.

    In Turkey there is not “freedom of speech”. Instead there is “Freedom of Expression and Dissemination of Thought”. And it’s a lot different from freedom of speech, at least in America (I don’t know where you’re coming from). Let’s compare.

    In America,

    Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…

    But in Turkey,

    Everyone has the right to express and disseminate his thoughts and opinion by speech, in writing or in pictures or through other media, individually or collectively. This right includes the freedom to receive and impart information and ideas without interference from official authorities. This provision shall not preclude subjecting transmission by radio, television, cinema, and similar means to a system of licensing.

    The exercise of these freedoms may be restricted for the purposes of protecting national security, public order and public safety, the basic characteristics of the Republic and safeguarding the indivisible integrity of the State with its territory and nation, preventing crime, punishing offenders, withholding information duly classified as a state secret, protecting the reputation and rights and private and family life of others, or protecting professional secrets as prescribed by law, or ensuring the proper functioning of the judiciary.

    The formalities, conditions and procedures to be applied in exercising the right to expression and dissemination of thought shall be prescribed by law.

    (emphasis added)

    You see all those disclaimers I highlighted? They mean that “freedom of speech” is a lot different in Turkey, and so the permit requirement is far from a violation of anything. It may not be “right”, in some abstract sense, but that’s a far different question than the quasi-legal argument you just put forth, as have so many people before you.

  7. Johan Richter says:

    There is an universal right to speak your mind. That is a moral statement which I agree with. In Turkey the goverment will punish if you speak your mind. That is a factual statement which I also agree with. (A different issue is that Turkey very likely would be found in violation of its obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights which it has signed by the court in Strassbourg.)

    I expressed my lack of symapthy for the goverment’s reaction in this case based on the fact that it was violating the right to freedom of speech. I thought it was obvious that I meant he freedom of speech in a moral sense, not as something actually existing in Turkey. (After all, I was complaining that you weren’t allowed to say what you want.) But I should probaly have been clearer.

    I am from Sweden by the way. And I’d really rather discuss math than politics on this blog.

Leave a Reply