This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/world/europe/germany-turkey-recep-tayyip-erdogan-jan-bohmermann.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Angela Merkel Allows Turkey to Press Case Against German Comic Angela Merkel Draws Criticism for Allowing Turkey’s Case Against Comic
(about 9 hours later)
BERLIN — Chancellor Angela Merkel, caught in a bind by Turkey’s bid to silence a German satirist who lampooned President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said on Friday that her government would allow the case to go forward, but that the outdated law that permits it would be repealed with effect from 2018. BERLIN — Turkey’s president found himself in choice company when he fixed upon an obscure German law to attempt to punish a popular comic who had satirized him in crude terms. The same law, dating from 1871, had also been used to silence critics of the Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi of Iran and the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.
Announcing the decision to allow the court case against Jan Böhmermann, the comic, to proceed, Ms. Merkel repeatedly insisted that Germany backs the freedom of press, opinion and culture and believes in the rule of law. “Not the government, but the courts and the legal system will have the last word,” she said. Designed during an era of ruffled majesties, the law allows prosecution in Germany for insulting a foreign leader, but only with the consent of the government. It also presented Chancellor Angela Merkel with a dilemma: She could either compromise on cherished values of free speech or risk further roiling relations with a leader she needs to stem another potentially chaotic flood of refugees to Europe again this year.
Pointedly referring to Turkey as a partner and a NATO ally, Ms. Merkel said that Germany expects the government in Ankara to heed democratic norms and that Berlin has observed attempts to restrict freedom of media and the justice system in Turkey “with great concern.” On Friday, Ms. Merkel gave President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey what he was seeking. She announced that prosecution of the satirist, Jan Böhmermann, could proceed — even as she added that the law allowing it would be repealed.
But her decision also made clear that she cannot afford to antagonize Mr. Erdogan after striking an accord with him to keep illegal migrants from proceeding to Western Europe in exchange for billions of euros in aid. The attempt to split the difference did little to appease criticism that Ms. Merkel had blinked in the staring contest with Mr. Erdogan. “We just experienced the beginning of the end of Chancellorship #Merkel,” wrote another satirist, Oliver Kalkofe, on Twitter. “I am ashamed by the lack of spine.”
Her gamble in making that deal appears to have paid off, with the migrant flow reduced to a trickle since the agreement was reached in late March. But increasingly, Mr. Erdogan seems intent on exerting the new leverage that the agreement has given him over Europe. If anything, Ms. Merkel’s decision demonstrated how, by virture of geography and his swagger, the Turkish president has become all but indespensible to the security of Europe as it tries to calm war-ravaged Syria and deal with the conflict’s overflow of refugees and terrorism.
After the chancellor warmly welcomed the migrants last year, she faced the greatest pressure in her decade in power, from conservatives in her own bloc and a rising anti-immigrant party, as well as from European Union allies wary of the tide of migrants. Ms. Merkel pushed hard for a deal at a European summit meeting last month, in which Turkey agreed — in exchange for billions of euros — to accept the return of illegal migrants and refugees who had made it to Greece.
Her decision to make a deal with Mr. Erdogan has now helped her relieve some of that political pressure, as well as some pressure on the European Union’s system of open borders, which last year was cratering under the weight of the pell-mell migration of hundreds of thousands, many fleeing wars in Syria and Iraq. At the time, the chancellor appeared relieved that the agreement offered a veneer of European unity and eased political pressure at home after months of dispute and German isolation over her refusal to impose a limit on migrants.
Those gains, however, have come at the price of criticism that the chancellor is being forced in return to overlook the increasing authoritarianism of Mr. Erdogan, who has similarly tried to silence critics in the media at home. But putting key European interests in Mr. Erdogan’s hands came under immediate criticism in Germany, not least for its potential to compromise core European values of human rights and free speech — something jesters such as Mr. Böhmermann were quick to point out.
Ms. Merkel announced her decision on the comic’s case on Friday in a brief statement and took no questions. She did however make clear that her “grand coalition” of center-right and center-left parties was divided over the case, and thus implied that she had decided on the matter. On March 31, the comic read what he has acknowledged was a crude poem designed to offend the Turkish leader, whose government has brought more than 1,800 criminal cases against Turks for insulting their president.
The center-left Social Democrats had already urged repeal of the law they called antiquated under which Mr. Erdogan can now proceed to sue the comic. Thomas Oppermann, parliamentary leader of the Social Democrats, said the decision to allow the suit was wrong. It was not long before Mr. Erdogan sent his representatives to the German Foreign Ministry with a formal request that Mr. Böhmermann be prosecuted under an obscure 19th century law once employed, in 1964, to penalize journalists at the newspaper Kölner Stadt Anzeiger for a caricature photo montage criticizing the Shah of Iran.
Foreign heads of state cannot get special rights to sue German citizens, Mr. Oppermann said. The shah tried again in 1967 to silence critics through the law, but was dissuaded during a visit to Tehran by the German interior minister, according to German media.
If the case goes forward, the law stipulates that Mr. Böhmermann could face up to three years in jail, or an unspecified fine. Most legal experts have said it is highly unlikely he would go to jail as the court is likely to rule that his poem was permitted as freedom of expression. In 1977, the Chilean ambassador won a case after claiming he was offended by a banner “Band of Killers” hung outside his embassy in Bonn, at the time the capital of West Germany.
The Turkish president, who has brought almost 2,000 suits against perceived insults against him in Turkey, has also filed a private lawsuit against the comic, Mr. Böhmermann. The provision requiring German government approval was designed to protect German diplomatic interests — by explicitly giving the government a say in a legal proceeding.
Both suits will be pursued through prosecutors and courts in Mainz, which is the seat of the public broadcaster ZDF, which broadcast the show in which Mr. Böhmermann read his poem. But it turned into a fateful obligation for the chancellor, said Konstantin van Lijnden, a legal expert who writes for several German publications.
Media and cultural figures in Germany have united behind the comic and his satire. After Ms. Merkel’s statement, she was widely criticized on Twitter. Ms. Merkel and her supporters argued that her decision on Friday put the matter back where it belonged — in court. “Not the government, but courts and the legal system will have the final word,” she said.
Earlier Friday, one of her crucial allies had indicated that she would permit the prosecution and leave the matter to the justice system. “Satire can do anything,” Ms. Merkel’s ally, Volker Kauder, told the Passauer Neue Presse, a Bavarian newspaper. “But not every degradation is satire.” But even her government — a coalition of her center-right bloc and center-left Social Democrats — was not united, and Ms. Merkel made clear that the choice to let the courts decide the matter was hers.
That statement recalled the words of Ms. Merkel’s spokesman on April 3, when he announced that the chancellor had agreed in a telephone call with Turkey’s prime minister that the comic’s poem was “deliberately insulting.” Foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Justice Minister Heiko Maas, both Social Democrats, stressed the overarching value of free expression, culture and media. Mr. Maas said the chancellor should have simply allowed Mr. Erdogan to proceed with a private lawsuit that he has also brought against Mr. Böhmermann.
Her criticism of the comic set off a wave of protest against Ms. Merkel and a wave of support for Mr. Böhmermann, who is now living under police protection after what the police have described only as unspecified threats from Turkish nationalists. Some three million Turks live in Germany — a fact the Chancellor stressed in her statement emphasizing close bonds with Turkey, a NATO ally now seeking to join the European Union.
Two Social Democratic ministers who took part in government discussions about the legal dilemma said they had opposed issuing the permission, arguing that Mr. Erdogan’s private case would anyway proceed through the courts. Gökay Sofuoglu, a leader of the Turkish community in Germany, said the Chancellor had to choose between “a crisis in her coalition and a crisis affair of state.” The coalition crisis was the easier option, he said.
Using identical words, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the foreign minister, and Justice Minister Heiko Maas said: “The freedom of opinion, media and culture are the highest treasures of our Constitution.” Mr. Böhmermann has won broad support, particularly from media and cultural figures, while Ms. Merkel was subjected to heavy criticism on Twitter. The comic Harald Schmidt, a mentor of Mr. Böhmermann, mocked up a message saying Moscow was offering exile to the satirist.
In Germany, someone who offends a foreign leader or an accredited ambassador can be prosecuted under an article of the law which all now agree belongs more to the 19th century world of majesties and czars. It has been used, among others, by the Chilean strongman Augusto Pinochet. Most legal experts consulted by German media in recent weeks have suggested that Mr. Böhmermann is unlikely to go to jail, though he could face up to three years, and that his poem probably qualifies as satire and free speech protected by the constitution.
It is nicknamed the ‘Shah paragraph’ after the Iranian leader Mohammed Reza Pahlavi used it several times to try and silence criticism. In 1964, journalists at the Cologne newspaper Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger had to pay a fine after they were deemed to have offended the Shah in a caricaturistic montage of photos. Mr. van Lijnden, a legal expert based in Düsseldorf, said that Ms. Merkel had faced an impossible choice.
When the Shah tried to sue demonstrators after protests during his visit in 1967, the German interior minister at the time went to Tehran and persuaded him against taking action, according to German media. “She said, I am allowing this because I think these things should be resolved by the judiciary, and not by the German executive.” he said. “When the law specifically gives her power to decide, that is a kind of circular reasoning.
In 1977, a court in North Rhine Westphalia ruled that a banner outside the Chilean embassy in Bonn, then the German capital, which said “Band of Killers” was illegal. The ambassador had said he was offended by the banner. “But it would have been an even tougher sell for the public if she had said, ‘I am allowing this because I don’t want to harm relations with Turkey even further.’ ”