As it stands, the clause in the MoU seems to suggest a serious risk of undue restrictions on freedom of expression, whereas Finland and Sweden seem open to potentially change their criminal legislative framework to make sure their understanding of free speech aligns with Turkey’s dominant narrative on the Kurdish question. Before such a fax lists step is taken, it would be necessary for Finland and Sweden to investigate whether the criminal provisions already in place in the countries would be per se sufficient to tackle incitement to violence, terrorist activities and threats to the national security of Turkey, and other allies.
This post showed that there are significant human rights concerns deriving from the MoU and, most notably, its omissions. and the potential implications under the profiles of criminal law and judicial cooperation are not foreseeable; in addition, it fails to mention minimum human rights standards, proportionality test and balance of interests.
- Board index
- All times are UTC
- Delete cookies
- Contact us