Protestors at front of demonstrations to pay more for damaged property

Protestors at front of demonstrations to pay more for damaged property

ISTANBUL
Protestors at front of demonstrations to pay more for damaged property

DAILY NEWS Photo

Protestors who stand at the front of a demonstration in which public and private goods are damaged will be forced to pay more compensation for damaged property than those at the back, according to an Interior Ministry circular.

A circular issued by the Interior Ministry and signed by Interior Minister Efkan Ala has outlined the details of how the damage to public or personal belongings caused during a protest will be addressed, daily Vatan reported March 9.

The circular states that individuals who harm public or personal goods in “terror protests” and social movements that turn violent will be determined with evidence collected “by all means.” Once the people harming the property have been specified, a lawsuit against them will be opened.

While the circular notes that people determined to have committed the damage would clearly need to pay the amount of the damage incurred, legal action could also be taken against them for “causing harm through immoral acts.”

If a group of people are determined to have caused damage to public and personal goods, then the damage will be shared equally among the number of people in the group, during which individuals in the front of the group will pay a higher share of the damage, while people at the back of the protest will pay less.

The circular also notes that individuals inside a group can file suits against each other if some claim they participated less in the rally.

The circular entered into force on Feb. 16, and was sent to all the governors of Turkey’s 81 provinces in order to ensure unity in the implementation of the circular.

Meanwhile, provincial governors may ask the Finance Ministry for permission to open legal action proceedings against the protesters, even if officials in charge of opening administrative suits decide there is no public benefit to opening such cases.