Evaluating The Perspectives of Civil Society Leaders on Rights Advocacy For Syrian Refugees

Öz

After the 2011 Syrian crisis, Turkey became the country hosting the largest number of refugees worldwide. Syrians with temporary protection status, who are disadvantaged in Turkey due to their legal status, are supported in matters such as improving their legal status and preventing rights violations by human rights advocacy Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs). The main aim of this study is to conduct a sociological analysis of the relationships between human rights advocacy NGOs and the government, society and other NGOs, focusing on Syrian refugees. In this qualitative research, semi-structured interviews were conducted with NGO authorities in Ankara. The empirical data collected from the field were analyzed on the basis of “Interpretative Sociology. According to the findings, NGOs do not cooperate strongly with the state except when submitting reports to the state. This situation is understood from the common points that all three NGOs expect from the state. Common expectations: taking opinions from NGOs on policy development by the state and its bodies, providing support to NGOs for public interest activities and difficulties for NGOs to carry out their activities (especially the demonstration, show it is the elimination of situations such as restricting the right to freedom of marching). In terms of the relations and cooperation with other NGOs, it is clear that the NGO whose cooperative network is strongest is the Human Rights Association (İnsan Hakları Derneği, İHD). İHD is in cooperation with many NGOs as a strong association of universal networks such as the European Human Rights Network and the International Federation of Human Rights regarding the refugee crisis. It is concluded that the productivity and effectiveness of İHD, whose cooperation network is developed among the three NGOs, are more extensive during the refugee crisis (Daft, 2015). On public relations, one of the important findings is that the Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed People (İnsan Hakları ve Mazlumlar İçin Dayanışma Derneği, MAZLUM-DER) opinions and suggestions 1 Makale Geliş Tarihi: 28.09.2024 Makale Kabul Tarihi: 10.11.2024 2 This article is derived from the master’s thesis titled “Sociological Analysis of Human Rights Advocate Non-Governmental Organizations in the Focus of Syrian Refugees,” conducted under the supervision of Dr. Olgu Karan as part of the Sociology Master’s Program at Başkent University. The study conducted within the scope of this thesis received ethical approval from the Başkent University Social and Humanities and Arts Research Board on April 22, 2019. 3 MSc Registered Dietitian & Associate Nutritionist, ORCID NO: 0000-0003-4846-1095, [e-mail] 186 IJHM, 2024; 4(2): 186-225 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN MOBILITY are included in the media and newspapers that broadcast on the official party line, while İHD and Human Rights Agenda Association (İnsan Hakları Gündemi Derneği, İHGD)’s opinions and suggestions are not included in the mainstream media. İHD can offer its suggestions and opinions in the rights-oriented newspapers. İHGD also provides suggestions and opinions in small-scale rights-oriented newspapers currently closed by the government. Although İHD cannot be included in the mainstream media, it is clear that among these three human rights advocate NGOs, the NGO using social media most actively to convey their views to society is İHD. This finding can be explained by the theory of Resource Dependence in inter-organizational relations (Daft, 2015). Although the media, currently broadcasting in Turkey on the official party line, is a very strong medium in terms of conveying opinions and suggestions, İHD, in order to achieve its objectives independently, ‘source assurance provides the continuity of the guarantee to communicate its views to the society as an indicator of its effectiveness as an NGO that provides’, through its own social media and official website. In addition, in terms of the working methods of NGOs, the most important situation is, from the answers given by İHD, close to the Management Science approach in organizational decision-making, in a more systematic way, making decisions, taking into account the factors, MAZLUM-DER, on the other side, is seen from an organizational point of view to make instant decisions in some cases, to have spontaneous activities or meetings. For this reason, it is possible to say that MAZLUM-DER exhibits the Waste Bin model approach in some cases (Daft, 2015). Although organizations like İHD, İHGD, and MAZLUM-DER attempted to establish a cooperative network with the state to improve their effectiveness in solving refugee crises, the state did not respond favourably to these efforts. As a result, neither the NGOs nor the state could form an organizationally strong cooperative network, leading to a low level of activities and effectiveness in addressing the refugee crisis.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Human rights
• rights advocacy
• NGO (Non-Governmental Organization)
• Syrian
• refugee.

Kaynakça

1. Adorjan, M., & Benjamin, K. (2017). Interpretive sociology. In Encyclopedia of Sociology. Wiley. Aksakoğlu, Y. (2006). STK’lar için savunuculuk rehberi. Sivil Toplum Geliştirme Merkezi.
2. Bingöl, O. (2018). 70. yılında insan haklarını yeniden düşünmek. Mavi Atlas Dergisi, 6, 69-70.
3. Civil Society Development Center (STGM). (2011). Türkiye’de hak temelli sivil toplum örgütleri sorunları ve çözüm arayışları. Ankara: Odak Ofset Matbaacılık.
4. Daft, R. L. (2015). Örgüt kuramları ve tasarımını anlamak. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
5. Daft, R. L. (2015). Örgüt tasarımının boyutları. In R. L. Daft, Örgüt kuramları ve tasarımını anlamak (pp. 14-15). Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
6. Daft, R. L. (2015). Yapısal boyutlar. In R. L. Daft, Örgüt kuramları ve tasarımını anlamak (p. 15). İstanbul: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
7. Döner, P. Ö. (2013). Syrian refugess in Turkey: Number and emotions. The Lancet, 764.
8. Emini, F. T. (2013). Sivil toplum kuruluşlarinin politika belirleme sürecindeki rolü: TÜSİAD örneği. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 36,43-56

9. Erdem,T., & Öztaş, N. (2007). İmge ve gerçeklik olarak sivil toplum ve STK’lar. İstanbul Journal of Sociological Studies. https://doi.org/10.18368/IU/sk.46178
10. Eren, Z. (2019). Biçimsel ve biçimsel olmayan örgüt yapılarının sosyal ağ analizi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,34(4), 1121-1142
11. Frabs, V. (2009, January 01). International human rights law: A short history. https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/ article/international-human-rights-law-short-history
12. GİGM. (2018, June 16). Geçici koruma. https://www.goc.gov.tr/gecici-koruma5638
13. Human Rights Association. (İHD). (1998, December 09). Birleşmiş milletler insan hakları savunucularının korunması bildirgesi. http://www.ihd.org.tr/ble-mletler-san-haklari-savunucularinin-korunmasi-bdges/
14. Karapehlivan, F. Ş. (2013). Sosyolojide yeni bir alan: Haklar sosyolojisi. 8. Ulusal Sosyoloji Kongresi, (p. 28).
15. Kutlu, Z. (2015). Bekleme odasından oturma odasına. Anadolu Kültür ve Açık Toplum Vakfı.
16. Martindale, D. (1998). The nature and types of sociological theory. Routledge.
17. Migrant Integration Policy Index. (MIPEX). (2015). Migrant integration policy index. http://www.mipex.eu/turkey Miller, S. D. (2018). Assessing the impacts of hosting refugees. World Refugee Council Research Paper, 1-7.
18. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (OHCHR), (2004). Human rights defenders: Protecting the right to defend human rights. United Nations.
19. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (OHCHR), (2020, May 05). Human rights defenders: Protecting the right to defend human rights. United Nations.. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ AboutUs/Pages/WhoWeAre.aspx
20. Öncü, A. (1982). Giriş. In A. Öncü, Örgüt sosyolojisi (pp. 7-28). Turhan Kitabevi.
21. Öncü, A. (1982). Örgüt sosyolojisi. Turhan Kitabevi.
22. Research Centre On Asylum And Migration. (IGAM). (2017). Sivil toplum diyaloğu mültecilerin uyumu projesi. Ankara. https://www.migpolgroup.com/_old/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Comparision-between-EU and-TR-Harmonisation-is-the-way-to-protection_FINAL.pdf
23. Şahin,L., & Özturk, M. (2008). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları ve Türkiye’deki Durumu. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, 3-29.
24. Taş, H. Y., Küçükoğlu, M. & Menteşe, B. (2016), Türkiye’deki Suriyeli sığınmacıların çalışma hayatında karşılaştıkları sorunlar. TURAN – SAM Uluslararası Bilimsel Hakemli Dergisi, 8(32), 265-273.
25. Tezcan, D. (2011). İnsan hakları el kitabı. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
26. UNHCR. (2006, January 15). Human rights and refugee protection self-study module 5, 1, Human Rights and Refugee Protection. 1-127
27. UNHCR. (2020). Defender. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/SRHRDefenders/Pages/Defender.aspx
28. UNHCR. (2020). Eğitim. https://www.unhcr.org/tr/egitim
29. UNHCR. (2020). Figures at a glance. https://www.unhcr.org/figures-at-a-glance.html
30. UNHCR. (2020). Social and economic impact of large refugee populations on host developing countries. https:// www.unhcr.org/excom/standcom/3ae68d0e10/social-economic-impact-large-refugee-populations-host developing-countries.html
31. United Nations. (2020, May, 05). Human Rights. https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/: https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights/
32. Wallace, R. A., & Alison, W. (1999). Contemporary Sociological Theory. Prentice Hall.