Turkey's Spy Law Breach: Saudi Consulate Scandal

did turkey break the law by spying on saudi consulate

The disappearance and death of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018 sparked international controversy and raised questions about the legality of Turkey's surveillance practices. Turkish authorities claimed that Khashoggi was brutally murdered and dismembered inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, likely on the orders of the Saudi government. While Saudi Arabia initially denied the charges, Turkey asserted it had concrete proof. This incident brought attention to Turkey's culture of surveillance, with reports suggesting that Turkish authorities had obtained audio recordings of Khashoggi's death, including the voices of Saudi officials present. The existence of these recordings sparked debates about the legality of Turkey's spying activities and the extent to which they violated diplomatic norms and international law.

Characteristics Values
Date of Incident October 2, 2018
Location Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Person Involved Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi
Incident Disappearance and alleged murder of Jamal Khashoggi
Evidence Purported audio recordings, anonymous statements by Turkish officials, concrete proof as per Turkish sources
Turkish Action Requested permission to search the consulate, examined camera footage and airport records
Saudi Action Denied allegations, allowed Turkish authorities to enter the consulate
International Law The consulate is not sovereign territory, events are subject to Turkish law
Diplomatic Immunity Does not shield perpetrators of major crimes, can be annulled for "grave crimes"

lawshun

Turkey's history of spying

Turkey has a history of spying, which is perhaps unsurprising given its strategic location and the high-stakes showdowns among internal factions vying for power. The country's intelligence agency, the National Intelligence Organization (MIT), has been implicated in numerous spying operations both domestically and internationally.

One of the most well-known examples of Turkey's history of spying involves the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul in 2018. While the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, insisted that the consulate was sovereign territory, legal experts disagreed, stating that consulates and embassies are not considered sovereign territory under international law. This meant that Turkish law applied to the events that took place within the consulate. Turkish authorities eventually gained access to the consulate and, while no recordings have been officially confirmed, pro-government newspapers in Turkey reported the existence of audio recordings of Khashoggi's death, including the voices of Saudi officials present.

Turkey has also been accused of spying on its own citizens, particularly those with ties to the Gülen movement. In 2016, following an attempted coup, Turkish authorities took steps to monitor digital and other communications, targeting individuals accused of using the encrypted mobile messaging application ByLock, which was allegedly used by the network of U.S.-based cleric Fethullah Gülen. This crackdown was criticized by some Western governments and human rights activists as overreaching and targeting government opponents. Turkish judicial documents also revealed that Turkish nationals in Angola, Myanmar, and Kosovo who were supporters of the Gülen movement were spied on by Turkish intelligence.

Additionally, Turkey has been accused of conducting espionage in various countries, including Austria, Germany, Greece, and Australia. In 2017, German federal prosecutors investigated claims that three men were instructed by MIT to spy on Erdogan critics in Cologne, particularly Kurds and members of the Muslim minority Alevi community. In 2020, classified documents exposed the illegal surveillance, information collection, and monitoring activities of Turkish intelligence in Australia. Turkey has also been accused of infiltrating and recruiting informants within certain communities, such as retirees in Greece and imams in Australia, to spy on individuals and organizations deemed a threat to national security.

Turkey has also been active in counterintelligence activities, targeting suspected spies within its borders. In 2024, for instance, Turkey detained 33 people suspected of spying for Israel, and in 2019, it arrested two men suspected of spying on Arab nationals for the United Arab Emirates, one of whom was connected to the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

lawshun

The legality of Turkey's actions

Firstly, it is essential to understand that consulates and embassies do not fall under the sovereignty of the represented nation, according to international law and the 1961 Vienna Convention. This means that the Saudi consulate in Turkey is subject to Turkish law, and any crimes committed within its premises are under the jurisdiction of Turkish authorities. Therefore, Turkey's actions in investigating a crime that occurred on its soil, regardless of the involvement of a foreign consulate, can be considered a legitimate exercise of its legal authority.

Secondly, the principle of diplomatic immunity comes into play. Diplomatic immunity grants legal protection to diplomats serving in foreign countries, shielding them from prosecution under the host country's laws. However, diplomatic immunity does not extend to individuals who commit "grave crimes." In the case of the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, if the perpetrators were indeed Saudi operatives, they would not enjoy diplomatic immunity, as they were not official diplomatic staff. Therefore, Turkey's actions in pursuing justice for a crime committed on its soil, even against foreign nationals, are legally justified.

Additionally, Turkey has a history of surveillance and wiretapping scandals, indicating a broader culture of surveillance within the country. While this may raise concerns about privacy and civil liberties, it suggests that Turkey's actions in this particular case are not isolated incidents but part of a broader strategy of information gathering and security.

In conclusion, while the legality of Turkey's actions in spying on the Saudi consulate is complex, the focus on investigating a serious crime that occurred on Turkish territory and the absence of diplomatic immunity for the perpetrators justify Turkey's involvement. The broader context of Turkey's surveillance practices also suggests a consistent approach to information gathering, which, while controversial, may be deemed necessary for national security.

lawshun

The Vienna Convention's role

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 is an international accord that dictates how host countries should treat diplomats and embassies on their soil. Under the convention, embassies and consulates are guaranteed "inviolability", meaning that the host state cannot enter or search the premises without consent from the country the diplomatic mission belongs to. This also applies to diplomatic bags, which cannot be opened by the host nation.

The Vienna Convention also requires diplomatic missions to respect local laws and not interfere in the host nation's internal affairs. While it grants diplomatic immunity to diplomats, protecting them from lawsuits or prosecution under the host country's laws, this immunity can be annulled in the case of a "grave crime".

In the case of the Saudi consulate in Turkey, the Vienna Convention meant that Turkish investigators had to wait for permission from Saudi officials before entering the consulate to investigate the disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The convention also meant that Turkish authorities could not arrest any Saudi officials without Saudi consent.

The role of the Vienna Convention in this case highlights the delicate balance between respecting the sovereignty of diplomatic missions and ensuring that crimes committed by diplomatic staff do not go unpunished. While the convention provides protections for diplomats, it also outlines circumstances under which these protections can be lifted, such as in the case of a "grave crime".

In summary, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations plays a crucial role in governing the behaviour of both host countries and diplomatic missions. It ensures that embassies and consulates are treated fairly and respectfully by host nations, while also providing a framework for addressing potential crimes or violations committed by diplomatic staff.

lawshun

Diplomatic immunity

The concept of diplomatic immunity is a principle of international law that grants certain foreign government officials legal immunity from the jurisdiction of another country. It allows diplomats safe passage and freedom of travel in a host country and protects them from local lawsuits and prosecution.

The modern practices of diplomatic immunity are largely based on the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which has been ratified by almost every country in the world. The convention formally codified the legal and political status of diplomats, guaranteeing their inviolability and ensuring they cannot be prosecuted under their host country's laws.

However, diplomatic immunity is not absolute and has certain exceptions. For example, diplomats can still be declared persona non grata and expelled from the host country. Additionally, the sending country may waive immunity, typically in cases where the diplomat is involved in a serious crime unrelated to their diplomatic role. The Vienna Convention also states that immunity can be annulled in the case of a "grave crime" pending the decision of a "competent judicial authority."

In the specific case of Turkey's spying on the Saudi consulate, the issue of diplomatic immunity is relevant. While the Saudi consulate in Turkey is considered sovereign territory, it is not above the law. If a crime was committed within the consulate, it would fall under Turkish law, and the perpetrators could potentially be prosecuted in Turkey. However, if the perpetrators had diplomatic immunity, this could shield them from prosecution.

lawshun

Turkey's motives for spying

Turkey has a history of engaging in surveillance and espionage activities, both domestically and internationally. Here are some possible motives for Turkey's spying on the Saudi Consulate:

National Security and Intelligence Gathering:

Turkey's National Intelligence Organization (MİT) is tasked with gathering information on potential threats to the country's security and national interests. The Saudi Consulate could have been viewed as a potential target for intelligence gathering, especially if Turkey suspected any activities within the consulate that could impact Turkish national security.

Investigating the Murder of Jamal Khashoggi:

The disappearance and murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who was last seen entering the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, sparked global concern. Turkish authorities believed that Khashoggi was deliberately killed inside the consulate. Spying on the consulate could have been part of Turkey's investigation into Khashoggi's disappearance, as they sought to gather evidence and clarify the circumstances surrounding his death.

Geopolitical Interests and Power Dynamics:

Turkey is a key geopolitical player due to its strategic location, and there have been tensions between Turkey and Saudi Arabia in the past. Turkey's deployment of troops to Qatar in 2017, for example, strained relations between the two countries. Spying on the Saudi Consulate could have been motivated by a desire to gain insights into Saudi Arabia's regional activities and political intentions, especially if Turkey suspected any actions contrary to Turkish interests.

Counterintelligence and Counterterrorism:

MİT is also responsible for counterintelligence activities within Turkey. They may have had suspicions of espionage or illegal activities taking place within the Saudi Consulate, particularly if there were indications of threats to Turkish national security or stability. Additionally, given Turkey's history of dealing with terrorist groups and coup attempts, spying on the consulate could have been part of their efforts to monitor and counter potential terrorist activities.

Influence and Information Control:

Turkey has been known to closely monitor digital communications and the internet, including the banning of websites and targeting of critics. Spying on the Saudi Consulate could have been an extension of this, with the aim of gathering information to control the narrative surrounding Khashoggi's disappearance and exert influence over the situation.

Frequently asked questions

No. While Turkey does have a culture of surveillance, the Saudi consulate in Turkey is not considered sovereign territory under international law. Therefore, Turkey did not break the law by spying on the Saudi consulate.

The Saudi consulate in Turkey is subject to Turkish law, meaning that any crimes committed within the consulate can be prosecuted under Turkish law. This includes the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, which took place within the consulate in 2018.

Turkish government sources claimed to have "concrete proof" of Khashoggi's murder, including audio recordings of his death and the voices of Saudi officials present. Additionally, a 15-member Saudi team with diplomatic passports was identified as arriving in Istanbul before Khashoggi's visit to the consulate.

Saudi Arabia denied the charges, claiming that Khashoggi left the consulate in Istanbul less than an hour after entering. They maintained that the consulate is sovereign territory and that they had nothing to hide. However, international suspicions are mounting that the killing was ordered with the knowledge of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salam.

It is not clear from the sources what the final outcome of the investigation was. However, Turkey could seek an international arrest warrant for the perpetrators, as they are not likely to have diplomatic immunity. Rights groups have called on the U.N. to open an independent investigation into Khashoggi's disappearance and murder.

Written by
Reviewed by
Share this post
Print
Did this article help you?

Leave a comment