JUSREVYEN 2023: ET MASSIVT HELL I UHELLET

Injuria.no • 24. januar 2023

Tekst: Christoffer Saastad

Foto: Hedda Jørgensen

JUSREVYEN 2023: ET MASSIVT HELL I UHELLET

Så er det denne tiden av året igjen. Denne gangen er det plakater i rødt og hvitt som er klistret i alle høydemetrene som skiller Dragematen fra toalettet i gamlebyggets 4. etasje. Intelligentsiaen i årets revy kan gi seg selv en solid klapp på skulderen for markedsføringskampanjens effektivitet allerede før intensivuken starten. På fredagens premiereforestilling var salen stappet hardere enn et Ryanair-fly med britiske turister på vei mot Magaluf.

Selvsagt betyr ikke det at noe er tungt markedsført at det automatisk har et bra innhold. Man trenger bare å spørre den nylig omtalte Stayclassy-gründeren da Forbrukertilsynet- og nå Sparebank1- kom bankende på døren. Du kan kalle meg Jeff Dahmer, for nå skal jeg dissekere årets revy.

Før jeg setter i gang, så vil jeg si at jeg i streng forvaltningsrettslig forstand nok hadde vært inhabil til å skrive denne anmeldelsen, da jeg tross alt var med i revyens skrivegruppe i høst. Til gjengjeld er dette (heldigvis) en publisitetstekst, og ikke et tvangsvedtak om psykisk helsevern. Undertegnede har dermed vurdert seg selv som personlig egnet. Eposter fra bekymrede borgere tas imot på dagligleder@injuria.no.

Så var dette besøket verdt 130 kr? Det korte svaret er ja. Temaet for årets revy er «SÅ SKJEDDE DET SOM IKKE SKULLE SKJE», men resultatet som utspilte seg i Straffbar var i så fall et massivt hell i uhellet.

Ettersom dramaet om skuespillerplassene som hvert år skal tildeles på mange måter kan minne om en nedvannet versjon av Roy-familiens intriger i Succession, så var spenningen om årets skuespillerliste høy. Jeg skal innrømme at det var uvant å se en (stort sett) fersk gjeng oppe på scenen. Hverken Victor Kasa eller Johanne Braarud var på scenen i år, men til gjengjeld har begge satt talentene sine til god nytte som henholdsvis årets kreative sjef og kreative leder (hva realitetsforskjellen er på de to stillingene er jeg uskikket til å svare på). Særlig stort var savnet etter Sara Shillington, som for fjorårets revy var det Maggie Smith var for Downton Abbey.

Til gjengjeld har ikke dette årets skuespillergjeng på noen måte tapt seg i talent. Her vil jeg særlig ta av hatten for to folk. Det var en absolutt riktig avgjørelse å resirkulere dødsflinke Iselin Herud fra fjorårets skuespillergjeng: denne damen klarer å kapre scenens midtpunkt selv når hun nesten ikke sier noe som helst. Det kanskje beste eksempelet er der hvor hun spiller en- ja, skal man kalle det ustabil- prøverørsforsker i den hysterisk morsomme sketsjen: «Det store genlotteriet».

Den andre er nykommeren Thomas Aasheim, som binder publikum med en karisma av en annen verden hver gang han åpner munnen. Favorittsketsjen min i dette årets revy er faktisk et sangnummer hvor den energiske Thomas spiller den atskillig mindre energiske statsansatte Tom Tveit fra «Statens erstatningskontor for person som betalte litt for mye for båtførerprøven». Og om du var på høstens internaften så får du gjensynet med et sangnummer om og med en gjenkjennelig skikkelse som på Torgallmenningen nok er best kjent for sitatet: «Kan jeg stille deg et spørsmål?»

Årets revy byr på bøtter av sjarm, kreativitet og humor. Studentene og jusstudiets hverdag åpnes og utforskes som en umarkert hermetikkboks, som både vekker latter og tanker. Ingen temaer er for hellige til å slippe unna å bli stukket hull på av gjengen på seks stykker oppe på scenen; om det så er statsslaven Tom Tveit, eller den oppadgående BAHR-partneren Arnfinn som har solgt både sjel og luktesans for å kunne «fakturere ti tusen timer».

Dette er for øvrig en ting jeg vil si at man gjør bedre i år enn i fjor; uansett hvor godt jeg likte fjorårets revy, så var det noen sketsjer som forutsatte at man satt inne med visse referanser for å skjønne hele eller deler av poenget. Dette føler jeg med fordel at er en ting de har klart å gjøre «enklere» i år, og med det mener jeg at det i disse drøye to timene var å finne humoristisk ammunisjon for hele publikum uavhengig av studie eller interesser.

Det er av samme grunn at jeg stiller meg uforstående til kritikken årets revy har fått i Bergens Tidende om akkurat dette. Jeg skal nøye meg med å si at anmelderen har retten til å kommentere hva hun mener er morsomt like mye som jeg har retten til å være uenig.

En annen ting jeg synes at revyen gjør bedre i år er at man har sørget for å senke musikkvolumet til et nivå som gjør at man kan høre hva skuespillerne synger oppe på scenen- det motsatte var etter min mening var fjorårets akilleshæl. Dette var all forskjell som etter min mening løftet sangnumrene til årets høydepunkt. Bandets medley i starten av andre akt fløt også som en drøm. Om jusstudiet noen gang ryker så bør særlig Anders Stokka Meling seriøst vurdere en karriere som vokalist.

Når alt dette er sagt, så skal man ha et imponerende visuelt sinn for å se revyen gjennom denne anmeldelsen. Ordene mine kan ikke alene yte rettferdighet til det fantastisk bra arbeidet årets gjeng har gjennomført, men kanskje terningkastet mitt kan det. Revysjef Mathias Hordvei og resten av gjengen har gjort seg vel fortjent til applausen de mottok på slutten av premieren.

Terningkast: 6

Så om du ennå er på gjerdet om du vil se revyen, kom deg ned og inn på Straffbar!

 

Av Hannah M. Behncke, Eylül Sahin and Sabrina Eriksen Zapata – ELSA Bergen, Human Rights, Researchgruppen 24. april 2025
Oppression isn’t always loud - it can be the quiet erasure of culture and language, stripping minorities of their freedom to express who they are. Language and culture are two of the most important means to keep one's identity alive. Unfortunately, many minorities face extreme repression regarding their background. The Kurdish ability to perform their culture in Turkey has been a long struggle. This is still the case today, where the Kurdish minority face backlash for speaking their language. This article will look into the Kurdish fight to protect their identity in Turkey. To gain a deeper understanding of the diverse perspectives on this issue, we interviewed a Kurdish and a Turkish citizen of Turkey about their views on the Turkish state's treatment of Kurds. Legal basis Although several international legal frameworks exist to protect minority cultures and languages, Turkey has not incorporated them into its legal system. Article 27 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights explicitly states that “minorities shall not be denied the right […] to enjoy their culture, [...] or to use their own language.” However, despite ratifying the ICCPR, Turkey made a reservation excluding Article 27. Similarly, the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages requires minority languages to be accessible in education, judicial court proceedings, and in the media. However, Turkey has not ratified this charter. Domestically, the Turkish constitution does not recognize Kurds as a minority. In fact, article 42 explicitly prohibits the “teaching of any language other than Turkish as a mother tongue to Turkish citizens”.1 As a result, the Kurdish language lacks legal protection, unlike Ladino, Greek, and Armenian, which are safeguarded under the Treaty of Lausanne (1923).2 Historical overview After the Ottoman Empire's collapse, the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres promised Kurdish autonomy, but the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne nullified it, dividing Kurdistan among Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria without self-rule.3 Under Atatürk, Turkey enforced homogenization, banning Kurdish in public, closing Kurdish schools, renaming villages (1924) and forcibly relocating Kurds—even though most Kurds did not speak Turkish.4 The state criminalized Kurdish, promoted Citizen, Speak Turkish! and justified relocations as a tool to suppress identity.5 The Sheikh Sa’id Rebellion (1925), led by Kurdish nationalists and Islamists, was brutally crushed, triggering long-term conflict. Martial law and mass deportations lasted until 1939, while uprisings in Ararat (1930) and Dersim (1937–38) faced massacres, bombings, and poison gas, drawing parallels to the Armenian Genocide.6 Allegations of British support for Kurdish rebels persist, but remain debated.7 Kurdish political movements resurfaced in the 1960s and 1970s, with the Kurdish Democratic Party of Turkey (1965) and the Marxist-Leninist PKK (1978) engaging in armed resistance. Turkey designated the PKK a terrorist group in 1997, followed by the US and EU.8 Forced displacement continued, with over a million Kurds migrating between 1950 and 1980 due to state violence and poverty.9 The 1980 military coup further suppressed Kurdish politics, banning education (1982) and publications (Law No. 2932, 1983).10 Despite lifting the language ban in 1991, Kurdish broadcasting remained illegal until 2002. From 1984 to 1999, Turkey destroyed 4,000 Kurdish villages, displaced three million people, and killed tens of thousands in its campaign against Kurdish insurgency.11 The 1991 language bill allowed limited private Kurdish use, but public use remained restricted. Some progress followed in the 21st century, including Kurdish-language broadcasts (2004), a state-run TV channel (2009), and Kurdish as an optional school subject (2012), though full linguistic and cultural rights remain elusive. Oral storytelling (Dengbêj) persisted despite restrictions. Between 2013 and 2015, Turkey’s peace talks with the PKK, involving Abdullah Öcalan, PKK commanders, and pro-Kurdish HDP intermediaries, collapsed—renewing conflict in southeastern Turkey.12 Arbitrary arrests, imprisonment, torture, and land dispossession persist, as security forces often fail to distinguish civilians from PKK members.13 How is the situation today? An estimated 12–20 million Kurds live in Turkey, making up approximately 14–23% of the country's population. The wide range in estimates is due to the absence of ethnicity-related data in official statistics and the social and political stigma that may lead some to conceal their identity.14 As Kurds originate from various countries, most today identify with the state in which they reside. Surveys suggest that many Kurds feel a strong sense of discrimination. Only 28% believe they are treated equally to ethnic Turks, while 58% report experiencing discrimination. Some have even been denied medical services and housing due to their ethnicity.15 To better understand these challenges, we spoke with a Kurdish individual from Elbistan, Turkey, who spent most of his life there before relocating. When asked if he had ever felt pressure speaking Kurdish in public, he recalled visits to public institutions where his family, unable to speak Turkish, had to use Kurdish, but were not allowed to. “It always made us feel fear and anxiety”, he said. He also described restrictions on Kurdish culture: “Whenever we listened to Kurdish music or played traditional games outside, we knew we were being watched. Some of my friends were even detained just for playing games with Kurdish music. It felt like our culture was a crime.” In contrast, a Turkish conservative nationalist offered a different perspective. While personally holding nationalist views, he answered the questions in general terms, arguing that Kurds are integrated into society and do not face systemic barriers. When asked if there was tension between Turks and Kurds in daily life, he dismissed the idea: “Generalizing Turkey’s sociology is difficult, but I don’t see any real barrier. I have Kurdish friends and colleagues, and background doesn’t matter to us. In cities like Istanbul, people aren’t judged based on race, religion, language, or culture.” Even though he acknowledged past discrimination, he viewed it as a historical issue rather than an ongoing one. While the two perspectives differ, they reflect broader discussions on the extent of cultural and linguistic inclusion in Turkey. Surveys suggest that many Kurds report experiencing discrimination, while some view Kurdish cultural expression as unrestricted. The extent to which Kurdish identity is freely expressed - or whether challenges remain - continues to be a subject of debate. The survival of Kurdish culture in Turkey In a survey conducted regarding Kurdish identity, only 30% of Kurds reported their Kurdish language skills to be “good”, and of this 30%, only 44% of them reported that their children had the same strong language skills.16 This suggests that it is harder for each passing generation to maintain and teach the Kurdish language. So how has the oppression impacted Kurdish ability to maintain their language? According to the latter interviewee “Kurdish is spoken openly, cultural traditions are practiced, and there are Kurdish-language newspapers and TV channels”. Media As mentioned above, the Turkish government continuously violates the “freedom of expression”. In 2021, Turkey was the country with most cases regarding violation to “freedom of expression” before the European Court of Human Rights.17 Regarding Kurdish media, there has been a consistent crackdown on Kurdish media platforms. There has also been consistent imprisonment of journalists either writing in Kurdish or regarding Kurdish repression. For instance, Nedim Turfent was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment in 2017 for covering the clashes between the Turkish army and the PKK. In his sentence, he was charged with “membership of a terrorist organization”.18 Education The Educational accessibility to teaching Kurdish has improved in the years. Students in cities with a high population of Kurds, can choose Kurdish as a subject in primary- and secondary school. In addition, some state level universities offer Kurdish programs. However, these educational means have been greatly criticized by Kurdish activists, in regard to the government lowering the quality of education by not supplying enough teachers and appropriate materials needed for the classes.19 Final remarks Language is not just a means of communication; it embodies history, culture, and identity. The Kurdish struggle for linguistic freedom in Turkey is a fight for existence, where legal barriers and social stigmas persist despite claims of progress. While the government insists on inclusivity, Kurdish activists highlight ongoing repression, and for many, fear and anxiety remain. The future of Kurdish identity depends not just on legal reforms but on broader acceptance within Turkish society. Whether true equality is within reach - or remains a distant hope - ultimately depends on who you ask.
Av Injuria 24. april 2025
I denne utgaven: Nordtveit, Ernst - " Rettar til nausttomt " - 1982