[vidarh]

The legislation goes far beyond restricting that. Unless the english translation is completely wrong, it also required e.g. newspapers and books to use the Turkish alphabet.

That is far beyond legal restrictions in most other countries in the world, and had the defacto effect of placing a lot of restrictions on communication in other languages.

[diorray]

http://www.idefix.com/kitap/avesta-yayinlari-kurtce-kitaplar... Does it look like books that contain those letters are banned?

[vidarh]

It does look like someone are selling them now, and may possibly have sold them while the laws were still on the books. But enforcement in a situation where a law has long been controversial and changes have been long coming, does nothing to say whether or not it was legal before, and whether or not it at one point was more strictly enforced.

If it hasn't been enforced for some time: Great. But it says nothing about the legality.

EDIT: Here's a document from the Council of Europe's website: European Commission against Racism and Intolerance - ECRI Report on Turkey (2010/2011): http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/Country-by-country...

It indicates that teaching Kurdish and other minority languages in private schools was allowed from ca. 2002, and so presumably books such as the Kurdish/French textbook at the site you referenced would have been available from no later than then. It says nothing specifically about the alphabet, but that's much closer to a proper source regarding the legality in that it at least specifically cite legal changes that would have been rather meaningless if the teaching material would still remain illegal. This also fits great with the "idefix.com" website itself - the domain was registered in 2002 according to whois.

It of course still only addresses the issue of current legality, not your original claim that it was never illegal, which - unless you can show us that the Google Translate translation is flat out wrong, or that the purported text of the 1928 law I referenced earlier is fake, is directly contradicted by the law itself.

(At the same time, the report complains that as of writing in 2010, the use of Kurdish by public officials was still likely to result in prosecution - so there is certainly still a long way forward).