The uprising that began in February 1925 brought military suppression and exceptional powers. Original legislation, parliamentary records and research on newspapers explain how its consequences extended beyond the battlefield.

Chronology of 1925: uprising in February, Law 578 on 4 March, capture on 15 April, execution on 29 June, and lodge-closure Law 677 on 30 November
Modern editorial chronology of the uprising and subsequent legislation, based on the sources below. The November lodge-closure law followed Sheikh Said’s execution; it was not the February uprising’s trigger. Kurdish History · CC BY 4.0.

From regional uprising to national emergency

The Sheikh Said uprising began on 13 February 1925 and spread through Ergani, Bingöl, Elazığ and Diyarbakır. Şahin Sert’s study of contemporary newspapers documents both the spread and competing interpretations. [1] Religious authority and Kurdish political aspirations figure in the historical debate; neither label by itself explains the movement’s participants or reception. Hakan Özoğlu’s research places the rebellion within a wider struggle over political opposition in the early Republic. [5] Its military course, the government’s legal response and later narratives should be examined separately.

What Law 578 authorised

Adopted on 4 March 1925, the Takrir-i Sükûn Kanunu had three articles. Article 1 allowed the government, with presidential approval, to prohibit organisations, agitation, activities and publications considered threats to public order, including reaction and rebellion, and to refer those responsible to an Independence Court. Article 2 initially limited the law to two years; Article 3 assigned its implementation to the cabinet. [2] The wording reached organisations and the press across the country, rather than only armed combatants. It did not itself establish that every later defendant had participated in the uprising.

Two courts, different initial powers

Parliamentary Decision 117, also dated 4 March, established the Ankara and Eastern Independence Courts. The Assembly’s published history explains that the Eastern court could execute its death sentences directly, while Ankara initially required parliamentary approval. On 20 April, Ankara received authority to implement death sentences during the Assembly’s recess. The judges were parliamentarians, and the exceptional courts’ judgments allowed no ordinary appeal. [3] These institutional distinctions matter: a reference to an “Independence Court” does not identify one nationwide proceeding or a single group of defendants.

Defeat and the Eastern trial

Sheikh Said was captured on 15 April 1925 and executed with fellow defendants in Diyarbakır on 29 June, after trial before the Eastern Independence Court. [3][4] Those dates distinguish military defeat from judicial punishment. The emergency institutions lasted longer than the fighting: the Assembly’s history dates the closure of both courts to 7 March 1927 and the continued operation of the extended public-order law to 4 March 1929. [3] The law’s original two-year provision and its eventual duration are therefore different facts.

How newspapers framed the revolt

Sert examines surviving relevant newspapers from Amasya, Çankırı, Bartın, Elazığ, Kocaeli, İzmir and Adana. Some followed events closely; others reported intermittently. He identifies different explanations, including separatist Kurdish rebellion and reaction against the Republic. [1] These were editorial interpretations, not a survey of everyone living in those provinces. The legislation’s explicit inclusion of publications also made the press an object of emergency power. Parliamentary history records trials of journalists and proceedings concerning the Progressive Republican Party in Ankara. [2][3]

Political consequences and the order of events

Özoğlu’s published abstract describes research into the exploitation of the revolt to silence opposition, using US diplomatic sources. It raises questions about manipulation; the abstract alone does not prove that the government manufactured the rebellion. [5] Chronology also prevents a common error: Law 677 closing Sufi lodges was dated 30 November 1925, as an official ministry reply confirms. [6] It followed the uprising and executions. The lasting consequences included exceptional justice and restrictions on political expression, but later measures cannot be substituted for the causes of February.

Sources and further reading

  1. Şahin Sert, “Anadolu Basınında Şeyh Said İsyanı Üzerine Bazı Değerlendirmeler”, Korkut Ata Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 16 (2024), pp. 577–600, DOI 10.51531/korkutataturkiyat.1451810; published Turkish and English abstracts consulted.
  2. Grand National Assembly of Turkey, Law 578, Takrir-i Sükûn Kanunu, 4 March 1925, original text, Articles 1–3.
  3. TBMM Library and Archive Services, İstiklal Mahkemeleri (Kanun, Gerekçe ve Genel Kurul Tutanakları), vol. 1 (Ankara, 2015), introduction pp. XI–XII and historical overview pp. 4, 7; court powers and duration.
  4. Loqman Radpey, “Kurdistan on the Sèvres Centenary”, Nationalities Papers 50/6 (2022), pp. 1187–1216, DOI 10.1017/nps.2021.32; passage on capture and execution in 1925.
  5. Hakan Özoğlu, “Exaggerating and exploiting the Sheikh Said Rebellion of 1925 for political gains”, New Perspectives on Turkey 41 (2009), pp. 181–210, DOI 10.1017/S0896634600005410; published abstract consulted.
  6. Culture and Tourism Ministry, parliamentary reply to question 7/4573, 22 March 2012, answer 1: Law 677 dated 30 November 1925.