Turkey's Capital of Culture shrugs off the jibes

Istanbul's preparations for this year's European Capital of Culture event have been beset with accusations of budget irregularities and corruption - so what's new?

As officials at Istanbul's European Capital of Culture Agency know all too well, once you've been named a capital of culture, it's only a matter of time before the "capital of corruption" jokes start. So far Turkey's performance does not seem to be notably worse than those of other cities to have held the honour. The European Union awards the title to cities deemed particularly worthy of having their cultural assets showcased. Some 40 cities have been designated capitals since 1985.

"The event," says the European Culture Commission, "is so attractive that Europe's cities vie with each other fiercely for the honour of bearing the title." Who knows why, though, since it so often ends in budget deficits, scandal, bitter recriminations and public outrage. A study that the international cultural advisers Palmer/Rae Associates prepared for the commission noted that "almost all cities" selected thus far "reported that there were problems with their governance structures". The most commonly noted issues were "domination of political interests, relationship difficulties between board members and with the operational management team, the absence of representation of cultural interests and the size of the governance structure". Moreover, it noted, "personality clashes, communication problems, inappropriate experience of personnel and unclear responsibilities and job descriptions" were ubiquitous.

Istanbul will take over the culture capital flag on Saturday along with Essen, Germany, and Pecs, Hungary. Organisers have said they aim to promote Istanbul as a brand and take up long-neglected cultural projects: "The name of Istanbul will be associated with culture and arts all over the world," the agency's website proudly predicts, and "the city's cultural heritage will be managed in a sustainable manner and it will become even more of a magnet than ever." Organisers add, with perhaps an excess of optimism during a global recession, that jobs will be created in a wide range of fields.

But these admirable goals have thus far been overshadowed by embezzlement allegations, resignations, public debates about managerial incompetence and charges that Istanbul's culture is being destroyed by rapacious development faster than it can be promoted. Özgül Özkan Yavuz, the agency's tourism and promotion director, winced when the subject of corruption came up. The local press, she said, was irresponsible; Turkish people were prone to jealousy.

"People don't understand. This is the first time we've done something like this in this country and people aren't used to it." She noted that roughly 2,000 projects had been proposed to the agency, and only a fraction were accepted by the executive board. "People can't accept that their applications were rejected because their projects were no good. So they start rumours about corruption." This is entirely plausible - and so are the charges of corruption, incompetence and mismanagement.

It is no shock that the agency has been accused of budgeting irregularities - there's hardly an organisation in Turkey that hasn't as a matter of routine. More often than not, there's a hint of truth in the charges. But these accusations in particular have a sting because every time a Turkish citizen buys petrol, money is siphoned off to feed the culture agency. The opposition CHP party has produced documents suggesting that unaccounted for funds amount to a very considerable sum, and has hinted (typically) that a conspiracy to swindle is involved. Investigations (typically) have been delayed. The chairman of the executive board, Nuri Çolakglu, resigned in February. Other board members followed suit. Press conferences have turned into protests from which irate attendees require vigorous eviction.

Some of the projects supported by the agency certainly do leave the organisation open to the charge that the selection process was made with something other than cultural significance in mind. The most notorious has been the nine-million-lira contract awarded to a residential construction company to re-enact the 52-day circumcision ceremony of the son of Sultan Murad III. Contracts for the restoration of the city's historic walls, it is said, have been given to bidders so unqualified that archeologists are in convulsions; some hint that as a result, Istanbul could be thrown off Unesco's World Heritage List. The Innocence Museum, named after the Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk's most recent book, is not open despite the 750,000 liras thus far spent on it. The renovation of the Atatürk Culture Center - described by the agency as "one of the most important elements of the 2010 ECOC programme", not least because it is supposed to be the venue for many of the planned events - has not been completed as scheduled, and the project can scarcely be mentioned in Istanbul before someone repeats the rumour that corruption tainted the award of the tender.

More disturbingly, large neighbourhoods of Istanbul have been targeted for "revitalisation" before the city takes on Capital of Culture title, and in at least two, Sulukule and Tarlabas, it has resulted in the mass displacement of local populations. In Sulukule, the people are precisely what makes the neighbourhood culturally significant: it is believed to be the first permanent Romani settlement since the Roma migration from south Asia a thousand years ago. Given the important Roma musical tradition in Istanbul, it is hard to understand quite how the displacement of this neighbourhood's inhabitants - in violation of the UN Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage and the Unesco Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage - has anything to do with cultural preservation.

In Istanbul's defence, a great many of the proposed projects are laudable. Important restorations of historic structures and mosques, such as the inner part of Hagia Sophia and the kitchen and harem areas of Topkap Palace, appear as if they will be successfully completed; workshops, literature days and cultural seminars have been arranged throughout the city. Beyhan Murphy, the agency's director for stage and performing arts, says that Istanbul's status as a cultural capital encouraged many significant performers to agree to come to the city for the first time.

Whatever the truth in the rumours, Istanbul is hardly the first European Capital of Culture to have suffered such charges. The Palmer report suggests that financial irregularities are the rule, not the exception. "Certain cities," it noted, "had difficulties in furnishing even basic information. In other cities, two or even three sets of figures were received that were sometimes difficult to verify, and frequently summary figures mentioned in final published reports of individual cities did not match with the budgets submitted."

Vilnius, Lithuania, named a capital in 2008, is still trying to recover. Its first director, Elona Bajoriniene, was forced to resign amid allegations of embezzlement. The prosecutor's investigation into the project's finances is ongoing.