Tweet
HRANT DINK TRIAL: "Your Court will go down in History"
BIAnet.org
http://www.bianet.org/english/minorities/134541-your-court-will-go-down-in-history
Dec 6 2011
Turkey
The plaintiff lawyers presented their final speech at the 22nd hearing
of the trial on the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink.
Repeatedly requested records of the Telecommunication Communication
Presidency were finally sent to court and will be investigated now.
I癬_覺l C襤NMEN [email protected] Istanbul - B襤A News Center06
December 2011, Tuesday The 22nd hearing of the trial related to the
assassination of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was heard
before the Be癬_ikta癬_ (Istanbul) 14th High Criminal Court on Monday
(5 December). Dink, founder and then editor-in-chief of the Armenian
Agos newspaper, was shot in front of his office in Istanbul on 19
January 2007.
The hearing was attended by un-detained defendant Mustafa Ozturk
and detained key suspects Yasin Hayal and Erhan Tuncel. The joint
attorneys of the Dink family presented their final plea to court.
The session began at 11.00 am and finished in the late afternoon at
5.00 pm. The plaintiff lawyers read out 73 pages of their final plea
in turns. Together with the attachment the attorneys' speech comprised
a total of 106 pages.
The plea also referred to joint attorney Hakan Karadag who committed
suicide in the course of the trial.
Why was Hrant Dink murdered?
The text of the attorneys' speech included detailed information on
the set up of the murder, its political and ideological basis, on who
Dink was and why he was killed. Accountabilities of the defendants
and public officials were depicted and requests related to the trial
were reiterated.
The lawyers emphasized that the council of the prosecution did not
attach sufficient importance on the background of the murder during
the four-year and ten-month trial period. Their speech started with
an explanation of who Hrant Dink actually was.
"Who was Hrant Dink and why was he killed?" was the heading of a
section on Dink's life, his professional career and articles written
by the slain journalist.
The articles read out were for instance "The state of my soul is
like the restlessness of a dove" published in the Agos newspaper on
19 January 2007, the day of the murder, or "Why was I chosen as a
target?" (Agos, 12 January 2007).
The lawyers pointed to the article "The secret of Sabiha Hatun" about
Sabiha G繹kcen, the world's first female fighter pilot and one of
the adopted children of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, published in the Agos
daily on 6 February 2004. They concluded that the process which lead
to the murder was started when this article made the headlines in the
nation-wide Hurriyet newspaper on 21 February 2004. The following day,
the General Staff had announced that "This article was an offence
against the integrity of the state", the lawyers mentioned.
"It is the prosecutor's duty to launch investigations, not to write
articles" The attorneys' speech included a detailed section on the
process leading to the murder. Negligence and accountabilities of
the media, police forces, public officials, the intelligence and the
judiciary were depicted one by one.
At the 20th hearing on 19 September 2011, the plaintiff lawyers had
left the court room under protest when Prosecutor Hikmet Usta insisted
on presenting his final plea. They criticized that his investigation
into the 86-page evaluation had not been finished and remained as an
"essay". The lawyers reminded the fact that it was the duty of a
prosecutor to launch investigations.
Prosecutor Usta on the other hand reiterated his opinion on the final
plea and claimed that there was no need for a new investigation.
Under the section "The process of preparation of the murder", the
plaintiff lawyers drew attention to former Istanbul Deputy Governor
Ergun Gung繹r who called Dink to a meeting into his office that
was also attended by two intelligence officers. This was after the
'Sabiha G繹kcen news' had been published. The lawyers also pointed
to some provocative news and articles in the media and threats made
by the Ulku Ocaklar覺 (affiliated to the Grey Wolves).
"It is up to the court" The section entitled "Investigation Period"
listed negligence and mistakes made by the judiciary and the police. It
concluded, "The state had the obligation to protect one of its citizens
from this avoidable catastrophe". The lawyers stated that in the
course of this trial the "state's tradition" of political murders
and hostility against Armenian had been continued.
Examples were given for political murders by the state and hostility
against Armenians starting from the beginning of the 20th century.
The joint attorneys addressed Court President Rustem Ery覺lmaz,
"Your court will go down in history in any case. It will either be
the court that is going to re-establish confidence in a judiciary that
breaks this tradition; or it will be the court that carries on with the
tradition of political murders and hostility... It is up to the court".
The second part of the attorneys' speech on technical details
comprising more than a hundred pages is going to be read at the 23rd
hearing on 26 December.
T襤B records sent to court but not investigated yet The telephone
records of the area around the scene of crime were eventually sent to
court by the Telecommunication Communication Presidency (T襤B). The
lawyers of both parties requested additional time for the investigation
of the records that were only obtained on 2 December.
The hearing was observed by Republican People's Party (CHP) Deputy
Chair Sezgin Tanr覺kulu and Bar Association Presidents from seven
provinces, namely lawyers Halil Hulki Ozel (Mersin), Mehmet Cemal
Acar (Siirt), Enis Gul (Bitlis), Nu癬_irevan Elci (癬^覺rnak), Azad
Y覺ld覺r覺m (Mardin), Heval Sinan Aras (Agr覺) and Erdal Aydemir
(Bing繹l).
The trial was postponed to 26 December 2011.
Court President Ery覺lmaz ruled to keep detained defendants Yasin
Hayal and Erhan Tuncel in detention. They are tried under allegations
of "membership of a terrorist organization and assisting a terrorist
organization" according to Article 7/2 of the Anti-Terror Law (TMK);
Article 314/2 on "armed illegal organization" and Article 82 of the
Turkish Criminal Law (TCK) on "premeditated murder". (IC)
BIAnet.org
http://www.bianet.org/english/minorities/134541-your-court-will-go-down-in-history
Dec 6 2011
Turkey
The plaintiff lawyers presented their final speech at the 22nd hearing
of the trial on the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink.
Repeatedly requested records of the Telecommunication Communication
Presidency were finally sent to court and will be investigated now.
I癬_覺l C襤NMEN [email protected] Istanbul - B襤A News Center06
December 2011, Tuesday The 22nd hearing of the trial related to the
assassination of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was heard
before the Be癬_ikta癬_ (Istanbul) 14th High Criminal Court on Monday
(5 December). Dink, founder and then editor-in-chief of the Armenian
Agos newspaper, was shot in front of his office in Istanbul on 19
January 2007.
The hearing was attended by un-detained defendant Mustafa Ozturk
and detained key suspects Yasin Hayal and Erhan Tuncel. The joint
attorneys of the Dink family presented their final plea to court.
The session began at 11.00 am and finished in the late afternoon at
5.00 pm. The plaintiff lawyers read out 73 pages of their final plea
in turns. Together with the attachment the attorneys' speech comprised
a total of 106 pages.
The plea also referred to joint attorney Hakan Karadag who committed
suicide in the course of the trial.
Why was Hrant Dink murdered?
The text of the attorneys' speech included detailed information on
the set up of the murder, its political and ideological basis, on who
Dink was and why he was killed. Accountabilities of the defendants
and public officials were depicted and requests related to the trial
were reiterated.
The lawyers emphasized that the council of the prosecution did not
attach sufficient importance on the background of the murder during
the four-year and ten-month trial period. Their speech started with
an explanation of who Hrant Dink actually was.
"Who was Hrant Dink and why was he killed?" was the heading of a
section on Dink's life, his professional career and articles written
by the slain journalist.
The articles read out were for instance "The state of my soul is
like the restlessness of a dove" published in the Agos newspaper on
19 January 2007, the day of the murder, or "Why was I chosen as a
target?" (Agos, 12 January 2007).
The lawyers pointed to the article "The secret of Sabiha Hatun" about
Sabiha G繹kcen, the world's first female fighter pilot and one of
the adopted children of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, published in the Agos
daily on 6 February 2004. They concluded that the process which lead
to the murder was started when this article made the headlines in the
nation-wide Hurriyet newspaper on 21 February 2004. The following day,
the General Staff had announced that "This article was an offence
against the integrity of the state", the lawyers mentioned.
"It is the prosecutor's duty to launch investigations, not to write
articles" The attorneys' speech included a detailed section on the
process leading to the murder. Negligence and accountabilities of
the media, police forces, public officials, the intelligence and the
judiciary were depicted one by one.
At the 20th hearing on 19 September 2011, the plaintiff lawyers had
left the court room under protest when Prosecutor Hikmet Usta insisted
on presenting his final plea. They criticized that his investigation
into the 86-page evaluation had not been finished and remained as an
"essay". The lawyers reminded the fact that it was the duty of a
prosecutor to launch investigations.
Prosecutor Usta on the other hand reiterated his opinion on the final
plea and claimed that there was no need for a new investigation.
Under the section "The process of preparation of the murder", the
plaintiff lawyers drew attention to former Istanbul Deputy Governor
Ergun Gung繹r who called Dink to a meeting into his office that
was also attended by two intelligence officers. This was after the
'Sabiha G繹kcen news' had been published. The lawyers also pointed
to some provocative news and articles in the media and threats made
by the Ulku Ocaklar覺 (affiliated to the Grey Wolves).
"It is up to the court" The section entitled "Investigation Period"
listed negligence and mistakes made by the judiciary and the police. It
concluded, "The state had the obligation to protect one of its citizens
from this avoidable catastrophe". The lawyers stated that in the
course of this trial the "state's tradition" of political murders
and hostility against Armenian had been continued.
Examples were given for political murders by the state and hostility
against Armenians starting from the beginning of the 20th century.
The joint attorneys addressed Court President Rustem Ery覺lmaz,
"Your court will go down in history in any case. It will either be
the court that is going to re-establish confidence in a judiciary that
breaks this tradition; or it will be the court that carries on with the
tradition of political murders and hostility... It is up to the court".
The second part of the attorneys' speech on technical details
comprising more than a hundred pages is going to be read at the 23rd
hearing on 26 December.
T襤B records sent to court but not investigated yet The telephone
records of the area around the scene of crime were eventually sent to
court by the Telecommunication Communication Presidency (T襤B). The
lawyers of both parties requested additional time for the investigation
of the records that were only obtained on 2 December.
The hearing was observed by Republican People's Party (CHP) Deputy
Chair Sezgin Tanr覺kulu and Bar Association Presidents from seven
provinces, namely lawyers Halil Hulki Ozel (Mersin), Mehmet Cemal
Acar (Siirt), Enis Gul (Bitlis), Nu癬_irevan Elci (癬^覺rnak), Azad
Y覺ld覺r覺m (Mardin), Heval Sinan Aras (Agr覺) and Erdal Aydemir
(Bing繹l).
The trial was postponed to 26 December 2011.
Court President Ery覺lmaz ruled to keep detained defendants Yasin
Hayal and Erhan Tuncel in detention. They are tried under allegations
of "membership of a terrorist organization and assisting a terrorist
organization" according to Article 7/2 of the Anti-Terror Law (TMK);
Article 314/2 on "armed illegal organization" and Article 82 of the
Turkish Criminal Law (TCK) on "premeditated murder". (IC)