Tweet
HRANT DINK TRIAL: STATE CONCEDES "SEVERE MISTAKE"
BIAnet.org
http://www.bianet.org/english/freedom-of-expression/136332-state-concedes-severe-mistake
Turkey
Feb 21 2012
After an investigation into the assassination of Turkish-Armenian
journalist Hrant Dink, the State Supervisory Council concluded that
"the public service severely failed to protect Dink's right to life".
The probe was conducted upon the request of President Gul.
Istanbul - BÄ°A News Center21 February 2012, Tuesday Upon the
request of President Abdullah Gul, the State Supervisory Council
(DDK) conducted a probe into the assassination of Turkish-Armenian
journalist Hrant Dink, then editor-in-chief of the Armenian Agos
newspaper. The DDK reached the conclusion that "a severe failure
occurred within the public service to protect Dink's right to life".
Dink, founder of the Agos newspaper, was shot in front of his office
in Å~^iÅ~_li (Istanbul) in the middle of the day on 19 January 2007.
On Monday (20 February), it was announced on the website of the Prime
Ministry that President Gul ordered a probe of the DDK last year
after public pressure had increased regarding an effective trial and
further connections of the arrested perpetrators.
On 28 January 2011, the DDK launched an investigation which was
completed now.
The 653-page report was published in a summarized version of 34 pages.
A section of the report could not be disclosed due to the
"confidentiality of the investigation". Parts of the summarized
versions were blackened.
"The public service severely failed" The DDK report revealed that
that both the police and the gendarmerie were informed about the
threat against Hrant Dink and that intelligence units failed to take
necessary measures to protect the journalist.
Related units did not co-operate, the DDK claimed. Moreover, despite
being aware of the risk, the administrative authorities failed to
take necessary precautions to prevent danger that occurred as the
result of chain actions of responsible people on every level.
It is stated in the report that by reason of these failures "the
danger came true" and "Hrant Dink was killed".
The DDK determined that the investigations carried out about the
state officials who committed these severe mistakes in public
service did not reach an effective result because of the related
legislation, errors/inaccuracies in the followed methods and due to
other insufficiencies.
"Improper investigation from the beginning" The report specified the
following findings:
- Decisions regarding the permission for investigations about
personnel of the Provincial Police Directorates in Trabzon and
Istanbul and also about staff members of the General Police Directorate
Intelligence Branch Presidency were finalized without the result of
the administrative judicial review and/or appeals. Hence, no judicial
prosecution was opened about these public officials.
- The investigation about the personnel of the Trabzon Gendarmerie
Command was partly brought to court and some staff members were
convicted of neglect of duty.
- Permission for an investigation into the involvement of personnel
of the National Intelligence Agency (MIT) was given but the Public
Chief Prosecution decided to drop procedures due to the statute
of limitation.
- The murder suspect and the instigators of the murder were convicted.
- Investigation launched by the prosecutor's office about some
public officials after the decision of the European Court of Human
Rights (ECHR) were continued as well as a probe about possible other
perpetrators and instigators behind the murder.
It was emphasized in the report that the administrative inquiry and
investigations about public officials after the murder was not done
thoroughly.
"The investigation of such an incident and the evidencing remained
insufficient in terms of available tools and concerning the capacity
of the investigation with regard to the legislation. Additionally, the
present situation is not satisfying due to the factors as mentioned
above. A 'basic mistake' was being made from the very beginning with
respect to how the investigation should be carried out and within
which scope", it was said in the report.
The report furthermore underlined that according to DDK's evaluation,
the investigation and prosecution of the mentioned public officials
was obligatory in the scope of the main trial.
ECHR decision On 14 September 2010, the ECHR announced its decision
on the case Dink vs. Turkey.
The ECHR unanimously decreed for violations of Article 2 of the
European Convention on Human Rights on the "right to life", "freedom
of expression" enshrined in Article 10 and "the right to an effective
remedy" according to Article 13 of the convention.
The ECHR indicated that the Trabzon Governorship had not issued
permission for the prosecution of more than two gendarmerie officers:
"A judicial decision was not reached regarding the question why the
higher-grade officials, who held the authority of preventing the
murder, remained passive even though the non-commissioned officers
had forwarded relevant information. This shows obvious negligence of
the responsibility to take precautions when evidence of the incident
had been provided".
The State Supervisory Council According to Article 108 of the
Constitution, "The State Supervisory Council which shall be attached
to the Office of the Presidency of the Republic with the purpose
of performing and furthering the regular and efficient functioning
of the administration and its observance of law, will be empowered
to conduct upon the request of the President of the Republic all
inquiries, investigations and inspections of all public bodies and
organisations (...)".
As stipulated in Article 138 of the Constitution, "no organ, authority,
office or individual may give orders or instructions to courts or
judges relating to the exercise of judicial power, send them circulars,
or make recommendations or suggestions". Thus, the DDK is not entitled
to give any orders, instructions, advice or recommendation. (IC/VK)
BIAnet.org
http://www.bianet.org/english/freedom-of-expression/136332-state-concedes-severe-mistake
Turkey
Feb 21 2012
After an investigation into the assassination of Turkish-Armenian
journalist Hrant Dink, the State Supervisory Council concluded that
"the public service severely failed to protect Dink's right to life".
The probe was conducted upon the request of President Gul.
Istanbul - BÄ°A News Center21 February 2012, Tuesday Upon the
request of President Abdullah Gul, the State Supervisory Council
(DDK) conducted a probe into the assassination of Turkish-Armenian
journalist Hrant Dink, then editor-in-chief of the Armenian Agos
newspaper. The DDK reached the conclusion that "a severe failure
occurred within the public service to protect Dink's right to life".
Dink, founder of the Agos newspaper, was shot in front of his office
in Å~^iÅ~_li (Istanbul) in the middle of the day on 19 January 2007.
On Monday (20 February), it was announced on the website of the Prime
Ministry that President Gul ordered a probe of the DDK last year
after public pressure had increased regarding an effective trial and
further connections of the arrested perpetrators.
On 28 January 2011, the DDK launched an investigation which was
completed now.
The 653-page report was published in a summarized version of 34 pages.
A section of the report could not be disclosed due to the
"confidentiality of the investigation". Parts of the summarized
versions were blackened.
"The public service severely failed" The DDK report revealed that
that both the police and the gendarmerie were informed about the
threat against Hrant Dink and that intelligence units failed to take
necessary measures to protect the journalist.
Related units did not co-operate, the DDK claimed. Moreover, despite
being aware of the risk, the administrative authorities failed to
take necessary precautions to prevent danger that occurred as the
result of chain actions of responsible people on every level.
It is stated in the report that by reason of these failures "the
danger came true" and "Hrant Dink was killed".
The DDK determined that the investigations carried out about the
state officials who committed these severe mistakes in public
service did not reach an effective result because of the related
legislation, errors/inaccuracies in the followed methods and due to
other insufficiencies.
"Improper investigation from the beginning" The report specified the
following findings:
- Decisions regarding the permission for investigations about
personnel of the Provincial Police Directorates in Trabzon and
Istanbul and also about staff members of the General Police Directorate
Intelligence Branch Presidency were finalized without the result of
the administrative judicial review and/or appeals. Hence, no judicial
prosecution was opened about these public officials.
- The investigation about the personnel of the Trabzon Gendarmerie
Command was partly brought to court and some staff members were
convicted of neglect of duty.
- Permission for an investigation into the involvement of personnel
of the National Intelligence Agency (MIT) was given but the Public
Chief Prosecution decided to drop procedures due to the statute
of limitation.
- The murder suspect and the instigators of the murder were convicted.
- Investigation launched by the prosecutor's office about some
public officials after the decision of the European Court of Human
Rights (ECHR) were continued as well as a probe about possible other
perpetrators and instigators behind the murder.
It was emphasized in the report that the administrative inquiry and
investigations about public officials after the murder was not done
thoroughly.
"The investigation of such an incident and the evidencing remained
insufficient in terms of available tools and concerning the capacity
of the investigation with regard to the legislation. Additionally, the
present situation is not satisfying due to the factors as mentioned
above. A 'basic mistake' was being made from the very beginning with
respect to how the investigation should be carried out and within
which scope", it was said in the report.
The report furthermore underlined that according to DDK's evaluation,
the investigation and prosecution of the mentioned public officials
was obligatory in the scope of the main trial.
ECHR decision On 14 September 2010, the ECHR announced its decision
on the case Dink vs. Turkey.
The ECHR unanimously decreed for violations of Article 2 of the
European Convention on Human Rights on the "right to life", "freedom
of expression" enshrined in Article 10 and "the right to an effective
remedy" according to Article 13 of the convention.
The ECHR indicated that the Trabzon Governorship had not issued
permission for the prosecution of more than two gendarmerie officers:
"A judicial decision was not reached regarding the question why the
higher-grade officials, who held the authority of preventing the
murder, remained passive even though the non-commissioned officers
had forwarded relevant information. This shows obvious negligence of
the responsibility to take precautions when evidence of the incident
had been provided".
The State Supervisory Council According to Article 108 of the
Constitution, "The State Supervisory Council which shall be attached
to the Office of the Presidency of the Republic with the purpose
of performing and furthering the regular and efficient functioning
of the administration and its observance of law, will be empowered
to conduct upon the request of the President of the Republic all
inquiries, investigations and inspections of all public bodies and
organisations (...)".
As stipulated in Article 138 of the Constitution, "no organ, authority,
office or individual may give orders or instructions to courts or
judges relating to the exercise of judicial power, send them circulars,
or make recommendations or suggestions". Thus, the DDK is not entitled
to give any orders, instructions, advice or recommendation. (IC/VK)