Tweet
COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS REPORT: NO JUSTICE FOR HRANT DINK
tert.am
22.10.12
The Committee to Protect Journalists has released a report entitled
'Turkey's Press Freedom Crisis The Dark Days of Jailing Journalists and
Criminalizing Dissent' Along with other issues, the reports addresses
the assassination of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink.
The sidebar entitled "No Justice for Hrant Dink" reads:
Nearly six years after Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was shot
in front of his Istanbul office by a 17-year-old ultranationalist,
the real instigators, their links to state institutions, and the role
played by the Turkish media in making the well-known journalist and
human rights activist a target have yet to be fully investigated.
Captured shortly after he killed Dink on January 19, 2007, Ogun Samast
was sentenced by a juvenile court in July 2011 to nearly 23 years of
imprisonment. From the onset of the investigation, it was evident
that the young man, who had traveled to Istanbul from the Black
Sea city of Trabzon to commit the crime, had not acted alone. In
the course of the inquiry, it emerged that police, gendarmerie, and
intelligence officials in Trabzon, Istanbul, and Ankara were aware
that an assassination attempt was planned, but did nothing to warn or
protect Dink. On January 17, 2012, the 14th Criminal Court in Istanbul
ruled on the fate of other key suspects. It sentenced Yasin Hayal,
seen as the mastermind, to life behind bars.
Two defendants were sentenced to 12 years and six months of
imprisonment as accessories to Dink's murder, while another was
punished for illegal gun possession. But to the dismay of Dink's
relatives and supporters, the court ruled that Erhan Tuncel, an
ultranationalist police informant believed to be a major player,
had no involvement in the assassination. All 19 suspects were cleared
of being part of a criminal organization. "Turkey has a tradition of
political murders that goes back to Ottoman times. The judiciary still
has the automatic reflex to protect the state and civil servants,"
said Fethiye Cetin, lawyer for the Dink family. "They can't reveal
the truth about the Dink case because it was part of state policies."
Paradoxically, the presiding judge himself acknowledged that the
verdict was flawed. "We acquitted the suspects of organized crime
charges," Judge Rustem Eryılmaz told Vatan newspaper. "This ruling
does not mean that there was no organization involved. This means
that there was not enough evidence to prove the actions of this
organization."
In prescient articles published days before his death, Dink expressed
fears that he was in danger. "Why was I made a target?" he wrote in
Agos, the weekly Armenian-Turkish newspaper he founded in 1996.
Pressure against the ethnic Armenian writer had been building for
years. A series of articles on Armenian identity published in 2004 led
to his prosecution under the controversial Article 301 of the penal
code for "insulting Turkishness." He received a six-month suspended
sentence, which was upheld on appeal in 2006. The campaign against Dink
and other nonMuslims may have its roots in a policy document adopted
in 2001 by the National Security Council, which listed "minorities" and
"missionary activities" among the threats to national security. "After
the document was prepared, articles started appearing in the media
suggesting the country was overrun by missionaries and Christian
churches were being built everywhere," Cetin said.
In 2006, Catholic priest Andrea Santoro was killed by a right-wing
teenager, also from Trabzon, and a few months after Dink's
assassination, three Protestant missionaries were slaughtered in
the eastern city of Malatya. In this case, too, state involvement
is suspected.
At a time when power balances are shifting and the influence of the
military is waning, the judicial investigation into Dink's murder has
been widely seen as a test: Can Turkey end a culture of impunity and
shed a rigid state ideology that views some segments of society as
internal foes? The case also highlights troubling issues regarding the
Turkish media--though TURKEY'S PRESS FREEDOM CRISIS 19 restrictions are
imposed on press freedom, media outlets also play an active role in
the smear campaigns directed at Dink and others deemed to be enemies
of the state.
"The media were used as an instrument in the run-up to Hrant
Dink's murder," said Rober KoptaÅ~_, Dink's successor as editor of
Agos. "There was a trial against him, but he was also attacked first
by the right-wing press, then by mainstream media."
"The murder of a journalist known for his peace efforts shook Turkey
to the core. KoptaÅ~_ says the emotions it generated have contributed
to improving perceptions of Turkey's 50,000-strong ethnic Armenian
community. The debate on the 1915 massacres has also broadened
significantly, even if the Turkish authorities continue to deny
strenuously that they amounted to genocide. "Hrant Dink's murder has
decreased pressure on Agos. Article 301 was amended after the murder,
and any prosecution now has to get prior approval of the justice
minister," KoptaÅ~_ said.
"There has been no court case against us for the past four years."
In the past few years, dozens of army officers and other figures
suspected of plotting to overthrow the government have been arrested,
among them officials who harassed Dink and tried to intimidate him.
Journalists are among those facing terrorism charges, including Nedim
Å~^ener, who wrote a book alleging a police coverup in the Dink case.
Released pending trial in March 2012 after more than a year in
prison, the reporter is accused of belonging to the very network
he investigated.
Prosecutors looking into the past misdeeds of the "deep state" have
limited their inquiries to elements perceived to pose a direct threat
to the conservative government. Injustices committed against minorities
have not received the same attention. As Cetin points out, "the Hrant
Dink murder case has remained on the other side of the line."
The Dink family has appealed the criminal court's verdict, underscoring
the prosecution's failure to pursue crucial lines of inquiry pointing
to state involvement in the journalist's murder. The case will be
reviewed by the Supreme Court of Appeals, which can confirm the ruling
or order a retrial. A decision is not expected until the end of the
year. Interest in the final outcome remains strong, in Turkey and
abroad, and the ruling party is under pressure to ensure that justice
is properly served. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan pledged after
the January 2012 criminal court ruling that "the Hrant Dink case will
not be lost in the dark corridors of Ankara.
No provocation, no plot will remain concealed."
Cetin has publicly documented the inconsistencies and weaknesses of
the judicial procedure. "Everything is out in the open," she said. In
spite of the legal team's insistence, security camera footage and
phone records that could have offered proof of other suspects'
presence at the murder scene were not produced in court.
Prosecutors turned a blind eye to bureaucratic stonewalling.
Cetin remains hopeful that the upper court will reject the judgment and
demand a wider judicial inquiry. A report prepared in February by the
official watchdog, the State Audit Institution, stated that the role
of public officials has not been sufficiently investigated. In 2010,
the European Court of Human Rights came to a similar conclusion,
based on the early results of the murder inquiry. The court also
ruled that Turkey had violated Hrant Dink's freedom of expression
and failed to protect his life.
tert.am
22.10.12
The Committee to Protect Journalists has released a report entitled
'Turkey's Press Freedom Crisis The Dark Days of Jailing Journalists and
Criminalizing Dissent' Along with other issues, the reports addresses
the assassination of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink.
The sidebar entitled "No Justice for Hrant Dink" reads:
Nearly six years after Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was shot
in front of his Istanbul office by a 17-year-old ultranationalist,
the real instigators, their links to state institutions, and the role
played by the Turkish media in making the well-known journalist and
human rights activist a target have yet to be fully investigated.
Captured shortly after he killed Dink on January 19, 2007, Ogun Samast
was sentenced by a juvenile court in July 2011 to nearly 23 years of
imprisonment. From the onset of the investigation, it was evident
that the young man, who had traveled to Istanbul from the Black
Sea city of Trabzon to commit the crime, had not acted alone. In
the course of the inquiry, it emerged that police, gendarmerie, and
intelligence officials in Trabzon, Istanbul, and Ankara were aware
that an assassination attempt was planned, but did nothing to warn or
protect Dink. On January 17, 2012, the 14th Criminal Court in Istanbul
ruled on the fate of other key suspects. It sentenced Yasin Hayal,
seen as the mastermind, to life behind bars.
Two defendants were sentenced to 12 years and six months of
imprisonment as accessories to Dink's murder, while another was
punished for illegal gun possession. But to the dismay of Dink's
relatives and supporters, the court ruled that Erhan Tuncel, an
ultranationalist police informant believed to be a major player,
had no involvement in the assassination. All 19 suspects were cleared
of being part of a criminal organization. "Turkey has a tradition of
political murders that goes back to Ottoman times. The judiciary still
has the automatic reflex to protect the state and civil servants,"
said Fethiye Cetin, lawyer for the Dink family. "They can't reveal
the truth about the Dink case because it was part of state policies."
Paradoxically, the presiding judge himself acknowledged that the
verdict was flawed. "We acquitted the suspects of organized crime
charges," Judge Rustem Eryılmaz told Vatan newspaper. "This ruling
does not mean that there was no organization involved. This means
that there was not enough evidence to prove the actions of this
organization."
In prescient articles published days before his death, Dink expressed
fears that he was in danger. "Why was I made a target?" he wrote in
Agos, the weekly Armenian-Turkish newspaper he founded in 1996.
Pressure against the ethnic Armenian writer had been building for
years. A series of articles on Armenian identity published in 2004 led
to his prosecution under the controversial Article 301 of the penal
code for "insulting Turkishness." He received a six-month suspended
sentence, which was upheld on appeal in 2006. The campaign against Dink
and other nonMuslims may have its roots in a policy document adopted
in 2001 by the National Security Council, which listed "minorities" and
"missionary activities" among the threats to national security. "After
the document was prepared, articles started appearing in the media
suggesting the country was overrun by missionaries and Christian
churches were being built everywhere," Cetin said.
In 2006, Catholic priest Andrea Santoro was killed by a right-wing
teenager, also from Trabzon, and a few months after Dink's
assassination, three Protestant missionaries were slaughtered in
the eastern city of Malatya. In this case, too, state involvement
is suspected.
At a time when power balances are shifting and the influence of the
military is waning, the judicial investigation into Dink's murder has
been widely seen as a test: Can Turkey end a culture of impunity and
shed a rigid state ideology that views some segments of society as
internal foes? The case also highlights troubling issues regarding the
Turkish media--though TURKEY'S PRESS FREEDOM CRISIS 19 restrictions are
imposed on press freedom, media outlets also play an active role in
the smear campaigns directed at Dink and others deemed to be enemies
of the state.
"The media were used as an instrument in the run-up to Hrant
Dink's murder," said Rober KoptaÅ~_, Dink's successor as editor of
Agos. "There was a trial against him, but he was also attacked first
by the right-wing press, then by mainstream media."
"The murder of a journalist known for his peace efforts shook Turkey
to the core. KoptaÅ~_ says the emotions it generated have contributed
to improving perceptions of Turkey's 50,000-strong ethnic Armenian
community. The debate on the 1915 massacres has also broadened
significantly, even if the Turkish authorities continue to deny
strenuously that they amounted to genocide. "Hrant Dink's murder has
decreased pressure on Agos. Article 301 was amended after the murder,
and any prosecution now has to get prior approval of the justice
minister," KoptaÅ~_ said.
"There has been no court case against us for the past four years."
In the past few years, dozens of army officers and other figures
suspected of plotting to overthrow the government have been arrested,
among them officials who harassed Dink and tried to intimidate him.
Journalists are among those facing terrorism charges, including Nedim
Å~^ener, who wrote a book alleging a police coverup in the Dink case.
Released pending trial in March 2012 after more than a year in
prison, the reporter is accused of belonging to the very network
he investigated.
Prosecutors looking into the past misdeeds of the "deep state" have
limited their inquiries to elements perceived to pose a direct threat
to the conservative government. Injustices committed against minorities
have not received the same attention. As Cetin points out, "the Hrant
Dink murder case has remained on the other side of the line."
The Dink family has appealed the criminal court's verdict, underscoring
the prosecution's failure to pursue crucial lines of inquiry pointing
to state involvement in the journalist's murder. The case will be
reviewed by the Supreme Court of Appeals, which can confirm the ruling
or order a retrial. A decision is not expected until the end of the
year. Interest in the final outcome remains strong, in Turkey and
abroad, and the ruling party is under pressure to ensure that justice
is properly served. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan pledged after
the January 2012 criminal court ruling that "the Hrant Dink case will
not be lost in the dark corridors of Ankara.
No provocation, no plot will remain concealed."
Cetin has publicly documented the inconsistencies and weaknesses of
the judicial procedure. "Everything is out in the open," she said. In
spite of the legal team's insistence, security camera footage and
phone records that could have offered proof of other suspects'
presence at the murder scene were not produced in court.
Prosecutors turned a blind eye to bureaucratic stonewalling.
Cetin remains hopeful that the upper court will reject the judgment and
demand a wider judicial inquiry. A report prepared in February by the
official watchdog, the State Audit Institution, stated that the role
of public officials has not been sufficiently investigated. In 2010,
the European Court of Human Rights came to a similar conclusion,
based on the early results of the murder inquiry. The court also
ruled that Turkey had violated Hrant Dink's freedom of expression
and failed to protect his life.