Tweet
THE 'FRIENDS OF HRANT' AND THE 'FRIENDS OF HIS MURDERER'
Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Sept 16 2013
NURAY MERT
My friend Hrant was killed six years ago, in front of his office,
a few minutes' walk from my home. I was unfortunate enough to see his
body lying on the pavement. I ran to his office to get more information
right after I learned that he was attacked; at the time, I didn't know
that he was killed there, less than half an hour beforehand. Needless
to say, it was a devastating moment, and since then, I have refrained
from talking and writing about the emotional part of this tragic
event. Besides, there were so many personal accounts about "being
one of Hrant's friends."
At first, I thought that the murderer could be a nationalist thug who
had acted individually in a politically suitable environment; even
if it had been so, it would have been horrible enough. After that,
however, we started to learn the details of the case and that it was an
orchestrated murder. The public outrage against Dink's assassination
was the only consolation, as thousands marched at his funeral,
shouting, "We are all Armenians!" It seemed that the era was over
for those who thought that killing an Armenian could go unpunished.
Alas, seven years on, Dink's outspoken lawyer, Fethiye Cetin, has
stated "we are behind the point that we were at before," after a
long process of trials and verdicts. Tomorrow, another Dink trial
will begin after the Supreme Court of Appeals ruled that it was not
an individually motivated but organized crime.
Cetin, however, has stated that it is not an improvement but the
opposite, as the Supreme Court decided that the "organization behind
the crime" was limited to those who were already sentenced to prison.
It means that the court refuses to acknowledge or even question the
links between the murderers and the security services (and civil
bureaucracy) despite so much evidence provided by Dink's lawyers.
The lawyers and the followers of the Dink case who call themselves
"Friends of Hrant" have made a public statement and called for "a
trial of those who are really responsible for the murder, not a show
trial." In fact, it is not a call for justice just for Hrant, but
it has ultimate political significance. There is a lot of evidence
that hints that Hrant was murdered by a youth gang that had links to
the security services. Moreover, it was an initial court case against
Hrant and the public humiliation after the court's verdict that paved
the way for his ultimate murder.
At the time (2006) the case against Dink was opened with reference
to one of his newspaper articles that he was accused of "publicly
insulting the Turkish nation" under controversial Article 301. The
Supreme Court of Appeals then approved the sentence (July 2006).
I am sure most of you know the whole story; I just want to note
that after all, one of the judges who approved the sentence when he
was a member of the Supreme Court, Mehmet Omeroglu, was elected as
ombudsman of Turkey on Nov. 27, 2012. In fact, there is no need for
further comment. So far, I have often refrained from writing my doubts
about the hopes of a fair trial in the Dink murder, since, from the
beginning, I was very skeptical about the supposed elimination of
the deep state in Turkey under the Justice and Development Party
(AKP) government. The Dink trial is very important for observing
what happened to the so-called "deep state" after the AKP altered the
status quo ante. So far, it seems that it is only the patrons of the
state that have changed and that there is still a very long way to go.
I never thought that skepticism should stop us from fighting for more
democracy and the rule of law; I always thought that skepticism was
an essential part of political criticism that works as a tool to put
more pressure on politicians.
Unfortunately, this is a country where "skepticism is confused with
cynicism" by democrats themselves. It was a fatal mistake, and now
we are paying the price. Still, we should keep going and asking for
justice to be done.
The Friends of Hrant should never give up until the judges feel truly
obliged to inquire who the "friends of Hrant's murderer" were.
September/16/2013
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/the-friends-of-hrant-and-the-friends-of-his-murderer.aspx?pageID=449&nID=54490&NewsCatID=406
Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Sept 16 2013
NURAY MERT
My friend Hrant was killed six years ago, in front of his office,
a few minutes' walk from my home. I was unfortunate enough to see his
body lying on the pavement. I ran to his office to get more information
right after I learned that he was attacked; at the time, I didn't know
that he was killed there, less than half an hour beforehand. Needless
to say, it was a devastating moment, and since then, I have refrained
from talking and writing about the emotional part of this tragic
event. Besides, there were so many personal accounts about "being
one of Hrant's friends."
At first, I thought that the murderer could be a nationalist thug who
had acted individually in a politically suitable environment; even
if it had been so, it would have been horrible enough. After that,
however, we started to learn the details of the case and that it was an
orchestrated murder. The public outrage against Dink's assassination
was the only consolation, as thousands marched at his funeral,
shouting, "We are all Armenians!" It seemed that the era was over
for those who thought that killing an Armenian could go unpunished.
Alas, seven years on, Dink's outspoken lawyer, Fethiye Cetin, has
stated "we are behind the point that we were at before," after a
long process of trials and verdicts. Tomorrow, another Dink trial
will begin after the Supreme Court of Appeals ruled that it was not
an individually motivated but organized crime.
Cetin, however, has stated that it is not an improvement but the
opposite, as the Supreme Court decided that the "organization behind
the crime" was limited to those who were already sentenced to prison.
It means that the court refuses to acknowledge or even question the
links between the murderers and the security services (and civil
bureaucracy) despite so much evidence provided by Dink's lawyers.
The lawyers and the followers of the Dink case who call themselves
"Friends of Hrant" have made a public statement and called for "a
trial of those who are really responsible for the murder, not a show
trial." In fact, it is not a call for justice just for Hrant, but
it has ultimate political significance. There is a lot of evidence
that hints that Hrant was murdered by a youth gang that had links to
the security services. Moreover, it was an initial court case against
Hrant and the public humiliation after the court's verdict that paved
the way for his ultimate murder.
At the time (2006) the case against Dink was opened with reference
to one of his newspaper articles that he was accused of "publicly
insulting the Turkish nation" under controversial Article 301. The
Supreme Court of Appeals then approved the sentence (July 2006).
I am sure most of you know the whole story; I just want to note
that after all, one of the judges who approved the sentence when he
was a member of the Supreme Court, Mehmet Omeroglu, was elected as
ombudsman of Turkey on Nov. 27, 2012. In fact, there is no need for
further comment. So far, I have often refrained from writing my doubts
about the hopes of a fair trial in the Dink murder, since, from the
beginning, I was very skeptical about the supposed elimination of
the deep state in Turkey under the Justice and Development Party
(AKP) government. The Dink trial is very important for observing
what happened to the so-called "deep state" after the AKP altered the
status quo ante. So far, it seems that it is only the patrons of the
state that have changed and that there is still a very long way to go.
I never thought that skepticism should stop us from fighting for more
democracy and the rule of law; I always thought that skepticism was
an essential part of political criticism that works as a tool to put
more pressure on politicians.
Unfortunately, this is a country where "skepticism is confused with
cynicism" by democrats themselves. It was a fatal mistake, and now
we are paying the price. Still, we should keep going and asking for
justice to be done.
The Friends of Hrant should never give up until the judges feel truly
obliged to inquire who the "friends of Hrant's murderer" were.
September/16/2013
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/the-friends-of-hrant-and-the-friends-of-his-murderer.aspx?pageID=449&nID=54490&NewsCatID=406