Tweet
Today's Zaman, Turkey
Jan 19 2015
For Hrant, and for justice¦
by CAFER SOLGUN
January 19, 2015, Monday
A full eight years have passed since journalist Hrant Dink was
murdered on the sidewalk in front of the newspaper that he had
founded, and of which he was the editor-in-chief. Yes, a full eight
years¦ and we are still waiting for justice.
It would be difficult to find another murder that had announced itself
so openly in advance, the way the murder of Dink's did.
We all remember: A legal case was brought against Dink on the charges
that he had `insulted Turkishness.' The case was based on the racist
Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK). It would also be
difficult to find an example of a court case as clearly unfair as this
one was because, the truth is, `insulting Turkishness' was something
that would have never even occurred to Hrant Dink. But in the end, he
was targeted by dark forces.
Court hearings on his case turned into stages for racist shows by
Ergenekon-type forces. In the end, Hrant was sentenced by the court
for `insulting Turkishness,' and he said he was truly embarrassed of
being sentenced on such an accusation. For, after all, Dink was from
Turkey. He was a Turkish intellectual and journalist. He had nothing
to do with racism, with nationalism, with ignorance or with fanatical
thinking. He believed in the brotherhood of all peoples.
When the French Parliament accepted a law making it a crime not to
recognize the Armenian genocide, Hrant said, `I'm going to go to Paris
and yell in the city squares, `There was no Armenian genocide!'' He
was a democrat. And in the kind of democracy in which he believed,
there was no place for `buts,' for bans, for limitations.
But he was under threat. Instead of offering him protection, the state
made sure he was called into the Ä°stanbul Governor's Office, where he
was `officially' threatened; at this meeting, Hrant was told, `Watch
yourself.'
Hrant sensed that he was going to be killed. The final column he wrote
before his murder was titled `My state is like that of a nervous
pigeon.' And like a pigeon, he was in a constant state of jumpiness.
He didn't trust the state, but he trusted in society, in the prudence
and conscience of the Muslim majority of Turkey.
Here is some of what he said in his final published words, just nine
days before his death: `Yes, I can see that my state is one of the
kind of nervous jumpiness that pigeons have, but at the same time I
know that the people of the country never harm pigeons. Pigeons are
able to carry on with their lives right in the middle of the city, in
the midst of crowds. Yes, they are a bit jumpy and scared, but they
are also completely free.'
And then, on Jan. 19, 2007, at 3:05 p.m., Hrant Dink was shot and
killed in front of his newspaper's building.
The murderer and those who had encouraged him were captured. And the
triggerman, Ogün Samast, was treated like a hero at the local police
station, where his photo was even taken in front of the Turkish flag.
The courts sentenced the suspects in this crime, but the court also
ruled that this was no organized crime. When objections started to
come in, the justice process was restarted. From the very start of the
process, intelligence sources and public officials were protected,
with the court decision rendered that there had been no negligence on
this front.
But last year, the stance taken by the government in this all, as well
as the stance of the investigation itself, suddenly changed. And
permission was finally granted for police officers connected to this
case to be investigated. In fact, some intelligence agent police
officers were even arrested, and now, the investigation continues.
But even with these latest developments in mind, there is no sense
that this renewed justice process is actually going to bring about
results, and more importantly, justice. Those who just yesterday saw
Hrant's murder as the result of a `sudden and unpredictable' action of
a young person are the same who today clamor to prove that it was a
job done by the `parallel state.' And so, just as they failed to tell
the truth in the past, they are not telling the truth now either. The
only real interest the ruling party has in this case is political.
There is no real effort, no interest, no worry about seeing justice
served.
It was the widow of Hrant Dink, Rakel Dink, who reminded us all of the
dimension in this murder that calls for real questioning, when,
referring to murderer Samast -- who was not even 18 years old when he
pulled the trigger -- she noted, `Without investigating the darkness
that turned this child into a murderer, nothing can be done.'
In dying, Hrant Dink turned into a symbol of Turkey's quest for
justice. Without illuminating the darkness, we cannot look to our
future with any sense of trust.
http://www.todayszaman.com/columnist/cafer-solgun/for-hrant-and-for-justice-_370242.html
Jan 19 2015
For Hrant, and for justice¦
by CAFER SOLGUN
January 19, 2015, Monday
A full eight years have passed since journalist Hrant Dink was
murdered on the sidewalk in front of the newspaper that he had
founded, and of which he was the editor-in-chief. Yes, a full eight
years¦ and we are still waiting for justice.
It would be difficult to find another murder that had announced itself
so openly in advance, the way the murder of Dink's did.
We all remember: A legal case was brought against Dink on the charges
that he had `insulted Turkishness.' The case was based on the racist
Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK). It would also be
difficult to find an example of a court case as clearly unfair as this
one was because, the truth is, `insulting Turkishness' was something
that would have never even occurred to Hrant Dink. But in the end, he
was targeted by dark forces.
Court hearings on his case turned into stages for racist shows by
Ergenekon-type forces. In the end, Hrant was sentenced by the court
for `insulting Turkishness,' and he said he was truly embarrassed of
being sentenced on such an accusation. For, after all, Dink was from
Turkey. He was a Turkish intellectual and journalist. He had nothing
to do with racism, with nationalism, with ignorance or with fanatical
thinking. He believed in the brotherhood of all peoples.
When the French Parliament accepted a law making it a crime not to
recognize the Armenian genocide, Hrant said, `I'm going to go to Paris
and yell in the city squares, `There was no Armenian genocide!'' He
was a democrat. And in the kind of democracy in which he believed,
there was no place for `buts,' for bans, for limitations.
But he was under threat. Instead of offering him protection, the state
made sure he was called into the Ä°stanbul Governor's Office, where he
was `officially' threatened; at this meeting, Hrant was told, `Watch
yourself.'
Hrant sensed that he was going to be killed. The final column he wrote
before his murder was titled `My state is like that of a nervous
pigeon.' And like a pigeon, he was in a constant state of jumpiness.
He didn't trust the state, but he trusted in society, in the prudence
and conscience of the Muslim majority of Turkey.
Here is some of what he said in his final published words, just nine
days before his death: `Yes, I can see that my state is one of the
kind of nervous jumpiness that pigeons have, but at the same time I
know that the people of the country never harm pigeons. Pigeons are
able to carry on with their lives right in the middle of the city, in
the midst of crowds. Yes, they are a bit jumpy and scared, but they
are also completely free.'
And then, on Jan. 19, 2007, at 3:05 p.m., Hrant Dink was shot and
killed in front of his newspaper's building.
The murderer and those who had encouraged him were captured. And the
triggerman, Ogün Samast, was treated like a hero at the local police
station, where his photo was even taken in front of the Turkish flag.
The courts sentenced the suspects in this crime, but the court also
ruled that this was no organized crime. When objections started to
come in, the justice process was restarted. From the very start of the
process, intelligence sources and public officials were protected,
with the court decision rendered that there had been no negligence on
this front.
But last year, the stance taken by the government in this all, as well
as the stance of the investigation itself, suddenly changed. And
permission was finally granted for police officers connected to this
case to be investigated. In fact, some intelligence agent police
officers were even arrested, and now, the investigation continues.
But even with these latest developments in mind, there is no sense
that this renewed justice process is actually going to bring about
results, and more importantly, justice. Those who just yesterday saw
Hrant's murder as the result of a `sudden and unpredictable' action of
a young person are the same who today clamor to prove that it was a
job done by the `parallel state.' And so, just as they failed to tell
the truth in the past, they are not telling the truth now either. The
only real interest the ruling party has in this case is political.
There is no real effort, no interest, no worry about seeing justice
served.
It was the widow of Hrant Dink, Rakel Dink, who reminded us all of the
dimension in this murder that calls for real questioning, when,
referring to murderer Samast -- who was not even 18 years old when he
pulled the trigger -- she noted, `Without investigating the darkness
that turned this child into a murderer, nothing can be done.'
In dying, Hrant Dink turned into a symbol of Turkey's quest for
justice. Without illuminating the darkness, we cannot look to our
future with any sense of trust.
http://www.todayszaman.com/columnist/cafer-solgun/for-hrant-and-for-justice-_370242.html