Malatya Massacre Trial Questions The Ergenekon Connection

The 3rd High Criminal Court of Malatya which is trying the massacre of the three Protestants in Malatya is getting ready to ask the 13th High Criminal Court of Istanbul if there is a connection between their files.

The 13th hearing of the case was held yesterday (November 21). The court will ask the court in Istanbul, which is trying the Ergenekon case, if there can be any connection between their cases.

Three Protestants Necati Aydın, Uğur Yüksel and German citizen Tilman Ekkehart were murdered in the office of the Zirve Publication on April 18, 2007.

The court will ask the prosecutor’s office about the neglect of the police department  

Suspects Emre Günaydın, Salih ürler, Cuma Özdemir, Hamit Çeker and Abuzer Yıldırım were brought to the court from the Malatya E Type Prison, where they have been for the last 19 months, under high security measures. They are accused of “establishing an armed organization” and “committing murder.”

The court will ask the prosecutor’s office whether r not administrative investigation was launched about the possibility of a neglect on the part of the police department. The court rejected the demand by Gürler’s lawyer regarding widening the scope of the investigation.

The trial will continue on January 16

The court told the lawyers who joined the case as the parties of interest in the case to tell the court what kind of information the witnesses they want to hear have about the case in 25 days. The court also decide to get the opinion of the prosecutor’s office until the next hearing date, January 16.

In the previous hearing on October 16, Varol Bülent Aral was heard as a witness regarding his connection with the most important suspect of the case Günaydın, who had told the court previously that he had worked with Aral at a local newspaper. Aral is also known as the person who threatened one of the lawyers who joined the case, Orhan Kemal Cengiz.

At the previous hearing, Günaydın had wanted from Aral to explain to the court how he was going to provide him with the state support. Aral’s reply was that he had not promised any support. He had also said he had not known lawyer Cengiz.

Aral had also said that among the suspect, he had met Günaydın only during the three days he had worked at the newspaper Malatya Birlik in the autumn of 2006. He had also said that they had not talked about the missionaries, but the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK).

Günaydın had insisted that he had talked about missionaries with Aral, otherwise, he had said, how he would have known so much about the subject. But when the judge asked Günaydın whether Aral had convinced him to do what he had done, he decided to use his right not to answer the question.(EÖ/TB)