Three Dink Murder Defendants Released from Jail
It is assumed that the young hitman and his associates are the front to a more sinister backdrop of security officers who did nothing to prevent the murder despite having previous knowledge of such plans.
Eighth trial hearing
At the eighth hearing of the trial on 26 January, the defence demanded the release of five of the eight defendants in detention. The court decided to release Tuncay Uzundal, Mustafa Öztürk and Zeynel Abidin Yavuz to be tried without detention.
The court further decided to demand a list of the phone conversations and banking transactions of Colonel Ali Öz, Trabzon Province Gendarmerie Commander at the time of the murder.
Connections with Ergenekon to be investigated
It was also decided to study the mobile phone records of the Dink suspects in order to see whether there were connections with suspected members of the clandestine ultra-nationalist Ergenekon organisation.
Defendant Osman Hayal, who had been added to the suspects after it emerged that he had been in Istanbul on the day of Dink’s murder, accused defendant Erhan Tuncel, who is said to have been a police informer. Referring to his brother, Yasin Hayal, Osman said, “Whatever happened to him was because of Tuncel.”
Tuncel denied this and said that the reverse was true, to which Osman said, “It was you who received a wage.” Because Yasin Hayal then insulted Tuncel, he was taken out of the courtroom.
Osman Hayal said in his statement that he had no connections to the murder.
Suspected hitman Ogün Samast did not attend the hearing, claiming to be unwell.
Defence lawyer Turgut to be taken off case
Fuat Turgut, one of the defence lawyers, insulted the joint attorneys. He handed journalists a text in which he insulted Hrant Dink and the movement of intellectuals who are pressing for justice in this case. The text was littered with racist expressions.
The court decided that because Turgut is himself a defendant in the Ergenekon case, he could not act as a defence lawyer for the Dink murder suspects.
Information received by court
The court reported that the Istanbul Police Department had answered its written questions. According to the police, Dink never asked for police protection and that no other public bodies asked for Dink to be provided with protection.
Presiding judge Erkan Çanak said that the court had also received the report of the Prime Ministerial Investigation Committee.
He also announced that five people in Silivri prison for other crimes would be called as witnesses to this case.
In the afternoon, Trabzon police officers Mehmet Ayhan and Özkan Mumcu said in their statements that they did not trust the intelligence Erhan Tuncel provided them with at that time and confirmed it with information from another source. Despite the insistent questioning of the lawyers, they would not reveal this source.
Trial is being followed closely
The court case was attended by Turkish and international journalists, as well as MP Zafer Üskül, the head of the Parliamentary Human Rights Committee, MPs Sebahat Tuncel and Akın Birdal from the Democratic Society Party (DTP), MP Ufuk Uras from the Freedom and Solidarity Party (ÖDP), and Sema Kılıçer, a Turkey representative of the European Commission.
Members of Hrant Dink’s family also attended the hearing.
Kılıçer told bianet that an indepth investigation and trial of the murder were vital for fulfilling the political criteria for EU accession.
MP Tuncel said that while no one could bring Hrant Dink back, a just trial would “open the path for all the people struggling for freedom and justice.”
MP Birdal said that the Ergenekon investigation had deprived the Dink suspects of their protection.
Rally preceded hearing
Like on the other hearing dates, this hearing was also preceded by a rally at Beşiktaş ferry jetty. Around 500 people joined the rally. Actor Mahir Günşıray, representing the Friends of Hrant group who is following the court case, read a press statement. He said, “As long as we don’t see public employees in the defence seat, it is difficult to believe that justice is being done.”
Joint attorneys following the case have said in an evaluation of the case so far that plans for the murder were well-known before, but that they still have not received any answer to the question as to why the murder was not prevented.
The lawyers repeated their call for separate investigations and trials in Istanbul, Samsun and Trabzon to be merged and for public officers to be questioned and prosecuted. (EÜ/AG)
* Alberto Tetta contributed to this news item.