Click to read the article in Turkish
The Bakırköy 2nd Heavy Penal Court ruled that İlhan Matyar should be released. In the related ruling of the court, it was written that the defendant would be arrested again and he should not be released for that reason.
İlhan Matyar is still held in Silivri No. 5 Type L Prison.
Efkan Bolaç, his attorney, appealed to the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) and filed a complaint against the judge who had his signature under the verdict. The court board consisting of three judges gave the verdict of release with the signature of this single judge.
Verdict of release 'for a reason not cited in the law'
In Bolaç's petition of complaint, it was underlined that "not knowing the law was an excuse for citizens, but not for judges."
"My client was released with a verdict entitled 'RELEASE ON PAPER'. However, while the verdict should have been given by the board of the heavy penal court, the verdict has the signature of a single judge. And the verdict of release was given by making up a reason not cited in the law."
In the justification of the verdict, it was indicated, "In talks with the information technologies managers of the National Judiciary Informatics System (UYAP), it has been understood that in order for the verdict given by our court for defendant İlhan Matyar on October 31, 2019 to be active on the UYAP system, the verdict of arrest no. 2016/306 previously given by the Bakırköy 7th Penal Judgeship of Peace on June 14, 2016 is to be removed from the system (release) and a new record of arrest is to be formed as per the additional verdict dated October 31, 2019..."
'It has no place in the law or legal history'
Attorney Bolaç has said, "Instead of making the unlawful situation conform to the law, the judge made it conform to the UYAP system."
At the bottom of the document, there was a note: "As a writ of release is to be issued so that a writ of arrest could be issued against the defendant, it is formed on paper and the defendant will not be released."
This note of "Don't release the defendant" was evaluated in the petition in following words: "They have given a verdict that has no place in any law and, perhaps, will not have another example in our legal history. The proceedings of arrest were undertaken following this odd verdict of release."
'He should be outside now'
İlhan Matyar from Siirt stood trial on charge of "propagandizing for the Kurdistan Workers Party / the Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front (PKK/DHKP-C)" over his tweets. He was sentenced to 4 years, 8 months, 7 days in prison by the Bakırköy 2nd Heavy Penal Court in 2016.
In the year when the above verdict was given, the Bakırköy 40th Penal Court of First Instance ruled that he should also be sentenced to 3 years, 4 months in prison for "accommodating wagers" as per the Law no. 7258.
The Prosecutor's Office set his date of release on probation as August 14, 2021. However, İlhan Matyar could not benefit from the right of release on probation that was introduced by the Statutory Decree no. 671 two years before the end of his execution.
In his petition to the HSK, attorney Bolaç indicated that "if my client had been enabled to benefit from the Statutory Decree no. 671, he should be outside now as per the articles on supervised release."
'He should have been released in the 30th month'
In his petition to the HSK, Bolaç explained the situation in following words:
"Including the period foreseen for the supervised release, my client was sentenced to 56 months, 7 days in prison. As per the Anti-Terror Law, the prison terms shall be executed by three quarters.
"Moreover, given that the offense in question is not an organized crime according to the jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation, he will be subjected to a one-year probation. Taken together, he should have been released on probation at the end of the 30th month. However, my client has been arrested for 40 months and is now in prison as a convict."
It has been three months since this petition was written. Matyar is still behind bars. (AS/SD)
