Click to read the article in Turkish / Kurdish
ISIS launched a suicide attack against the people who met in the Amara Cultural Center in Urfa's Suruç to bring toys to children in Kobanî. The attack claimed the lives of 33 people on July 20, 2015.
The trial over the Suruç massacre, where the defendants are charged with being members / leaders of ISIS, is still ongoing. While there is only one defendant who is not a fugitive, he is not arrested pending trial.
Rejection for one person because of 'death'
In the application to the Constitutional Court, it was said that the right to life was violated as the necessary measures were not taken by public officials. In the detailed ruling published in the Official Gazette today (October 5), the Court has rejected the applications of 13 people on different grounds.
The allegations of eight applicants have been found inadmissible on the grounds that the legal remedies have not been exhausted. While the applications regarding the violation of the right to life of four people have been unanimously found manifestly ill-founded, the Constitutional Court has ruled that the application of one person shall drop as he lost his life in 2020.
According to the top court's detailed ruling, the application of Mehmet Şerif Akhamur has been dropped because of his death; the applications of Ceren Çoban, Dilek Kaya, Mehmet Özkan, Nimet Yurtgül, Sultan Yıldız, Ümran Akhamur, Yağmur Şeker Özer and Yasin Can have been found inadmissible as the legal remedies have not been exhausted; and the applications of Ali Sadet, Sunay Sadet, Özgen Sadet and Özge Sadet Semiz have been found inadmissible because they are manifestly ill-founded.
Court has found allegations 'abstract'
In their application to the top court, the applicants indicated that the public authorities did not even take minimum measures to prevent the attack from taking place despite the intelligence, no inquiry was undertaken about the politicians and public officials who were responsible for the incident and the right to life and right to an effective remedy were violated.
In the face of this argument, the Constitutional Court has commented that "without putting forward any concrete evidence to underpin their complaints, the applicants are seen to argue in an abstract manner that security forces were in a systematic negligence towards DAESH [ISIS] members."
(AS/SD)
