Click to read the article in Turkish / Kurdish
The 113th hearing of the lawsuit filed against public officials over the killing of Agos Newspaper's Editor-in-Chief Hrant Dink was held at the İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court today (December 17). While the court board started hearing the statements of defense as to the accusations, Hakan Bakırcıoğlu, an attorney of the Dink family, took the floor first.
CLICK - 2 days for statements of defense in a 4-year trial
CLICK - Prosecutor demands prison sentence for 53 defendants in Hrant Dink murder case
In the previous hearing held on Tuesday (December 15), attorney Bakırcıoğlu requested 2 months to 2.5 months to prepare the statement as to the accusations; however, Presiding Judge Akın Gürlek disregarded this request and adjourned the hearing for two days.
Sharing a brief summary of the 4-year trial in his defense, Bakırcıoğlu said that it was not possible to make a defense in two days. Accordingly, the attorney declared that he would not make a statement.
'Intelligence officers not heard'
Hakan Bakırcıoğlu also referred to the petition that he had submitted to the court at the hearing on September 15, 2020.
The attorney reiterated that the National Intelligence Organization (MİT) officers who met Hrant Dink at the İstanbul Governor's Office on February 24, 2004 did not come to court to testify. Bakırcıoğlu also reminded the court board that it had reversed its decision to hear the MİT İstanbul Regional Chair Ahmet Köksoy as a witness as part of the trial.
The attorney went on to say that the prosecutor's office presented its written opinion as to the accusations to the case file on December 14; however, at the hearing on December 15, the prosecutor did not declare his opinion verbally, but only repeated the opinion that he had presented. Bakırcıoğlu noted that the opinion of the prosecutor was notified to them after the 112th hearing was held on December 15.
Reminding the court board and the audience that the judicial process over the killing of Hrant Dink had been going on for 14 years, the attorney said, "...the time that we, as the intervening party, requested for our statements as to the merits of the case and to the opinion as to the accusations of the prosecutor's office with the aim of disclosing the material facts and the truth was not given to us by your court."
The attorney further underlined that "it was not possible for them to present a statement covering the statements of the witnesses and defendants and evidence within two days, considering the scope of the case file."
"It is also obvious that an opinion that we present in the meantime will not have any seriousness," he added. Accordingly, the attorney of the Dink family said that they would not present a statement as to the merits of the case or to the opinion as to the accusations for this reason.
Defense of defendants
Following the speech of attorney Bakırcıoğlu, the arrested defendants expressed their request to speak. However, Presiding Judge Gürlek said that he would allow the arrested defendants to speak at the end.
After Gürlek asked whether the non-arrested defendants would like to make a statement, Adem Sarıgöl, the owner of IQ publishing, said that his attorney was late for the hearing. Sarıgöl also added, "I refer journalists to God." Adem Sarıgöl requested his acquittal.
Afterwards, Specialized Sergeant Abdullah Dinç from the İstanbul Gendarmerie Command's Intelligence Branch Directorate took the floor. Making a brief defense, he reminded that he had been arrested for nearly a year as part of the trial. "I was released after it was understood that I was innocent," he said. Regarding two successive call records, he said that he had not used the phone. Dinç requested his acquittal.
The attorney of Mustafa Küçük from the İstanbul Gendarmerie Command said that there had not yet been the conditions where his client could make a statement. Indicating that the two-day time given for the defenses was not sufficient, Küçük's attorney said that the opinion was missing and faulty. Saying that they had their requests, the attorney demanded time.
Next hearing on December 22-23-24
Following the statements of Hüseyin Yılmaz, Volkan Şahin and Atilla Güçlüoğlu, Presiding Judge Akın Gürlek announced that he would hand down his interlocutory judgement if there was no one else who would like to make a statement. Indicating that the defenses as to the accusations will continue on December 22-23-24, he has announced the persons who will make defense on the specified days:
Adnan Acar, Cevat Eser, Atilla Güçlüoğlu, Metehan Kadir Yıldırım, Muhammer Ay, Niyazi Malkoç, Rahmi Özer and their attorneys on December 22; Resül Kütükoğlu, Tevfik Cantürk, Ünsal Gürel, Ahmet Çetiner, Ahmet Faruk Aydoğdu, Ahmet ilhan Güler, Birol Ustaoğlu and their attorneys on December 23; Engin Dinç, Eyup Temel, Hacı Ömer Ünalır, Hasan Durmuşoğlu, Hüseyin Yılmaz, Mikdat Özbek, Murat Bayrak, Musa Yıldırım and their attorneys on December 24.
Who is who in the Hrant Dink murder case?Ankara
İstanbul
Trabzon
Samsun
Civilians
|
Hrant Dink murder caseIn the lawsuit filed into the killing of Hrant Dink, the specially authorized 14th Heavy Penal Court handed down its ruling on 19 defendants on January 17, 2012. Arrested defendant Yasin Hayal was sentenced to aggravated life sentence on charge of "incitement to premeditated murder", 3 months in prison for threatining writer Orhan Pamuk and 1 year in prison for "possession of unregistered arm." He was acquitted of "leading an armed terrorist organization." While the court ruled that Erhan Tuncel, one of the arrested defendants, should be sentenced to 10 years, 6 months in prison and ruled for his release, it sentenced Ersin Yolcu to 12 years, 6 months, Ahmet İskender to 13 years, 4 months and Salih Hacısalihoğlu to 2 months, 15 days in prison. All defendants were acquitted of "membership in an armed terrorist organization." The 9th Penal Chamber of the Court of Cassation reversed the verdict of the local court on "organization" charges and ruled that the defendants should be retried for being the members of "an organization established to commit crimes", not being the members of "an armed terrorist organization." Upholding the conviction of Yasin Hayal on charges of "incitement to deliberate murder" and "threatening Orhan Pamuk", the Court of Cassation reversed the acquittal of Yasin Hayal on charges of "establishing and leading an armed terrorist organization", concluding that he should be convicted of "establishing and leading a criminal organization." While the Court of Cassation upheld the conviction of Erhan Tuncel on charge of "producing explosive substance", it reversed his acquittal of "incitement to willful murder" on the grounds that he should be convicted for having aided the Hrant Dink murder. Case file at the 14th Heavy Penal Court, again Following the Court of Cassation verdict, the retrial began at the İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court. After six hearings were held at this court, the file was sent to the İstanbul 5th Heavy Penal Court as the heavy penal courts specially authorized as per the Article 10 of the Anti-Terror Law (TMK) were abolished. Accepting the indictment against public officials, the İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court sent the case file to the İstanbul 5th Heavy Penal Court so that it would be merged with the main trial of eight defendants, including Ogün Samast, Yasin Hayal and Erhan Tuncel, the verdicts of whom had been reversed. The board of the İstanbul 5th Heavy Penal Court returned the case file to the İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court on the grounds that "consent was not requested in the ruling for merging the case files, the court was not authorized to hear terror crimes, the trial was at a further stage in the main case and there was no common defendant between the ones put on trial in this case and the public officials to be put on trial in the new case." The 5th Penal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, who examined the files to resolve the dispute between the courts, merged the two files and ruled that the cases should be heard by the İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court. The İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court ruled that the new trial of 50 defendants including gendarmerie officials should be merged with the main trial of 35 defendants including Ogün Samast, Erhan Tuncel and former security directors Ramazan Akyürek, Ali Fuat Yılmazer and Coşgun Çakır. New indictment While the trial was ongoing, the prosecutor conducting the investigation lodged a new indictment and demanded aggravated life sentence on charge of "attempting to overthrow the constitutional order" for 51 defendants including Fetullah Gülen, former prosecutor Zekeriya Öz, Editor-in-Chief of the closed Zaman newspaper Ekrem Dumanlu, journalists Adem Yavuz Arslan, Ercan Gün and dismissed Brigadier General Hamza Celepoğlu, the then Trabzon Provincial Gendarmerie Commander Ali Öz, Trabzon Gendarmerie Intelligence Branch Director Metin Yıldız and İstanbul Gendarmerie Intelligence Officer Lieutenant Muharrem Demirkale. The indictment also demanded that 40 defendants including Öz and gendarmerie officers be sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment on charge of "participating in the murder." Prison sentence for defendants in the main trial At the hearing on June 13, 2019, the İstanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court ruled that the case files of nine main defendants including Ogün Samast and Yasin Hayal should be separated from the others. Handing down its judgement on July 17, 2019, the court ruled that Erhan Tuncel should be sentenced to 99 years, 6 months in total on charges of "attempted murder with premeditation and by using a bomb, damage to property, being a member of a criminal organization and aiding a wilful murder", Yasin Hayal to 7 years, 6 months in prison for "establishing and leadign an armed criminal organization" and Ogün Samast to 2 years, 6 months in prison on charge of "being a member of an armed criminal organization." The court also sentenced Zeynel Abidin Yavuz to 14 years, 22 days, Tuncay Uzundal to 16 years, 10 months, 15 days and Ahmet İskender and Ersin Yolcu to 1 year, 10 months, 15 days in prison each on similar charges. Defendants Salih Hacısalihoğlu and Osman Hayal were acquitted by the court. |
(HA/SD)
-13.jpg)
