The retrial of six defendants in connection with the 2020 fireworks factory explosion in Hendek, Sakarya, which left seven workers dead and over 120 injured, continued today at the Sakarya 1st Heavy Penal Court following a mixed ruling from the Court of Cassation.
Among the defendants is factory owner Yaşar Coşkun, who attended the hearing remotely from prison. Two non-detained defendants, occupational safety expert Aslı Bozkurt and plant manager Ahmet Çağırıcı, were present in the courtroom, along with victims’ families, survivors, and legal representatives.
The prosecutor reiterated the opinion submitted at the previous hearing, calling for the court to uphold its initial decision, convict the defendants under the original charges, and maintain Coşkun’s detention.
Sakarya fireworks blast: Amount of stored explosives was above legal limits, experts find
Plaintiffs and their lawyers opposed the prosecutor’s recommendation, urging the court to base its decision on the Court of Cassation’s ruling, which said the case should involve "probable intent" rather than "negligence" and insisting that Coşkun remain in custody.
Coşkun accepted the prosecutor’s opinion but objected to the continuation of his detention. “The details of the sentence enforcement are already clear. I have already spent the duration meant for a lower-security facility in a high-security one,” he said.
“The Court of Cassation made a decision without reading the case file. If they had read it, the ruling should have been reversed in my favor. I was made to accept the sentence given by the Court of Cassation. I am the victim here. I request to be released," the factory owner further said.
Coşkun’s lawyers also asked the court to stand by its previous ruling and release their client.
Bozkurt and Çağırıcı denied the charges and requested acquittal.
The panel of judges ordered that Coşkun remain in custody and granted time for all parties to prepare their final statements before adjourning the hearing.
Protest before hearing
Prior to the trial, a group gathered outside the courthouse under a banner reading “Justice for Hendek.”
Lawyer Evren İşler criticized the prolonged legal process despite the Court of Cassation’s ruling.
“We’re here today to demand justice and to insist on sentencing for probable intent,” she said. “There is no such thing as death being part of the job. We’re fighting so people don’t die just for trying to earn a living. While one side protects business owners, we are on the side of those who want to live. We are the ones who are right. We will win this fight together.”
Muammer Yılmaz, the father of victim Halis Yılmaz, also spoke during the gathering, saying he wanted to see justice served.
The demonstration was attended by family members of the deceased, lawyers, and Ayça Taşkent, a member of parliament from the Republican People’s Party (CHP) representing Sakarya.
Background
On Jul 3, 2020, an explosion at the Coşkunlar Fireworks factory in Hendek, Sakarya, killed seven people and injured 127. Five suspects, including the factory’s owners, were detained shortly after the incident. One suspect was released under judicial control.
Ahmet Coşkun, who was injured in the blast, was later included in the trial as both a complainant and a defendant.
On Feb 28, 2022, the Sakarya 1st Heavy Penal Court sentenced factory owners Yaşar Coşkun and Ali Rıza Ergenç Coşkun to 16 years and 3 months in prison each for “causing multiple deaths and injuries through conscious negligence.” Defendant Hasan Ali Velioğlu received 12 years and 6 months.
Four other defendants, Erşan Öztürk, Asiye Angın, Aslı Bozkurt, and Ahmet Çağırıcı, were sentenced to 6 years and 8 months each for “causing multiple deaths and injuries through negligence.” Velioğlu was released, taking into account time already served.
However, the Court of Cassation later upheld the sentence for Ali Rıza Ergenç Coşkun but overturned the conviction against Yaşar Coşkun, ruling that his actions should have been evaluated under “probable intent to kill and injure,” not “conscious negligence.” The court found that the lower court had misclassified the offense and failed to support its verdict with sufficient reasoning.
The Court of Cassation also rejected the sentences for the other defendants on similar grounds, citing legal errors and inadequate justification for the charges. Following this decision, the retrial of the six remaining defendants began.
(HA/VK)
-132.jpg)
