‘Hrant Dink murder case still continues; not only at court, but also in consciences’

* Photo: Emrah Yorulmaz / AA

Click to read the article in Turkish

The third lawsuit filed into the assassination of Agos Newspaper Editor-in-Chief Hrant Dink on January 19, 2007 ended on March 26 after 5 years. 26 defendants were convicted and penalized in the 77-defendant trial. While the Dink Family has defined the ruling as "far from the truth", the attorneys of the family have announced that they will appeal against the ruling.

Making a statement after the hearing, Hrant's Friends said that the trial ended "for now" and stressed that "the ruling handed down by the court has not lifted the dark veil covering up the murder." Noting that the ones who said "Kill him" were not put on trial, they reiterated their demand for justice, adding that their struggle and the case will continue till justice is served.

Bülent Aydın, one of Hrant's Friends, has spoken to bianet about the ruling handed down by the court after 14 years.

'Answers we are looking for are not there'

In the third trial over the murder of Hrant Dink, the court gave a ruling of 37 acquittals and 26 convictions. Were the convicted ones the real perpetrators? How do you think we should see this ruling?

The vast majority of the defendants put on trial in this case were related to the murder process in one way or another. In fact, at one hearing, one of the defendants protested, saying, "Am I the only responsible person for a murder which was known by 100 people beforehand?"

There are of course others, among the responsible ones, who could not be put on trial in this case. There are those for whom no permit for investigation was given, there are those who were summoned to justify at court as a witness, but could not be brought to court... They were mentioned in the petitions of request submitted by Dink Family's attorneys several times.

A systematic and comprehensive judicial process was never the case. In spite of all these, so much information and documents came up in the 14-year judicial process and in the trial of public officials since 2016... It is the first time in this country that so many public officials have been put on trial in a political murder case and some of them have been penalized.

Who decided that this murder be committed? Where and how? How was the process carried out? We still do not know it.

Why wasn't Hrant Dink protected? Despite the preparations for the murder which was known beforehand, why didn't a single official move even his finger to protect him and to prevent the hitmen and the instigators? Why didn't even a single one of so many officials do his duty?

The ruling does not have an answer to these questions.

From the very beginning, the trial proceeded with its scope determined beforehand. Those who designed and ran a lynch campaign against Hrant Dink as of 2004, those who threatened him and made him suffer at courts, those who came to his door and insulted him are not in this trial.

In fact, as written by Hrant Dink himself until his passing, the real perpetrators must be sought among those who made the country unbearable for him for years... That was why we met in front of the courthouse before every hearing and cried out, "Put the ones who said 'Kill him' on trial."

'As if so many hearings had not been held'

In the Hrant Dink murder case, did the state do what a state of law is supposed to do? Was a complete trial held?

The murder should have been addressed in such a way to include the background and aftermath of this process as well as its all partners. But, it was not the case. All through the hearings, the requests of the Dink Family's attorneys for the extension of the investigation were not met. The predetermined scope of the case was not allowed to be extended.

The application of right violation made by the intervening party was rejected by the Constitutional Court on the weird ground that "the trial was still ongoing." This issue was taken to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). As for the ruling handed down in the 131st hearing, it was a ruling that was given as if all those hearings had not been held. It was a ruling, the boundaries of which had been set by the indictment and the prosecutor's final opinion as to the accusations. It had major deficiencies.

'A ruling that does not satisfy consciences'

Before pronouncing the ruling, Presiding Judge Akın Gürlek said, "We reached a conscientious conclusion." He also expressed the opinion that the murder was "committed in line with the aims of the Fethullahist Terrorist Organization (FETÖ)". The murder was previously associated with "Ergenekon". What would you like to say about the "attempts to associate the murder with an organization"?

In the first case where the hitmen were put on trial, there was also this stage of "sensitive nationalist youth." All these restrictive attempts have led to a diversion from a fair investigation of the murder, hidden the real culprits and hindered the disclosure of the truth in all aspects.

In the process of lynch against Hrant Dink, in paving the way for his murder, enabling this murder, making the evidence disappear later on and producing fake documents, there were people from Gülen community involved, just as there were those who had nothing to do with them. There are hundreds of pieces of evidence in the court documents that prove it.

Throughout the hearings, some of these people accused one another. Different units of Security and Intelligence tried to put the blame on each other. In fact, the truths showed the responsibility of them all. And, in the end, a ruling that does not satisfy the consciences has come up, as it was also the case in the first ruling which was overturned afterwards.

'It has always been ignored'

Has Turkey finally been able to face the hate crime that led to Hrant Dink's death?

We are not in a better position in terms of racism and hate crime that took Hrant Dink away from us. On that dark day when we walked behind his coffin from one corner of İstanbul to the other, saying, "We are all Hrant, we are all Armenian", a tear was perhaps made in that dark mindset.

Perhaps, this trial could have also been an opportunity in terms of facing racism and hate crime. But, as is also the case in the ruling, the main reason was always ignored throughout the hearings, let alone facing it.

'We will keep raising our demand for justice'

When will justice be served for Hrant Dink and for those who walk alongside him?

Yes, a ruling has been handed down in the trial that started with 85 defendants and ended with 76 defendants; but, this trial has not yet been over. Throughout the appeals processes, we, as Hrant's Friends, will keep on expressing our demand for justice.

This is a trial that continues not only at courts, but in consciences as well. And the conscientious people of this country will also keep on raising the demand for justice in front of Agos every January 19. Until all perpetrators of this murder receive the penalty that they deserve and all partners of this heinous murder are brought to account...

Who decided to kill Hrant Dink to silence him? Where and how did they do it? How did the process that started in 2004 proceed? Why wasn't Hrant Dink protected? Despite the preparations for the murder known by all relevant institutions of the state almost a year before, why didn't a single official move even his finger to protect him and prevent the hitmen and instigators?

Justice will not be served until the answers of these questions are fully revealed. Let's reiterate what we said in front of the courthouse after the ruling: This trial will not end until we say so! (HA/SD)