'ISIS members convicted in the massacre case are outside among us'

On the anniversary of the October 10th massacre, we discussed the trial process, the court's stance, what was investigated, and what was left in the dark with lawyer Senem Doğanoğlu, one of the intervening attorneys in the case.

The court limited the trial only to captured ISIS militants, did not answer their investigation requests, told them, "Be content with this," said Lawyer Doğanoğlu for the trial that ended for the detained defendants. The trial of fugitive defendants is still ongoing.

She also added that public officials whose responsibility or negligence was revealed in the massacre, even those mentioned in inspector reports, were not even called to the court, not even as witnesses.

Photo: Ekmek ve Gül

How did the judicial process up to this point progress? You have consistently pointed out that there was no effective investigation and prosecution. What were the most significant shortcomings?

On August 3, 2018, when a decision was made regarding those who were detained, and the court stated the following: "We have made a decision on 19 ISIS militants, 9 of whom are responsible for the massacre, and in our view, the case is over. We tracked the suicide bomber in white shoes, unraveled the moment of the massacre, and even though we have not yet identified him, we have also figured out who could be related to him. We will not prosecute what happened before or after. You should be content with this. The prosecution of those we have not apprehended will come next." In short, they said, "Accept this outcome."

“Inspector's report revealed the negligence of public officials”

Fundamentally, despite the clear responsibility of the state in the massacre, not a single public official was brought before the court, and thus, before the public, not even as a witness.

The report prepared by the Ministry of Interior Inspectors, although limited to Ankara, revealed the negligence of many public officials in this massacre. Nevertheless, the court and the prosecution built a very strong barrier against the inclusion of these individuals as defendants in our case.

“State's responsibility revealed in official documents”

Nevertheless, the files from Gaziantep Heavy Penal Courts included in the case, the communication tracking files of the defendants, and responses to correspondences with public institutions in Gaziantep and various parts of the country indicated that the October 10 Ankara Massacre was not unexpected, and that the responsibility of the state was much broader. However, the case was hastily closed before our efforts in this regard could yield results.

With the indictment prepared as a result of the incomplete investigation, the judiciary demanded satisfaction with the ISIS members who were already made defendants, and only imposed sentences for membership in the organization for the suspects did not directly participate in the October 10 Ankara Train Station massacre, but who were responsible for the ISIS organization in Turkey and who underwent training within the organization in Syria. 

Some of these defendants, are already out of prison and among us, and the remaining will be released from prison very soon. ISIS, being a highly functional apparatus, naturally posed a greater threat than anticipated, not only for Turkey but also globally, and some of the most significant militants will be among us.

“Fugitives continue to carry out ISIS activities”

The trial of fugitive defendants is still ongoing. How is this process progressing? 

Sixteen of the defendants who planned the massacre are still fugitives, and they are currently continuing ISIS activities in various parts of the country or the world.

There are also 32 individuals in the case who are identified as planners of the massacre but whose names have not been determined, and our requests for their identification and capture were disregarded during the trial. Efforts were made to identify them in the trial related to the fugitives. Thus, the court has undermined finding their connections with the defendants for whom decisions were made.

Not regarded "a crime against humanity"

There are many more hidden and carefully concealed issues, but lastly, and also applicable to the ongoing case, our request for the massacre to be considered a crime against humanity from the first day and for punishment to be carried out accordingly has been rejected, and this has also affected the incomplete investigation and prosecution processes.

Although later an indictment was prepared against defendant Erman Ekici for crimes against humanity in connection with his responsibility in the massacre, the Court of Cassation also classified the October 10 massacre as a "crime committed against the constitutional order and the state."

“Syrian civil war has given suspects immunity”

What important information have you gathered, and what points have become clearer regarding the attack over the years, based on the statements of the defendants and the documents you have witnessed in the trials?

The defendants still prefer not to speak about the October 10 massacre. They also maintain silence regarding the organization's network.

However, the cases in which the defendants have been tried separately, the Ministry of Interior Inspector's report, and most importantly, the folders left on a bench in the courthouse four years after the massacre have provided us with a clear picture: These defendants and many others have been significant organizers of jihadist organizations in Turkey for many years, constantly monitored in their activities related to the spread of this ideology, including their travels in and out of the country including to Afghanistan, and that they have been under "supervised release."

Their quick organization in response to the oath-taking process with ISIS and to fight on its behalf during the Syria civil war made them immune for years.

“Dozens of intelligence pieces”

The inspector's report revealed that there was intelligence in the police department indicating that suicide bomber Yunus Emre Alagöz was planning such an attack in Turkey, and there was intelligence on September 14, 2015, that there would be an attack at a rally, but this intelligence was not communicated.

The report also highlighted the movement at border crossings and the existence of dozens of intelligence reports on the individuals facilitating these movements, indicating that these pieces of intelligence were not acted upon.

Missing Folders

Once again, the so-called missing folders, which are pieces of evidence collected during the investigation but not included in the case file, revealed that on September 30, 2015, Nizip (district) Police became alarmed when the perpetrator of the October 10 massacre, Yakup Şahin, attempted to purchase a large quantity of fertilizer. However, Antep (province) Police took no action.

either the Ankara Police, nor the the prosecutors leading the massacre investigation saw the need to include these findings in the indictment, which are important not only for determining the state's responsibility but also for not casting doubt on the nature and definition of the sentences imposed on the perpetrators.

Simply looking at the documents, the records of what an already organized apparatus would do during a critical period that changed Turkey's political history, which had been collected in advance, was very disturbing to see for all of us.

Sadece belgelere bakınca, zaten yıllardır örgütlenmiş bir aparat yapının Türkiye siyasal tarihini kritik bir şekilde değiştiren bir dönemde ne yapacağının kayıtlarının da önceden toplanmış olması, hepimizde bir çeşit dehşet duygusu uyandıran bir tabloydu.

“We have no information about actions taken in the case file”

You mentioned that no action was taken against ISIS militants who were found to be connected to the massacre and whose identities were known. What efforts have you made in this regard, and how were your requests addressed?

As I mentioned earlier, the court took action in this regard by closing the file for the detainees and initiating proceedings in the ongoing case against the fugitives. Similarly, the court filed a criminal complaint at our request to identify the ISIS commander with the code name Abu Zeynep, who was responsible for ordering the massacre.

We also filed a criminal complaint regarding Muhammed Cengiz Dayan, who was interrogated right at the beginning of the massacre, but no action was taken against him. All these investigations were consolidated in the same case.

Initially, we were submitting petitions with documents we obtained from the case file or other files to identify the perpetrators. However, in 2021, a sudden restriction was imposed, and we lost access to the case file. Our objections because the restriction decision was made for the suspects, and it could not be applied to the complainants were unsuccessful. Bending and twisting the law, our appeal was rejected on the grounds that we had no right to appeal.

Therefore, we have no information about what actions have been taken in the case, or whether any actions have been taken at all. However, if there were any actions taken they would be reflected in the trial, and the fact that there has been an investigation left open for four years suggests that the direct perpetrators of the October 10 massacre have still not been punished, and that both the investigation and the now concluded trial have not been capable of responding to the demand for justice from the beginning.

“The then Governor of Gaziantep became the Minister of Interior”

Despite various complaints, public officials were not prosecuted. What have been the consequences of this impunity, who do you believe are responsible for this, and are public officials still in their positions, and what roles are they performing?

With the exception of those who have retired, public officials are still actively serving. In fact, the former Governor of Gaziantep became the Minister of Interior. The Head of the Intelligence Department became the Chief of Police in Ankara. The relevant prosecutors moved to the Court of Cassation. In short, there has been no difference in their careers as a whole. The entire process served as a special example of how the prevention, investigation, and even the prosecution of a massacre could fail at every stage.

The fact that not a single public official has been held accountable at any stage limited the issue of state responsibility in the October 10 Ankara massacre to a matter of compensation. Especially, it was politically and legally made impossible to discuss the negligence of the state.

“Hidden reports contain wiretaps and surveillance files”

Despite winning the lawsuit opened to obtain the Ministry of Interior Inspectors' report, which reveals the responsibilities of public officials, the documents have still not been handed over to you today. What information do you have about the contents of this report?

First and foremost, let us state that the General Directorate of Security has effectively made the court decision unenforceable. These reports are very important because they contain wiretaps, physical surveillance files, and intelligence related to the Antep and Adıyaman aspects of the massacre, the defendants, and other possible perpetrators.

It is clear that the October 10 massacre needs to be illuminated not only in terms of state responsibility but also in terms of the responsibility of the defendants. Ultimately, this situation has no other result than drawing more attention to the places they have hidden, covered up, and shadowed.

“There isn't even an investigation number”

How were the criminal complaints against Gaziantep Police personnel responded to? How was the criminal complaint against Ankara Police personnel closed?

Our criminal complaint against Gaziantep Police is still listed as an informant file. In other words, there isn't even an investigation number that we can tell you today. Naturally, there is no investigation. Our criminal complaint against Gaziantep Police was sent to Gaziantep Police by the Prosecutor's Office for investigation, which already indicated that there would be no independent, impartial action that would yield results.

We also had a criminal complaint regarding Gaziantep Police, especially concerning their operations resulting in the deaths of the October 10 massacre perpetrators Halil İbrahim Durgun, Yunus Durmaz, and Mehmet Kadir Cebael. This criminal complaint was also closed without further action. The Prosecutor's Office stated that there was only one answer to the question of whether it was necessary to capture individuals alive and secure evidence without damage or the safety of those conducting the operation: They said it was the safety of the police officers.

“Killed with close-range shots”

By the way, Mehmet Kadir Cebael was killed in the bathroom of the house with close-range shots, and these actions were carried out through a long-term operation plan. So, the answer to our question and the lack of follow-up are not realistic.

Regarding Ankara Police, the Ankara Governorship initially did not grant permission for an investigation. This permission was not granted despite the Inspector's Report recommending the opening of an investigation for preventive measures.

“Ankara Police shifted responsibility to the prosecutors”

Our applications to the Constitutional Court made in 2016 have still not been concluded regarding this matter. Similarly, the criminal complaint we filed concerning the missing folders with Ankara Police has only recently been resolved.

Ankara Police stated, 'We sent every document to the Prosecutor's Office, and the Prosecutor's Office did not take any action.' They shifted the responsibility to the prosecutors. We will also bring this matter before the Constitutional Court."

“Initial acts in this series of attacks are under suspicion”

The investigation into the bombings of the People's Democratic Party (HDP) buildings in Adana and Mersin has not been completed for 8 years. Have you been able to obtain any information about this?

First of all, it's a case that still has a restriction order. We can understand from here that no action has been taken. Or if any action has been taken, we won't know which part of it will be eliminated or what will be covered up.

The records in the press in 2016 for Savaş Yıldız, who is also the perpetrator of these attacks, included statements pointing to Turkish intelligence regarding ISIS activities in Turkey. In any case, the initial acts in this series of attacks are under suspicion, and, without going as far as conspiracy theories, the state needs to speak. However, these attacks are still in the dark.

“Our complaints are before the European Court of Human Rights”

You mentioned that for 8 years, almost all of your requests for information and documents necessary to illuminate the massacre and reveal the real perpetrators have been rejected. Have you made any criminal complaints or filed complaints with the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) regarding this?

Our applications to the prosecutors were closed by stating that our allegations were abstract. No prosecutor underwent an investigation. The Constitutional Court also rejected these applications one by one.

Currently, our complaints regarding this matter are before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). As we have mentioned before, no action has been taken even in terms of disciplinary responsibility for any prosecutor. (AS/PE)