It has been 85 days since Rojin Kabaiş’ death, a student at Van Yüzüncü Yıl University (Van YYÜ). Although forensic records state her cause of death as ‘drowning in water’, many questions remain unanswered.
Although it has been 85 days since she died, it is not known at what hour Kabaiş died, where she drowned, how she was swept 24 where the yellow slipper she was wearing is, whether the marks on her body were caused by assault, or happened as she was swept away in water and to whom the two different male DNA samples traced on her remains belong to.
The restriction order imposed by the prosecutor’s office, on the other hand, makes it more difficult for both the family and the lawyer’s to access the case file.
The women’s rights centres (KHM) of the bar associations of 11 provinces came together on 6 December 2024, Monday, to assess the judicial processes and deficiencies in the Rojin Kabaiş file. The bar associations have since decided to collaborate on the file.
We talked with Lawyer Cansel Talay, a member of the Diyarbakır Bar Association KHM, one of the bar associations taking part in the meeting, and who was also present at the meeting held with the Prosecutor of the Kabaiş file, about the investigation and the questions that remain unanswered.
Negligence
Talay lists the instances of negligence during the period from the disappearance of Rojin Kabaiş to the discovery of her lifeless body, and adds that no investigation at all was carried out during the first three days after Kabaiş’s disappearance, that the current in Van Lake was not taken into account and that her telephone signal was not tracked.
Talay states that there were very few reports submitted to Van KHM, adding that the date and hour of Kabaiş’s death is not clear on the forensic report: “Her cause of death is given as ‘drowning in water’, yet it is not clear in which water she drowned, in the lake, or in a river. Most significantly, no date and hour is given for Rojin’s passing”.
Talay explains that there are many contradictions in the report on ‘how’ Kabaiş’s manner of death was determined, and that requests for the clarification of contradictions were left unanswered.
Kabaiş’s mobile phone, earphones, her muffin and bottle of water were found on 28 September on the shore of Van Lake. Talay emphasizes that the telephone analysis report is still incomplete, that the mobile device has been sent to the Istanbul Forensic Institute for examination, but that there had been no response from that institution yet. Talay points out that this all amounts to show how bad the investigation has been carried out on what is now the 85th day of Kabaiş’s passing.
The distance between the point where Rojin Kabaiş is thought to have entered the water and the site where her body was found is 24 kilometres.
Distance between point where Rojin Kabaiş was last seen and where her lifeless body was found.
Talay states that this is too long a distance in a lake where there is an undercurrent, adding, “Could this current have swept Rojin so far? That question remains unanswered. Our colleagues in the commission asked for a detailed report on this, but that request has not received a response, either. In other words, many technical reports are missing, and the most important evidence has not been collected. The negligence began at the very beginning, evidence was not found, and evidence was not assessed”.
Restriction order
Talay explains that another and highly significant issue in the evaluation of evidence has been the restriction order placed on the case file, stating, “Because of the restriction order, we do not know whether the data we have is valid evidence or not, because we do not know the evidence in the file. We do not even have proper knowledge of the process in the file. We could be in possession of evidence that could complete the puzzle for the investigation. Yet neither we know that, nor the prosecutor’s office, because the prosecutor’s office is not establishing effective communication with the lawyers”.
Talay says that on 6 December 2024, Monday, they visited the prosecutor as a delegation made up of the KHM representatives of 11 regional bar associations and that they requested the lifting of the restriction order. Talay states that the prosecutor has only one reason for the order, which is the ‘health of the investigation’, adding:
“This order affects the family most. We see how the family is suffering from a second blow, because they receive no answer to any of their questions, yet due to the intense interest shown by the public in the case, many stories are made up about Rojin. This means that the family is made to suffer the same pain over and over again.”
Lawyer Cansel Talay
“Even the Prosecutor is not convinced that it is ‘suicide’”
Talay states that the Van Bar Association requested to attend the autopsy as an ‘observer’, but that this request was also rejected. Talay reminds us that in the Narin Güran murder case, the Diyarbakır Bar Association’s request to intervene was accepted, adding:
“The Diyarbakır Bar Association assumed a large part of the Narin Güran case. The bar even found evidence that hadn’t been discovered. That played a great role in the eventual outcome. Yet we cannot even answer, in the case of Kabaiş’s death, whether it was murder, suicide, or an accident. Even the Prosecutor is not convinced that it is ‘suicide’, that’s why he has not concluded the investigation.”
“Calling it suicide is the easy way out”
Talay states that all these points lead to suspicion regarding the case, and that it is merely seeking the easy way out of the investigation to call suicide the death of a 21-year-old woman, who was studying at a course she wanted, was at the threshold of a new life, and asked her roommate before she left, ‘I’m going for a walk on the shore, would you like to come with me?’”
Rojin Kabaiş’s family are seeking justice for their daughter
Talay continues: “The easiest way out is to call it suicide. If you say, ‘she chose to commit suicide’, then you don’t have to consider the risks a woman is exposed to in public space, and in life in general, and you don’t have to think about the negligence of the dormitories where women stay and campuses they attend. Calling it suicide would have lightened the prosecutor’s load, and perhaps give comfort to the public, and the case would be closed. Yet we see great cause for suspicion in this case. Thus, we believe that all instances of negligence need to be re-discussed, and those who allowed such negligence must be separately investigated.”
From falls from balconies to drownings in water
In the year 2024, the death of 259 women were recorded as ‘suspicious’. 2024 is also the year that the number of women killed under ‘suspicious’ conditions has been the highest.
Talay states that the year we have left behind has been devastating for women, adding, “The way we observed this was how even mainstream media reported much more on women’s murders and children’s murders, because even they couldn’t paint a ‘secure country’ picture, they couldn’t overlook the situation, that is how bad it has become.”
“We have witnessed brutally committed murders, and we have revealed all the underlying practices and patriarchal reasons that led to them. In press conferences and actions held all across Turkey, we repeatedly stated that these murders weren’t the first. Last year was the worst yet.”
Talay said that discussions held in mainstream media about evidence to murder shows means and methods to potential perpetrators, adding: “You might remember the period when there were ‘falls from balconies’. Now we have ‘drownings in water’. Tomorrow, it will be something else. This is because specialists are pouring out thousands of details about killings on the TV channes of mainstream media, to the interest of potential perpetrators, thus providing murderes with means and methods.”
(ED/NHRD)
