Second application to Constitutional Court over Roboski massacre

Click to read the article in Turkish

The families of the people who lost their lives in Roboski massacre in Şırnak in 2011 have made another application to the Constitutional Court. Attorney Kerem Altıparmak has indicated that if the Constitutional Court gives a ruling of right violation, the court case can be filed.

CLICK - 9 years of impunity in Roboski

34 citizens from the villages of Ortasu/Roboski and Gülyazı/Bujeh in Uludere district lost their lives in a bombardment of Turkish Armed Forces' jets in Turkey's Kurdish-majority province of Şırnak on December 28, 2011. The judicial process is about to end in impunity.

The Military Prosecutor's Office of the General Staff gave a decision of "no ground for prosecution (lawsuit)" for the Roboski massacre.

After the appeals of Roboski families against the decision of non-prosecution given by the General Staff's Military Prosecutor's Office were rejected, they applied to the Constitutional Court on July 18, 2014.

On February 26, 2016, the supreme court rejected the application of the families on the ground of the two-day delay of Nuşirevan Elçi, the attorney of only three applicants, to submit his warrant of attorney.

Speaking to bianet about the issue, attorney Neşat Girasun previously said that they made another application as new evidence came up in the light of the developments that unfolded after the July 15 coup attempt in 2016. However, this application has also been rejected.

CLICK - New investigation into Roboski massacre

The families made another application to the Constitutional Court, demanding that the responsible persons be put on trial.

'Our only demand is trial of perpetrators'

After applying to the top court on Friday (April 9), Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) Central Executive Committee member Ferhat Encü, who lost his sibling and several family members in the massacre, and the family's attorney Kerem Altıparmak made a press statement.

As reported by Mezopotamya Agency (MA), addressing the reporters in front of the Constitutional Court, Encü briefly said:

"We, as the Roboski families, demand justice. But, since then, not a single person has been suspended from duty, investigated or put on trial.

"We, the Roboski families, who have been struggling for justice, faced lawsuits, detentions and arrests. The files about the 34 massacred people ended in non-prosecution, but the Roboski families' trial is still ongoing. The mothers who lost their children are tried.

"Even though it is known which chain of command the act was committed and who the perpetrators were, they are still not brought to justice.

"We, as the families, demand that the perpetrators be brought to account before court. This is our only demand.'

'New evidence has come up'

Speaking after Ferhat Encü, attorney Kerem Altıparmak underlined that new evidence came up after the failed coup attempt on July 15, 2016.

Referring to the "FETÖ", which is held accountable for the coup attempt, attorney Altıparmak briefly said:

"In the aftermath of July 15, former Minister of Treasury and Finance Berat Albayrak openly said on TV that Roboski and similar incidents, the incident with the Russian plane, were carried out by the organization called the FETÖ. The military prosecutor who gave a decision of non-prosecution is a prosecutor discharged from public office and faced a criminal case on FETÖ-related charges. Similarly, of the three judges who examined the appeal against this decision, only one remained in office.

"The judge who remained in office is the judge who requested that the decision of non-prosecution of the Roboski case be overturned.

"In other words, three of the four members of the judiciary are investigated for organization membership, they are discharged. Only one judge, the one who said that this case should be opened is still in office. When we put this forward in reference to the remarks of a person sitting on the top seat of Turkey, it is obvious that we are faced with new evidence."

Altıparmak also said, "If the Constitutional Court gives a ruling of right violation here, it will be obligatory to open this investigation." (AS/SD)