Courts Need to Comply with ECtHR Decision, Says Kavala's Attorney

Click to read the article in Turkish

"Regarding Osman Kavala's unlawful imprisonment, Turkey's unfairness has been proved once again," said an attorney of the businessperson on the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decision that has become final.

Speaking to bianet, attorney Köksal Bayraktar recalled that the ECtHR said its decision on December 10, 2019, that "Kavala's arrest is against human rights."

Saying that the ECtHR ruled for the "immediate release" of Kavala, Bayraktar remarked, "Why hasn't Osman Kavala been released since December 10? Why is he still inside [the prison] despite the decision? We are having trouble understanding that."

All requests for Kavala's release were rejected

"We have repeatedly asked the state why Osman Kavala was inside despite the ECtHR decision. We said that this situation is unlawful. We have repeatedly submitted requests for release to penal courts of peace, heavy penal courts. But unfortunately, the decisions are not complied with," he continued.

"Does the ECtHR say something different in its final decision than it said in its decision on December 10? No. The point of the finalized decision is that the ECtHR only rejects the objection of the state of the Republic of Turkey. It says, 'I don't take this decision to the Grand Chamber.' It says, 'This is not a decision that can be taken to the Grand Chamber.' In this aspect, it makes the decision final.

"The ECtHR already said in the decision on December 10 that 'Osman Kavala should be released immediately.' In our appeals, we repeatedly underlined the word 'immediately' but we could not have it accepted."

"The ECtHR said evidence was not essential"

"He was acquitted in the Gezi trial, they remanded him in custody in the July 15 [coup attempt] case. He was released in the July 15 case, he was remanded in custody in the investigation of 'political or military espionage.'

"The ECtHR had already ruled in its judgment that the existing evidence was not sufficient, moreover, it was not essential.

"The file that led to Osman Kavala's arrest included allegations that he had met with Professor Henri Barkey, a former employee of the US State Department and an international relations expert at Lehigh University, but the evidence is not sufficient.

"Osman Kavala and Henri Barkey came across at a restaurant in Karaköy and greeted each other. That's all. They did not even say 'Hello'. Secondly, Barkey was at a meeting in Büyükada before July 15. But Osman Kavala was not at that meeting.

"Another evidence is that the coordinates of Barkey's phone match with the coordinates of Osman Kavala's phone. Osman Kavala's workplace is at the most central point of İstanbul. Berkey was also there at certain dates, but there is no evidence that he was in the office."

"Courts must understand the importance of the decision"

"All these three things I mentioned are included in the case. These are included in the cases that we get acquittal verdicts. Besides, the ECtHR mentions the incident of greeting Barkey in the restaurant and says, 'This is not sufficient as evidence.' But unfortunately, the state of the Republic of Turkey continues to keep Osman Kavala inside, based on this evidence.

"It is really impossible to understand why Osman Kavala is still remanded in custody. Now, the judgeships of peace in İstanbul must consciously abide by the importance and effectiveness of this decision. They must respect the decision and lift the verdict of arrest." 

(HA/VK)