Feminist lawyers apply to Constitutional Court for Nevin Yıldırım

* Photo: Çiçek Tahaoğlu

Click to read the article in Turkish / Kurdish

Feminist Lawyers (Feminist Avukatlar) platform has announced that an application has been made to the Constitutional Court for Nevin Yıldırım, who killed a man named Nurettin Gider, who had been systematically sexually assaulting her, and was sentenced to life imprisonment.

In a statement made on the social media account of the Feminist Lawyers, it is said, "Let's not forget: Nevin keeps looking at us... It has been 8 years, 8 months, 19 days since Nevin Yıldırım was arrested. The file has been pending at the General Assembly of Penal Chambers since November 28, 2019. It is not certain when its turn will come. As our applications remained inconclusive, we applied to the Constitutional Court today (May 17)."

According to the statement, the Feminist Lawyers have demanded the urgent release of Nevin Yıldırım "by discussing that a ruling was handed down based on the rumors and guesses in the village, rather than evidence; Nevin Yıldırım had stayed behind bars for a long time and her statement about rape had never been investigated; her right to a fair trial was violated as the evidence in her favor were not collected, therefore, the obligation to conduct an effective investigation was violated; and despite the framework of the İstanbul Convention about gender equality, Nevin Yıldırım had been surrounded by prejudice from the first moment on, the male violence that she had been subjected to was not seen, it was made invisible."

In her retrial in March 2018, the court sentenced Nevin Yıldırım to life imprisonment without making any sentence reductions. The 1st Penal Chamber of the Court of Cassation examined the appeal against the local court ruling on March 23, 2019. The Chamber upheld the life sentence. The ruling was given by a majority of votes as the woman member of the panel gave a dissenting opinion, indicating that there was "unjust provocation."

Emphasis on long period of arrest

Speaking to bianet about the application to the Constitutional Court, lawyer Oya Meriç Eyüboğlu has drawn attention to the unlawful points in Yıldırım's trial and reiterated the demand for her immediate release:

"There is a serious violation of the period of arrest in the domestic law. There is nothing saying the contrary or banning it; but according to the practices of the Court of Cassation, after the court hearing the trial pronounces its ruling, the following period, namely the period of appeals that we call the upper court, is not included in the process of arrest.

"In that case, in files such as that of Nevin Yıldırım, I mean the files which do not end for a long time, which are reversed by the upper courts and returned, which are prolonged further and further, the period of arrest goes well beyond being lawful or humane. As of today (May 17), Nevin Yıldırım has been arrested for 8 years, 8 months, 19 days.

"As I have said, this ambiguity is neither humane or conscientious nor lawful. There are numerous European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings that show the contrary. In this process, we applied to the 1st Penal Chamber of the Court of Cassation and to the General Assembly of Penal Chambers due to the long period of arrest; however, we could obtain no results. Exhausting the domestic remedies, we have applied to the Constitutional Court."

'Male violence was made invisible'

Further in her statement about the application, lawyer Eyüboğlu has underlined that "another reason for their application to the top court is the invisibility of the male violence that Nevin Yıldırım was subjected to, or rather, the fact that this violence was made invisible."

"During the trial of Nevin, dozens of witnesses from the village were heard. Those witnesses saying that Nevin had not been raped, but it had been a 'consensual' relationship were stating that 'they had heard about it', they were stating, 'People were talking about it, I don't remember now who said it.' The ongoing rumors and comments were conveyed," Eyüboğlu has noted.

"In other words, there were no accounts based on eyewitnessing or information that there was a 'consensual relationship'. That rapist Nurettin was one of the notables of that village, he was rich and influential...

"Somehow, all witnesses gave statements in his favor!? These were men who said that she had several friends, spent time with them, drinking and going around. This is, above all else, against the natural flow of life. Everyone saying the same thing as if they had memorized it..."

'Already a conviction before the hearings'

Eyüboğlu has also raised concerns about "several contradictions in witness statements such as the incidents, dates, etc."

"In other words, a ruling was handed down based on rumors and guesses. Because the necessary, meticulous, adequate and effective investigation was not conducted in this trial. To put it in classical terms, evidence in favor were not collected. This is the most important issue.

"No inquiry was made about Nevin's statement regarding rape. Neither an inquiry nor a legal discussion was made as to the reality of this. From the first moment on, Nevin was faced with a net of prejudices.

"How could a woman commit a murder! They asked me this at the clerk's office at court, in Yalvaç Courthouse, when we first went there to examine the file with Deniz (Bayram). The hearings had not yet started, but there had already been a conviction at the Yalvaç Courthouse!"

'Her "bad motherhood" questioned, not rape'

Referring to the trial at the local court, lawyer Oya Meriç Eyüboğlu has reminded us that the Presiding Judge of the Heavy Penal Court was a woman: "At the first hearing, so, after Nevin gave her statement for the first time, she said to Nevin, 'You were pregnant, you gave the child away... What did you think or feel that you did this? Didn't you feel bad? How did you make this decision?' She said it in a very tragic voice.

"She did not ask a question about rape or about the court case, she preferred reminding Nevin of her 'bad motherhood'."

Commenting further on the issue, Eyüboğlu has said, "Yes, Nevin got pregnant as a result of this rape; she went to the Isparta Public Hosptial for abortion, but she was sent back. For this reason, she had to keep the baby against her will and had to give birth. But she gave away the child because she thought that she would see the rapist whenever she saw the baby."

"All in all, the course of the trial that started with this trial continued by being surrounded with prejudices," Eyüboğlu has added.

Referring to the ongoing judicial process at the Court of Cassation, Eyüboğlu has underlined that "what needs to be discussed here is self-defense, not unjust provocation." She has noted, "Nevin had to kill to protect herself from rape. Let me reiterate it on this occasion."

(EMK/SD)