‘There are doubts in the file concerning the best interest of the child’

"Children have rights' - Photo: Şehlem Kaçar / csgorselarsiv.org

Click to read the article in Turkish

The third hearing was held in the trial over an incident where a child worker was deforced and battered by his employers in Afyon on the grounds that he had asked for his unpaid daily wage of 200 lira.

The trial of the 16-year-old Ş.Ç.K. began in the absence of the defendants yesterday (September 9). The Idea and Art Worksop Association (FİSA) Children's Right Center's request for involvement in the case was rejected by the court. The newly appointed prosecutor presented an opinion as to the accusations in contrast with the one given at the previous hearing. The FİSA will now make an application for involving in the trial.

In the opinion as to the accusations, the prosecutor said that Ş.Ç.K. did not commit the offense of theft, as alleged by his employers, adding that the sentence of Akif A. should be reduced due to unjust provocation on the grounds that the child was using his vehicle. The prosecutor also indicated that the offense of injury was committed against the child worker Ş.Ç.K.

The next hearing will be held on September 16 at 2 pm.

'The child ran for his life'

Following yesterday's hearing, Kasım Akbaş, a lawyer from the FİSA Children's Rights Center, has said that there are several doubts in the file as to whether the best interests of the child are observed or not:

"We were actually expecting that it would be the final hearing. The new prosecutor presented an opinion as to the accusations. And the parties demanded time for the defense as to the accusations. The file refers to the aggrieved and abused child as a juvenile pushed into crime.

"The charges of theft were dropped. The prosecutor considered it to be 'theft for usage.' Moreover, the child threw them a fishing box in self-defense. The prosecutor demanded penalization for actual bodily harm and demanded penalization for the opposing party on charge of 'injury with a weapon.' As the element of the crime of deprivation of liberty were not there, the prosecutor did not request any penalization on this charge.

"We still think that there are elements of deprivation of liberty. Because people much older than the child prevented him from going out. We think that the child could not go out even though the doors were open. It is captured by cameras as well. He is seen to be running for his life.

"The fact that the prosecutor was changed can be evaluated as follows in terms of children's rights: It is negative that the child constantly comes to the hearing and is traumatized. The child is not at ease psychologically. In trial of children, too many hearings are not acceptable.

"When we look at the content of the file, we see that the state has not fulfilled its positive obligation to carry out an effective investigation for the child's protection as foreseen in both the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the European Convention on Human Rights.

"Because there is a security guard by whose side the child took refuge after escaping from there. There is a witness who saw it right after the incident. But the guard is not mentioned in either the investigation or the prosecution. Even the statement of the guard has not been taken.

"The child says, 'They beat me with a metal stick.' The photos prove this, but the opposing party says that they beat him with a mopstick. The crime scene must be immediately examined to see if there is a metal stick. An effective investigation must be ensured by adding the photos taken by the mother at hospital to the file. These were not done. They must be investigated.

"On the other side, the child was made to drink alcohol at the storehouse. This is openly child abuse. This point has never been mentioned by the prosecutor's office. Moreover, there is an allegation of sexual abuse of the child in the file. There are also conflicting witness statements.

"It is naturally not preferable if the file lasts long. But, on the other side, this has been happening because an effective investigation was not carried out. For this reason, there are several doubts in the file as to whether the best interests of the child are observed or not."

What happened?

The child working as an apprentice at a fish shop in Güvenevler Neighborhood in Afyon was battered by shop owner Akif A. (34) and employee Ali S. (29). He asked for help from the security guards of a nearby shopping mall and was taken to a hospital.

After he was discharged from the hospital, he went to the Children's Branch of the Provincial Security Directorate and filed a criminal complaint. The two suspects were taken into custody afterwards. Akif A. was arrested while Ali S. was released on probation.

In the indictment issued about the incident, the prosecutor's office has demanded that Akif A. and Ali S. stand trial on charge of "deprivation of liberty with force, threat or deception". Upon the complaint of suspect Akif A., the indictment has also demanded that the child be penalized on charge of "burglary at night by opening with an unjustly held key."

The child and his family also filed a criminal complaint about the incident. Elif Tuğba Şahin, the attorney of the family, said that the child had been traumatized and shared the following information:

"He is also in a very bad psychological state. There are allegations of theft against him; it is not the case, the child is the one who has money owed. They refer to allegations of theft and make such defenses to evade the charges, they are trying to make accusations of culpability against the client."

While defendant Akif A. was released on probation, defendant Ali S.'s judicial control measures have been lifted. (AÖ/SD)