Is it a "Coup Crime" to Secure the Barracks?

Is it a "Coup Crime" to Secure the Barracks?

Major Murat Ertas, who was beloved and respected by his colleagues with his diligence and gained the appreciation of his commanders with his honesty, and ability to perform every task assigned to him in the best way and become a role model for his subordinates, has been appointed to a critical branch of the Turkish General Staff HQ in 2016. Considering that the sensitive source research of the officers assigned to this task was carried out by the authorized intelligence units and that the appointment could be made if the research was concluded with a positive result, as of July 2016, just one month before his appointment, Major Ertas was confirmed and approved by the General Staff that he had no contact with any group or organization.

 If we look at the prevailing condition in the country and especially in Ankara before July 15, the chaos, uncertainty, and trauma caused by the terrorist attacks in Ankara in the last 4-5 months have not been healed yet. In the intelligence reports sent to the headquarters, it is insistently stated that there may be an attack at any time, and all staff is kept on alert against such an attack at any time.

An action warning message about a possible terrorist attack was sent to the military units at 6.11 PM on July 15. Major Murat Ertas, who worked for the preparations for the National Security Council to be executed at the end of July, continued to work during the week of July 15, thought that there might be an attack on the General Staff Headquarter considering the unusual mobility around the headquarter, the sounds of guns heard in the barracks and the terrorist attack sensations that have been insistently stated in the intelligence reports recently sent to the headquarter. Major Ertas, as every soldier has the duty specified by the law, with a professional reflex, has turned towards the guardhouse in order to ensure the safety of the General Staff Headquarter and its personnel, which he regards as the honor of the Turkish Armed Forces and the country. While trying to take measures against the possibility of an attack from outside, he expressed the conflict inside and the situation he was in as follows:

“From the location I was at, it was not possible to fully understand what happened inside the barracks, the headquarter, even in the guardhouse area. Under these circumstances, it was impossible to comprehend what was happening outside of the barracks -in the whole country, Turkey- while suffering fear of life in the conflict environment. I had only one goal, which was to be able to see the end of the process I was going through without having anyone's nosebleed. That night, I reinforced the perimeter security of the General Staff Headquarter within the scope of my duty and authority, which was alerted and attacked. I ensured the safety of myself, the soldiers around me, and the innocent citizens who were sent to death by being manipulated.”

After the evaluation of the court committee decided this incident as abnormal for Major Ertas to go to the guardhouse area on the day of the case, and sentenced him to life imprisonment and considered his act as a coup attempt, he stated the following in his plea;

“You might wonder whether taking the gun in this action is legal or not? Sure, this act is legal, rational, and also proper. Moreover, it is a legal and peculiar act within military service. According to Article 85 of the Turkish Armed Forces Internal Service Act, it is indicated that; "in extraordinary cases, all forces are kept as a ready unit”. Also, there is a provision that "when an alert is given to the barracks or when necessary, all personnel are assigned to ensure the safety of the barracks". In the 84th article of the same act, it is stated that "the alert force should be equipped and armed". In addition, it is stated that "every soldier has the authority and duty to use a weapon if it is necessary to defend in an attack against soldiers and military items" and "every soldier is authorized to use weapons within the scope of legitimate defense" in Article 89 and 90, respectively.

In Article 88 of the Internal Service Act, there is the rule that "every soldier who has the authority to use a weapon is punished according to the nature of his act if he does not use the permissions determined by the law in place and on time, or if he does not fully benefit from his weapons". Article 87 of the same act, again, defines the way how to use these weapons. According to this article, "Using a weapon is not necessarily to shoot. Shooting is the last option. There is a provision that "First, a warning shot is made to the air, then the fire is fired towards the foot. If the resistance or attack continues, which threatens dangerously, it will be fired regardless of the target”. Despite so many legal rights and regulations, it is meaningless to associate my act of military service with coup activity.”

Committing "The Crime of Attempted Coup" by Reinforcing the Barracks Safety

His answer to the court committee is extremely important which tried to define the reinforcement of the environmental security of the barracks as a crime of participating in the coup attempt despite the fact that Major Ertas was in the barracks in order to provide the safety of the General Staff`s Headquarter, to ensure the safety of the personnel and the innocent citizens who were deliberately directed to death, and that he did not fire his gun during his stay there, but tried to direct both the staff and the citizen to behave with common sense.

“Your Honor!.. Now I would like to explain what the coup activity means, and how the action I made can be associated with this coup activity. First of all, I would like to state that in the coup plans that have been performed so far - namely neither in the "Bayrak'' Operation Plan used on September 12th , nor in the "Balyoz'' conspiracy trials, nor in the postmodern February 28th coup- the effort of a military personnel aiming to reinforce the environmental security of the barrack has not been defined as a coup attempt. No such action has been carried out on those who have become executed. Members of the armed forces throughout the country, notably those on the Syrian and Iraqi border and beyond, continue to reinforce the environmental security of their barracks and base regions when they receive a notice of attack or when their barracks are alerted, and no one has an anticipation that the personnel in question will commit a coup. As Professor Doctor İzzet Ozgenc states in his book titled “Criminal Organizations”,  it is obvious that a plan including the preparatory phase is necessary since the coup attempt does not have the opportunity to be executed by a sudden decision. In a coup plan, a three-phase plan that includes military preparation, execution, and the post-coup, how and by whom, what duties will be performed, the control and management of public institutions and organizations and strategic facilities, the fate of senior executives, and who will be assigned to their places should be determined in detail. 

The article, Annex-6 of the Military Penal Code No. 1632, clearly states that "those who attack, swear, insult, and use violence and threats in the first-degree military forbidden zones or guard places, barracks, headquarters and military institutions, are punished." In this context, even though the act of civilians entering the headquarters was decriminalized with Decree No. 696 after July 15, it is accepted by everyone who respects the law, especially lawyers, that it was unlawful and even a crime as of that date. "

In his plea which he gave a law lesson to the court, Major Murat Ertas stated that he, as a member of Turkish Armed Forces, took the security of the barrack only, and while doing so, he did not point his gun at anyone or did not shoot it, however unfortunately, he was sentenced to life imprisonment. This "justice system" in our country, which imprisons honorable officers who are in love with their profession, must attain the "priority of law and the principle of dignity" as soon as possible. The real criminals who need to be tried in fact are the commanders who were hiding in the parking lot because of fear that night and did not give orders to their subordinates, those who did not give the necessary orders when all the security units of the state were ready and active to take security measures and those who allowed the enemies of the state to enter the military bases, especially the army's most prestigious barracks, such as the General Staff Headquarter.