Striking Evaluation of the July 15 Courts Through the Eyes of an Officer

Following the so-called Coup Attempt of 15 July, during and after the State of Emergency, the fact that the judiciary mechanism in Turkey has moved away from the law and that some members of the judiciary have made decisions under the guidance of the current government and its partners, contrary to the basic legal norms, stands before us as a fact.

Along with the collapsed judiciary mechanism, a media structure that sided with the existing dominant power, deliberately conveyed information to the public, and slandered innocent people through perception operations, is unfortunately a sad reality of Turkey.

Under these conditions, the facts that emerged during the July 15 trials, what happened in the courts, the unfair words, attitudes and behaviors of the complainants and their lawyers to the accused, and the inconsistencies and mistakes in the claims of the members of the judiciary representing the indictment authority, do not make it possible to convey the reality to the public impartially.

The defenses of the defendants are important for the public to know in what environment, by whom and how the proceedings in question were carried out. At this point, we listen Colonel Dogan Ozturk, who was tried at the Ankara 17th High Criminal Court. He tells us his findings regarding the judiciary and the lawyers of the complainants in the courtroom:

“Generally speaking, I have no opportunity to make a comparison as I have seen a court environment for the first time in my life. That's why I don't know if these observations are just for this case or if they are like this in general. Considering the extraordinary nature of the period, the abnormality of the conditions, the ideological and emotional prejudices of the people, the intensity of the political atmosphere due to the conjuncture, and of course the nature of the case, it can be thought that what we experienced and the scene that emerged are largely unique to this case.

Rather than a courtroom, I saw a theater stage where everyone and every segment assumes certain roles in their own way, adopts them and performs accordingly. The court consists of two members, one president and one junior. No matter what the defendants say, they stand like ‘we have already given our decision, we’re just following the procedure.’ On the one hand, there is the chief judge who is a joker in his nature but tries to be serious because of the grandeur of the case, tries not to make mistakes in the procedure as much as possible, and on the other hand, tries to show that he is on the side of the dominant power with his speech, facial expressions and gestures. It is obvious that the chief judge, while smiling in the faces of the defendants and procedurally in favor of the accused during the hearing, made ruthless decisions in the interim decisions and in the end. On the other side are the members who do not speak at all, most of them do not even look around or the suspects, who seem to be following something from the computer all the time, but I am openly curious about what they are actually following from that computer.

And there is the prosecutor, the one who did not dominate the indictment when the hearings started, who made the defendants laugh at him with the questions he asked and the speeches he made, who never talked even while the most critical defendants were making their defense, who never thought to ask questions, but whose tongue was unraveled when the AKP deputies came to watch the hearing, who then felt compelled to ask questions that would be neglected in terms of content and quality, but showed his side and conveyed his messages to the relevant authorities.

Then there are the lawyers of the complainants who feel that they have gained the power and the prestige of the authorities, with the forces they recruited who took a seating arrangement from the front and from the corner near the lectern in accordance with the hierarchy, asking questions containing messages to the audience and the relevant authorities.” 

In other courts where the July 15 trials were held, it is obvious that similar findings can be made to those of Colonel Ozturk. We hope that an impartial and independent judiciary mechanism, which takes into account human rights and freedoms, treats with dignity, acts with the belief that Justice is the Foundation of Property, will be re-established, and innocent people will be free again.

Those who act under the guidance of today's powerful people, who do not take into account the basic legal norms, who act against human dignity, who protect the crime and the criminal, will of course be brought to account before the Justice.

Fatih Ayhan Acar