Does the Somali President's son have the freedom to commit crimes in Turkey?

Recently, the son of the Somali President caused the death of a motorcycle rider. In the accident that occurred on Thursday, November 30, around noon, on Kennedy Avenue in Istanbul, at the exit of the Eurasia Tunnel in the direction of Zeytinburnu, motorcycle courier Yunus Emre Göçer (38) was struck from behind by a diplomatic vehicle driven by Mohammed Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, the son of the Somali President.

Thrown onto the road by the impact, Göçer was taken to the hospital with severe injuries and passed away on December 6.

The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office announced that in the accident report prepared immediately after the incident, the motorcycle rider was listed as at fault for violating lane-changing rules, while no fault was attributed to the vehicle driver, and that Mohamud, who had been detained, was therefore charged with "negligent injury" and subsequently released.

According to the aforementioned accident report, two traffic police officers who arrived at the scene prepared a false report that portrayed Mohamud as faultless and found Yunus Emre Göçer, who was in no condition to defend himself, primarily at fault.

In the report, which did not reflect the reality of the situation, it stated: "Göçer, who was driving ahead, lost control of the steering wheel, hit the curb, bounced off the curb, and fell in front of the vehicle driven by Mohamud. The vehicle could not stop and hit him with its front left side, resulting in a traffic accident involving property damage and injury. Based on Mohamud's statement and the investigation of the accident scene, it is the opinion and conclusion that Göçer violated Article 56/1A (changing lanes other than for passing or turning) of the Highway Traffic Law No. 2918." it read. 

However, the expert report prepared after the accident stated that motorcycle courier Yunus Emre Göçer did not violate any articles of the Highway Traffic Law and was not at fault during the accident. It emphasized that the primary fault in the accident, which occurred because the following distance was not maintained according to the Highway Traffic Law and the Highway Traffic Regulation and the motorcycle was struck from behind, lay with, Somali President's son, Mohammed Hassan Sheikh Mohamud. it was emphasized.

Minister of Justice Tunç stated that no fault was found in the first report prepared regarding Mohamud, which is why the defendant was released, but that the second report concluded that Mohamud was at fault.

So, is this contradiction normal? 

EXPERT REPORT

The expert report also included the statement Mahmud gave following the incident. According to this, Mahmud claimed that the motorcycle suddenly braked and turned right without signaling, that the driver was not wearing a helmet, and that despite braking, he could not avoid hitting the motorcycle.

The expert, however, determined that the motorcycle was slowing down while in the far-right lane and then moving toward the shoulder, and that the vehicle driven by Mahmud struck the motorcycle without slowing down.

Speaking to agencies, the Göçer family's lawyer, İyaz Çimen, also stated in his initial remarks: "We expect the driver of the vehicle, who is one hundred percent at fault, to be punished for 'Causing Death by Negligence.' Due to the erroneous assessment made by the officer who first responded to the incident, the suspect has not been apprehended at this stage, and because nearly a week has passed since the incident, we are facing the possibility that he may never be caught." he said.

Regarding the matter, the press release from the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office dated December 8, 2023:

The Chief Public Prosecutor's Office announced that following Göçer's death, the file was sent to a traffic expert on December 7, 2023, and that the expert provided an opinion on the same day stating that Göçer was not at fault; it further announced that an arrest warrant was issued for the suspect on December 8, but it was determined that the suspect had left Turkey on December 2.

In the press statement in question;

“A press statement has been deemed necessary to inform the public correctly regarding the news appearing in some media outlets concerning the traffic accident involving the Somali President's son. Regarding the incident on 30.11.2023, on Kennedy Avenue in the direction of Aksaray, where a motorcycle collided with a vehicle belonging to the Somali Consulate, resulting in the injury of motorcycle courier Yunus Emre Göçer, our Chief Public Prosecutor's Office “Negligent Injury” investigation proceedings were immediately initiated for the crime of. Taking into account the injury of Yunus Emre Göçer, the nature of the crime, and the initial findings regarding fault, the suspect Mohamed Hassan Seıkh Mohamud was questioned on the same day and released following his statement. Upon the death of motorcycle courier Yunus Emre Göçer on 06.12.2023, due to the change in the legal classification of the crime, a detention order was issued for the suspect for the crime of causing death by negligence. Since the suspect had left the country on 02.12.2023 and the detention order could not be executed, an arrest warrant was issued for him on 08.12.2023. A report from the Council of Forensic Medicine has been requested to prepare a definitive report regarding the suspect's fault status. All processes, including international procedures, are being meticulously carried out for the apprehension of the suspect, and the investigation is continuing in all its aspects.” it was stated.

Göçer’s Attorney İyaz Çimen Requested an Arrest Warrant for the Suspect

Following the tragic accident, motorcycle courier Göçer’s attorney, İyaz Çimen, had requested the suspect's arrest in a petition submitted to the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, citing the suspect's foreign nationality and the risk of flight. In the aforementioned petition, Attorney İyaz Çimen stated, 

"The suspect was released after his statement was taken. Being tried without arrest is contrary to procedure and law. The suspect is a foreign national and there is a suspicion of flight. 

When the camera footage is examined, it is clear that the fault lies with the suspect. No expert report has been obtained for the camera footage. If a report is obtained, it will become clear with new evidence that the suspect is at fault. For this reason, we object to the suspect being tried without arrest, and we request that an expert report be obtained for the camera footage and that the suspect be tried while in custody." they had stated.

However, no action was taken against the suspect Mahmud, and he left Turkey on December 2, fleeing to his home country.

Making a statement regarding the matter, the Ministry of Justice said, "The entire process, including international procedures, is being meticulously carried out for the apprehension of the suspect, and the investigation is continuing in all its aspects." Furthermore, Minister of Justice Tunç stated that a judicial investigation had been launched into the police officers who conducted the crime scene investigation and the initial fault assessment following the accident. 

In reality, the concrete incident is a traffic accident.

Under normal circumstances, the investigation of a traffic accident should be conducted and completed in a very straightforward manner. When the accident footage is examined via Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IBB) camera recordings, it is clearly seen that suspect Mahmud hit the motorcycle rider, Göçer, from behind after Göçer slowed down and stopped.

When evaluating the statement taken from suspect Mahmud following the incident, we see that these claims are completely contrary to how the event occurred and are false. In other words, It is clear that if the IBB camera recordings had not existed, the investigation would have proceeded based entirely on suspect Mahmud's false statement, and this incident would have been covered up. 

As is known, in a criminal investigation, police officers work under the instructions of the public prosecutor.

After the accident occurred, the police officers who arrived at the scene called the public prosecutor. However, because the police officers only took the statement of suspect Mahmud while the incident was still fresh, they reported the event to the public prosecutor based on these statements. (This is also extremely incorrect; the process should have waited until the victim, Göçer, could also provide a statement.)

Meanwhile, Göçer, who was severely injured, was taken to the hospital by medical teams. However, the victim, Göçer, who suffered a brain hemorrhage, was not in a condition to speak. Indeed, he passed away one week after the incident following his intubation.  

The crucial point of this incident is the video footage report. The victim's lawyer also requested an arrest on December 1, 2023, based on the video viewing report dated November 30, 2023. When the video viewing report is examined, we see that the date of the report is November 30, 2023, at 17:20. The time of the accident was recorded in the summary of proceedings as 14:45. In other words, according to the video viewing report, it was possible for the police officers who saw the footage to inform the public prosecutor directly about the true nature of the incident and change the course of the investigation. So, in fact, the truth of the material event and the fact that suspect Mahmud was lying were clearly understood 3 hours after the incident. This is precisely why the incident has been so widely debated by the public. 

Because this situation goes far beyond mere negligence. The police officers, having learned the truth of the incident three hours after the accident, could have contacted the duty prosecutor again to report the situation. In this case, even if the crime had remained at the stage of negligent injury, the public prosecutor could have summoned the individual due to this false statement and, for this reason alone, could have referred him for arrest, at the very least due to the suspicion of flight.

Even if an arrest did not occur, it would have been very easy to impose a travel ban.

Initially, upon the police officers reporting the incident by phone, the public prosecutor's instruction was to take the statements of the suspect, Mahmud, and the injured party, Göçer. However, it was clear that Göçer's statement could not be taken, as he was severely injured and subsequently intubated.

Specifically, upon reviewing the footage, the police officers should have immediately called the public prosecutor and reported the changed circumstances. Since instructions were given via telephone communication and the prosecutor was not re-informed, it must be said that the instructions of the public prosecutor, who could not sufficiently grasp the investigation, remained incorrect. 

We see that the instructions changed after Göçer lost his life a week after the incident, and a detention order was issued for the suspect, Mahmud.

HOWEVER, IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS CHANGE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 1, 2023. For this reason, since the suspect, who gave a false statement, fled and returned to his country on December 2, the instructions issued could not be carried out. Despite the fact that the suspect clearly lied to the officers on duty on November 30, 2023, and this lie was exposed the same day by a video surveillance report, the suspect, Mahmud, returned to his country without any hindrance.  

We are facing a terrible chain of negligence. In fact, similar incidents occur in Istanbul almost every day. One of the reasons for this situation is the assignment of a young public prosecutor who lacks sufficient experience to a major city like Istanbul. This seniority issue leads to an increase in judicial errors and hinders access to justice in many cases. In reality, while judges and prosecutors with at least 10-12 years of experience should be assigned to Istanbul, the traditions in the judiciary prior to 2010 have been abolished, and judges and prosecutors have begun to be sent to Istanbul as their very first place of assignment.

This situation is dangerous both for those being tried and for the judges and prosecutors themselves. It is precisely for this reason that we see a decline in trust in the judiciary, and we know that junior judges and prosecutors working in major cities are subjected to intense investigations because they are performing their duties without having learned the rules of judicial ethics—that is, before they even know how to protect themselves.

The Council of Judges and Prosecutors must put an end to this practice as soon as possible and establish criteria of at least 10 years of experience and professional success for appointments to major cities. Above all, the practice of sending judges or prosecutors to large cities as their first place of duty must be ended immediately. This is not acceptable. It is the same as having a newly graduated medical doctor perform heart surgery without even receiving specialist training. In that case, the patient would certainly die in the hospital. Here, as we see in the example I provided, the files are dying. We see every day that the judiciary system is suffering great wounds due to the elimination of merit in the judiciary, as in all other fields in Turkey.

In light of the information described above, the suspect was released despite the existence of the incident report dated 30.11.2023. This was extremely erroneous. According to this report, the suspect should have been brought to the prosecutor's office in custody, and the reasons for his lies and the consequences of them should have been explained to him. If at least a measure such as a travel ban had been applied to the foreign national, the unjust result we see today would not have occurred, and the person would not have been able to flee Turkey freely. The fact that even these measures were not taken has increased suspicions regarding the case file. 

On the other hand, regardless of what happened, this crime is a crime of negligence. There is no multilateral or bilateral extradition treaty between us and Somalia. Even if there were, an extradition request might not be possible because the crime is one of negligence. Based on this premise, an international arrest warrant cannot be issued for crimes of negligence through Interpol. Therefore, a red notice cannot be requested either. In summary, if the suspect Mahmut does not come to our country of his own volition and surrender, there is no legal action left to be taken against him. This is the most severe consequence of this incident. Our young man who lost his life was married and a father of two. What will these people do now? For this reason, it should be known that it is important for public officials to be very careful and work without making mistakes, and that the responsibility for not making merit-based appointments is significant. 

And unfortunately, The Century of Turkey is the reality of our country, which is being hyped up. In our country, after causing a person's death in traffic, you can return to your country freely without even a detention order being issued against you three days later. Just like the judicial errors in the Jamal Khashoggi murder, it is indisputable that this incident has also caused great damage to Turkey's reputation.