Is the report on the lieutenants fake?

After the graduation ceremony at the Military Academy on August 30, five lieutenants facing dismissal from the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) for crossing their swords and reciting the Officer's Oath—while chanting “We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal”—will make their final oral defense before the Land Forces Command High Disciplinary Board (YDK) in four days. The number of lieutenants involved is estimated to be between 500 and 700.

Prior to this, 12 lawyers representing the lieutenants, including Turkey Bar Association President Erinç Sağkan, submitted their written defense to the YDK on Friday.

What did the lawyers explain? Let us summarize the main points from the 25-page defense prepared for the top-ranking graduate, Artillery Lieutenant Ebru Eroğlu.

It was emphasized that although the Officer's Oath, referred to in the entire investigation file as the “oath removed from the regulations,” was also recited on the evening of August 29, no charges were brought against the lieutenants regarding this matter.

Regarding the claim that the lieutenants' official requests for changes to the ceremony program before the event were a crime, the defense stated: “The requests made by Lieutenant Ebru Eroğlu in her capacity as the top-ranking graduate and by Lieutenant İzzet Akarsu in his capacity as the Cadet Regiment Commander were merely a formal way of conveying requests from their peers to their superiors. They were asked multiple times, and they conveyed these requests multiple times. Making an official request is a legal right, and there is no rule limiting the exercise of this right more than once. Implicitly accusing individuals of exercising their legal rights is not a characteristic of a state of law.”

It was noted that the lieutenants were not accused because they crossed their swords, said “We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal,” or because of the content of the Officer's Oath, but rather for failing to follow an order—yet it was recalled that the order only covered the duration of the ceremony. Furthermore, their commanders watched the event without surprise, despite seeing and hearing everything, and did not act as if they were witnessing “acts constituting serious crimes or disciplinary offenses that would damage the reputation of the State and the TSK.”

ALTHOUGH THE NAMES WERE DETERMINED LATER

While it was pointed out that the incident report dated August 30, which was attached to the file, contained a list of the lieutenants who participated in the oath, it is understood from the entire investigation file that these names were determined later by examining photographs. The following was highlighted:

“Therefore, it is impossible for the report in question to have been prepared on August 30 by those who signed it. What is important here is not the content of the report. In fact, the content of the report contradicts both the statements of the individuals and the images in the file. What is important is that this report was signed by people who later stated in their testimonies that they did not actually see the event. This creates a justified doubt regarding the reliability of the statements of those who signed the report. Indeed, it is understood from the Battalion Commander's statements that the incident report was prepared and signed much later.”

THE CONTENT OF THE WHATSAPP MESSAGE

In the lawyers' defense, regarding the accusation that Student Regiment Senior Lieutenant Talip İzzet Akarsu organized the “act” together with Lieutenant Ebru Eroğlu due to a message written in the lieutenants' WhatsApp group at 00:37 on the night of August 29, the content of the message was described as follows:

“Considering that the content of the message was, ‘Friends, despite our necessary proposals upon your requests, it did not happen. I apologize to you again on my own behalf. We cannot do it due to the Ceremony Regulation. Please ensure that there is no political action/discourse or misunderstanding while celebrating after the ceremony. I congratulate everyone on their new rank,’ it is understood that the message was sent by Lieutenant Talip İzzet Akarsu to inform them about the result of the requests he received. The fact that there is no mention in the message of gathering to recite the oath removed from the regulations, and that it even contains a warning for the celebrations to be conducted in a way that would not lead to any misunderstanding, shows that there was no planning involved.”

INTERFERENCE WITH THE LIEUTENANTS' STATEMENTS

The comprehensive defense also included the following findings:

- The names of the investigation committee were hidden when the copy of the file was provided. Since we cannot see who the committee consists of, it has not been possible for us to verify that the investigation was conducted by impartial investigators.

- The investigation documents were provided incompletely; the disciplinary supervisor's opinion and proposal form, which led to the return of the files, was removed from the file. It is highly probable that there was an unlawful intervention, or at least a biased direction, by the YDK regarding the opinions and proposals of the disciplinary supervisors.

- We object to the parts of the statements that were recorded against our clients due to the fact that personnel of much higher rank (generals, colonels, lieutenant colonels) were assigned to the investigation committee and because of their attitude toward witnesses and those under investigation—in an environment where lawyers were not present—such as saying, “That's not how it happened, did you say it like this, let's write it like this.”

- It has not been demonstrated which act of the clients hindered which military service. An act constituting behavior that hinders service must be a serious crime or disciplinary offense resulting from attitudes and behaviors that would damage the reputation of the State and the TSK. How can the collective recitation of the Officer's Oath—which the Ministry of National Defense (MSB) also admits contains nothing negative—after the ceremony has ended, on the first day of their officer lives, damage the reputation of the State and the TSK?

- Considering the reactions of the public to the event, as well as the statements of political parties and non-governmental organizations representing a vast majority of society, retired officers who know military service best, and legal experts, it is clear that the reputation of the State and the TSK was not damaged by the lieutenants' actions.

- One cannot speak of a “serious crime and serious disciplinary offense” in this incident. Indeed, no investigation permit was granted regarding the lieutenants, nor was an ex officio investigation initiated by the Public Prosecutor's Office. Therefore, it is impossible to consider an act that is not even a crime as a serious crime.

- The fact that the act was carried out in front of cameras was cited as a disciplinary offense. However, it was the Deputy Dean, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Arif Sarı, who sent the photographer and cameras to the field. The lieutenants definitely did not call the press and did not provide footage to the press.

- The statements made by the President and the Minister of National Defense before both the start of the disciplinary investigation and the trial at the YDK show that the allegations of action against the lieutenants were accepted as if they had occurred, and that it was even decided that this was a crime. This means that pressure is being placed on YDK members, whose professional careers and promotions depend on the decisions of the President and the Minister of National Defense, and that the presumption of innocence is being violated.

Finally, the lawyers emphasized that while no such process was initiated regarding the hundreds of other lieutenants who recited the oath, deciding to remove 5 lieutenants from the TSK would not be compatible with the principle of proportionality and public interest, and they requested a decision that “there is no room for punishment as the elements of the crime of engaging in behavior that hinders service have not been formed.”

Müyesser YILDIZ

January 12, 2024