Gendarmerie... What Is This State?!..

In the last 15 days, we have witnessed the following two incidents regarding our Gendarmerie.

A person named Muhammed Raşid Seydaoğlu, described as the “bureaucracy manager of the Menzil sect,” met with Gendarmerie Deputy General Commander Lieutenant General Halis Zafer Koç. [https://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/siyaset/karargahtaki-o-fotograf-uzerine-kritik-aciklama-bosalan-kadrolari-2178744] When asked about this meeting, Seydaoğlu replied, “I also meet with the President.”

The second incident took place in Şırnak. It was observed that Provincial Gendarmerie Commander Major General Murat Bulut, along with the Governor of Şırnak, the Provincial Police Chief, and other officials, participated in the election campaign activities of the AKP's İdil mayoral candidate. [https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/tumgeneral-ile-vali-ak-partili-adaya-destek-turunda-haber-1673422]

Naturally, everyone asked once again, “What is happening in the Gendarmerie?”

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CAPTAIN WHO CALLED VAHDETTİN A “TRAITOR”

You may remember; in recent months, we wrote about what happened to a captain serving in the Gendarmerie Commando Special Public Security Command. [https://muyesseryildiz.com/2023/11/24/menzillik-dava-ataturkcu-subayin-basina-neler-geldi/] In summary, what happened was as follows:

On November 12, 2021, an argument broke out between Captain C.H., known for his heroism in the 2018 Operation Olive Branch in Syria, and a non-commissioned officer (NCO) regarding Atatürk and Vahdettin. When C.H. called Vahdettin a “traitor,” the NCO replied, “He who calls the Sultans a traitor is a traitor himself,” and swearing ensued.

While the incident was subject to a disciplinary investigation within the Gendarmerie, it was later transferred to court. The reason for the transfer to court was that the records kept were altered, and it was alleged that Captain C.H. had also “insulted the President.” [https://muyesseryildiz.com/2023/11/25/menzillik-davada-hakimin-sorusu-gavs-ne/]

Following this allegation, C.H.’s place of duty was changed four times, he was given a salary deduction penalty, and he was suspended. Although C.H. won 15 out of the 16 lawsuits he filed against these actions, his dismissal from the Gendarmerie was brought to the agenda, and a criminal complaint was filed against him for “insulting the President.” Although the prosecutor conducting the investigation determined that the four NCOs who testified against C.H. acted out of “professional solidarity” and that there was no “insult to the President,” a lawsuit was filed on the grounds of “strong suspicion of a crime.”

In his defense in this criminal case, C.H. stated that the Menzil members had set a trap for him, while his lawyer, Serdar Öztürk, said, “The incident took place between sectarian officer/NCOs and an Atatürkist officer.”

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Interior High Disciplinary Board, which reviewed C.H.’s dismissal from the Gendarmerie, concluded that C.H. “did not insult the President” and rejected the dismissal request. However, C.H. was given a 16-month rank advancement freeze penalty. The justification was “creating the environment that would cause this slander to be cast upon him!”

Stating that the criminal case for insulting the President is ongoing, let us tell you about another lawsuit filed against C.H. on the same subject.

THE NCO WHO DEFENDED VAHDETTİN REQUESTED PROTECTION FROM THE COURT

C.D., one of the NCOs with whom Captain C.H. argued, filed an insult lawsuit against C.H., claiming that he had sworn at him and attempted to beat him, and demanded 5 thousand liras in compensation.

Yesterday, this case began to be heard at the Ankara West 3rd Criminal Court of First Instance. Before the hearing, the lawyer for NCO C.D. submitted a petition to the court with the following request:

“Considering the content of the file and the acts of the defendant subject to the indictment, in order to ensure and maintain order in the courtroom, and to ensure that the client complainant does not face any danger that could harm his material and moral existence, security measures should be taken by law enforcement officers before and after the hearing, around the courtroom, and during the hearing if deemed necessary by your honorable court…”

However, it appeared that the court did not deem it necessary, as no security measures were taken before or after the hearing.

JUDGE: “ARE YOU GOING TO TELL ME WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MILITARY UNTIL EVENING?”

Let us come to what happened in the hearing.

While C.H. stated that the allegations were not true, that he did not insult the complainant NCO C.D., and that he did not try to hit him, his lawyer, Süleyman Demirel İlbak, requested that a SEGBİS (Audio and Visual Information System) recording be made. Upon this, the following dialogues took place:

Judge: “I will not listen to anything regarding other matters. I will not open SEGBİS. Explain the reason for the argument in essence.”

Atty. Serdar Öztürk: “I am making a procedural objection. You cannot give instructions to the defendant on how to make his defense. The defendant makes his defense freely, then questions are directed if there are any.”

Judge: “We do these files every day, don't worry. I didn't do such a thing. Of course, I will have the incident explained.”

Atty. Öztürk: “We are sensitive because we have encountered a lot of lawlessness in this process.”

Judge: “Please do not tire the court before the trial begins.”

Atty. Öztürk: “Do not tire the defendant either.”

Judge: “Of course I will ask the reason. He doesn't accept the act at all anyway. Are you going to tell me what happened in the military until evening?”

After these dialogues, while the Judge rejected the request to open SEGBİS, Captain C.H. continued his defense as follows:

“The person called C…. is an enemy of Atatürk and the Turks. When I said ‘traitor’ for Vahdettin, he replied, ‘He who calls Vahdettin a traitor is a traitor.’ When I asked, ‘Who are you calling a traitor?’, he insulted Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, his comrades-in-arms, historians, and consequently my wife, who is a historian. I used profanity. I swear at those who insult Atatürk. I did not say it directly to him, I used a general expression. I am an officer loyal to the military oath. Afterwards, I did not walk towards him, I did not try to hit him. On the contrary, H.F. from them pulled me inside, closed the door, and held me while C.D. got up from his seat and came towards me. When I shouted, ‘Let me go,’ Sergeant Major H.Ö.E., who heard my voice from outside, came, and then H.F. let me go. That is how I left the room.”

When C.H. continued his defense by saying that he had also filed a criminal complaint against C.D. for insulting Atatürk, but the prosecutor had decided not to prosecute, the Judge reacted as follows:

“Please, the insult to Atatürk is not related to the merits of the file, it does not concern us. I will not listen, I will not write it down. This is a courtroom, I am the President, I will not have it written.”

The Judge then asked Captain C.H. whether he wanted the announcement of the verdict to be deferred. Upon Captain C.H.’s reply, “I do not want it. It has emerged that the evidence in the file is invalid. I am the one complaining about him,” the Judge replied, “I am not the authority to receive complaints. Go to the prosecutor's office.”

C.H., stating that his complaints had been missing for 2 years, presented the section on the Kara Harp Okulu (Military Academy) website where Vahdettin is called a “traitor” to the Judge and concluded his defense with the words, “It is impossible for a Turkish soldier, a child of Turkey, not to know this.”

THE NCO'S CHARACTER DEBATE

After Lawyer Serdar Öztürk explained what C.H. did in Operation Olive Branch, he said about the complainant NCO C.D., “He was tried for preparing fake reports as if he had captured organizational materials in the field, which he had actually seized in the house of a person sympathetic to the PKK while serving in Hakkari. Although it was not possible for him to be assigned to JÖAK (Gendarmerie Commando Special Public Security Command) considering the disciplinary penalties he had received before…” The Judge interrupted, “Then submit a petition to JÖAK saying ‘He cannot serve.’ Complete your sentence, come to the merits.”

When Atty. Öztürk replied that what he was telling was important in terms of showing his character, the Judge reacted with the words, “I determine his character. Do not tell me his character. There cannot be a sentence like ‘He cannot serve in JÖAK.’”

After all these events, Atty. Öztürk first said the following:

“Just as in the FETÖ era, there are suspicions that the complainant was assigned to this duty due to his sect connection, and this situation has been conveyed to the administration. I am explaining why my client was slandered. Whether a trial is real or theater can be determined by two facts. These are; whether the court restricts the defense of the defendant and his lawyers, and whether it collects the evidence for the defense. In this trial, from the very beginning, the defendant being forced to make a defense quickly, being warned not to go into other subjects, and the trial being conducted only with questions is against the law. The basis of our defense in this file is that C.H. was slandered by sect members who hate Atatürk and Atatürkists because he is an Atatürkist officer. Not allowing this to be explained and told is a restriction of the right to defense and a violation of the principle of a fair trial.”

Then he requested the recusal of the judge.

The Judge, after asking for the prosecutor's opinion, decided to send the file to the High Criminal Court to make a decision on the request and adjourned the hearing.

In short; are the things that happened to Captain C.H. not also an explanation of how Menzil members can be accepted at the highest level in the Gendarmerie General Command or how commanders can participate in the AKP's election campaigns, in other words, are they not an indicator of the climate in the Gendarmerie?!