The lieutenants' case was heard under police supervision!..

Following the graduation ceremony of the Military Academy on August 30, 2024, the cancellation lawsuits filed by Student Regiment Senior Talip İzzet Akarsu and Serhat Gündar—who, like the class valedictorian Ebru Eroğlu, were dismissed from the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) for reciting the Officer's Oath, which had been removed from the regulations, crossing their swords, and saying "We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal"—have also been rejected unanimously.

Regarding the rejection decisions, which were notified to Lieutenant Ebru Eroğlu last Monday following the Ramadan Feast, and to lieutenants Talip İzzet Akarsu and Serhat Gündar on Friday, let us first point out the following:

In the case of Ebru Eroğlu, heard at the Ankara 4th Administrative Court on March 5, the decision was rendered on March 13—the day Mustafa Kemal entered the War Academy—but was notified 10 days later.

The case of lieutenants Talip İzzet Akarsu and Serhat Gündar at the Ankara 20th Administrative Court, however, was heard 8 days before Ebru Eroğlu's case, on February 25. The date of the 8.5-page decision? Just one day later, on February 26. But they waited 29 days for notification!..

THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED INTO THE HEARING

As you might guess, I also observed the hearing of lieutenants İzzet and Serhat.

It is unheard of in administrative courts; there were two police officers in the courtroom. However, since they could only have been there upon the court's request, one wonders: was there a concern that the lieutenants might do something?

Furthermore, Ebru Eroğlu and other lieutenants who came to the courthouse to support lieutenants İzzet and Serhat were not allowed to enter the courtroom. They had to wait outside.

When Ebru Eroğlu's hearing was held in the same place 8 days later, there were no police present, and there was no interference with other lieutenants entering the courtroom.

It seems that either the 4th Administrative Court, which heard Ebru Eroğlu's case, did not feel any concern regarding the lieutenants, or everyone felt relieved after seeing that no incidents occurred during the hearing of lieutenants İzzet and Serhat a week earlier.

THEIR ONLY CRIME IS BEING BARRACKS MATES

It was observed that the rejection decision for lieutenants İzzet and Serhat was almost identical. This is natural, as both of their hearings were held consecutively on the same day and at the same time.

Specifically, Serhat Gündar's file was reviewed first, and defenses were heard.

Namık Öztürk, one of Gündar's lawyers, stated that crossing swords is a ritual repeated every year, but it came to the agenda this time because Erdoğan had not yet left the school and the lieutenants' voices were heard, adding, "They talk about an oath removed from the regulations. But there is no problem with the content of this oath. It was also recited in the Gendarmerie 15 days ago." Emphasizing that the whole issue hinges on whether any order was given regarding the time after the official ceremony, and noting that all 42 lieutenants stated no such order was given and that it is understood no such order exists, Attorney Öztürk described the school administration's act of backdating a report prepared 10 days after the ceremony to appear as if it were written on August 30 as "recklessness." Attorney Öztürk also noted the following:

"It is claimed that the lieutenants made plans. At the battalion party on August 29, the second-in-class officer recites the Officer's Oath, and no problem arises. Lieutenant Ebru says, 'It was my right to recite it.' Serhat Gündar only says that Lieutenant Ebru is right. This is what they call planning. These 4 lieutenants are roommates. They are chosen just because they are in the same barracks as Talip İzzet Akarsu, to create the number in people's minds. We consider the dismissal of the lieutenants from the TSK as a kind of scapegoating operation. In fact, the President and the Minister of National Defense clearly stated that these lieutenants should be dismissed. Despite this, 4 members of the Land Forces Command High Disciplinary Board cast dissenting votes."

Attorney İlter Aksoylu, after stating that the dismissal penalty given to the lieutenants is the heaviest penalty in disciplinary law, listed the irregularities in the investigation and said, "One day the truth will come out."

LIEUTENANT SERHAT: ''TO THE TURKISH FLAG BEHIND YOU''

After the Ministry of National Defense (MSB) lawyers stated that the dismissal process was in accordance with regulations and procedure and requested the dismissal of the case, Serhat Gündar was finally asked if he had anything to say. He said the following:

"Our celebration on August 30 has no political content or purpose. We did not think it would be reflected on social media. Indeed, previous celebrations had not been reflected. Because they were not reflected, they were not subject to political evaluations. Since no order was given regarding the time after the ceremony, there is no question of disobedience. I want to return to my duty, which is my right, and serve with my uniform to the Turkish Flag behind you."

''I KNOW PASHA YAŞAR''

Lieutenant Serhat's hearing ended this way, and the case of Talip İzzet Akarsu was immediately moved to.

İbrahim Yılmaz, one of Lieutenant İzzet's lawyers, objected to the accusations that "Ebru Eroğlu planned for the Officer's Oath to be recited, prepared the environment, and managed the group gathered in the field":

"The text of the WhatsApp message that Lieutenant İzzet allegedly sent is not in the file. It is not there because no such message was sent. Since there is no such message, it has not been explained how he did the planning. Where is the environment, how did he prepare it, what act or action did he take; it is not there. Did he line up all the lieutenants and say, 'You do this, you do that'? The claim that he managed the gathered group is abstract and a fabrication. Because Battalion Commander Halit Türkoğlu did not give an order regarding the time after the ceremony, and because the lieutenants did not follow the commanders' order, they were dismissed from the TSK. The MSB is contradicting itself."

After Attorney Mustafa Güler addressed the panel, saying, "Your nation is the Turkish Nation, and I believe you will make a decision in accordance with the conscience of the Turkish Nation," the MSB lawyers responded to Attorney İbrahim Yılmaz's words, "The MSB is contradicting itself," by saying, "He was not dismissed because Battalion Commander Halit Türkoğlu did not give an order regarding the time after the ceremony, but because he did not ensure the ceremony order."

Finally, Serdar Öztürk, one of Lieutenant İzzet's lawyers, spoke and said the following:

"We do not agree with the administration's claim that an investigation in accordance with the regulations was conducted. We are facing a void transaction from the very beginning. I know Pasha Yaşar (Güler); he was at the ceremony. If he thought there was a lack of discipline, he would have piled the Central Command there 1 hour later. Erhan Afyoncu only removed the Officer's Oath from the Military Academies. It is recited in other places. It is a ritual applied every year that has no political aspect. There is no crime or lack of discipline. The great head of the Land Forces Command High Disciplinary Board, the Legal Advisor, says, 'There is no lack of discipline.'"

LIEUTENANT İZZET: ''I AM WAITING WITH MY UNIFORM READY''

Following Attorney Öztürk's statement, the Court President announced that the hearing was over. However, when his lawyers reminded him that Talip İzzet Akarsu had not made a defense, Lieutenant İzzet was given the floor after a short hesitation.

Lieutenant İzzet was content to say the following:

"I never, ever imagined that our August 30 celebration would come to this, that politics would interfere with a ritual performed every year, and that we would fall into such a situation. However, I consider this situation as a flag watch. I am waiting with my uniform ready. My biggest dream is to fulfill the promise I made to my family and my nation."

Let us end with a section from the rejection decision rendered just one day after this hearing.

It stated, "Although it is claimed that the act subject to the case took place after the official part of the ceremony ended; since it is concluded that the act did not take place after the ceremony, based on the evaluation of all this information together, that the act took place while the plaintiff and other lieutenants were in their uniforms in a military area and while the people present at the ceremony (families and Commanders) had not yet left the ceremony area, and while members of the press were also present..."

It is in the name; graduation celebration... Apparently, if they had taken off their uniforms and done it after their families and commanders left the ceremony area, it would not have been a problem... But is this what you call a "graduation celebration"?!