What did the lieutenants 'protest'?!

When Ömer Aras, Chairman of the High Advisory Council (YİK) at the TÜSİAD Ordinary General Assembly, listed recent developments, we suddenly had a brand-new conflict on our hands, and an investigation was launched immediately.

In summary, YİK Chairman Aras's statements were deemed to be “attempting to influence a fair trial” and “publicly disseminating false information.”

Aras's list also included the dismissal of the lieutenants from the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK).

Since it has become the subject of an investigation, what does this mean? Were the lieutenants not dismissed from the TSK?

They were, and on his way back from Erdoğan's trip to Asia, Minister of National Defense Yaşar Güler reacted by saying, “We know what decision we have made. We are certain of the accuracy and necessity of the action we have taken. We are not going to discuss this with TÜSİAD!”

Let us come to the most concrete evidence that what we have been writing and talking about for months is not a fantasy, and that the lieutenants have indeed been dismissed from the TSK.

A few days ago, the lawyers for one of those lieutenants, Serhat Gündar, applied to the Ankara Administrative Court on Duty for the cancellation of the dismissal decision.

So what now? Did all those lawyers take action to cancel a non-existent procedure?!

Irony aside, the petition contains important findings and questions, especially regarding “influencing a fair trial.”

First and foremost, while recalling that the dismissal decision was taken by a vote of 5 to 4, the following was emphasized:

“One of those who cast a dissenting vote is the most senior member of the Board (a Lieutenant General) and therefore has the longest military experience. One is the only legal expert on the board in his capacity as the Head of Legal Services with the rank of Colonel Judge, and one is the member who has reviewed the most similar files on the board in his capacity as Branch Manager at the High Disciplinary Board (YDK). It is noteworthy that in an institution like the TSK, which makes decisions and acts within a chain of command, the decision was reached by only one extra vote, despite the statements reflected in the press by the highest officials of the State and the Ministry of National Defense that 'the lieutenants should be dismissed' and their will in this direction.”

Following this, attention was drawn to the illegalities in the investigation process, stating: “The names of those conducting the investigation were hidden. Documents were provided to us incompletely. The opinions and proposals of the disciplinary superiors were changed. The lieutenants' statements were taken using prohibited interrogation methods.”

THE TSK'S USE OF THE CONCEPT OF 'PROTEST'

While the justification for the decision was being examined, the following contradictions, which were not dwelled upon much after the dismissal, were highlighted first:

“The justification states, ‘Reading the oath, which was removed from the National Defense University Ceremony Directive, outside of an official ceremony cannot be evaluated as an act of indiscipline. Furthermore, the phrase 'We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal,' which expresses loyalty to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, to whom every cadet should be wholeheartedly attached, is not an act of indiscipline. The Great Leader Mustafa Kemal Atatürk is the common value of our nation and our state and cannot be debated.’ It continues, ‘However; when evaluated individually; when acts that are innocent, legitimate, and even possible to encourage are evaluated in terms of the integrity of the action, the way it was formed, its purposes, and the results it created; it will be accepted as a protest behavior and indiscipline that could create a sense of opposition in society, create a perception that the values in the content of the oath known as the Officer's Oath, which was removed from the National Defense University Ceremony Directive, are being excluded, and consequently cause the TSK to be debated. Undoubtedly, using the phrase 'We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal,' which expresses loyalty to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, in a protest action that is outside its purpose and contains opposition, would not only be an act of indiscipline but also a behavior that diminishes the value of the phrase,’ thereby revealing the true reason for the dismissal decision.”

Subsequently, this claim was challenged as follows:

“An acceptance and justification that a protest action was carried out and that they should be dismissed for this reason requires the cancellation of the decision for several reasons. First; no accusation was directed at the client regarding the words 'We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal' or the allegation that these words were used outside their purpose, no questions were asked during his statement, and his defense was not taken on this matter. Therefore, the client has been dismissed for an act for which his defense was not taken; the illegality is clear in a way that leaves no need for further explanation. Second; it is not possible to accept the words 'We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal' as a protest action. Because, as frequently emphasized in the majority opinion, the words themselves are innocent, legitimate, and words to be encouraged. Moreover, there is no one being protested with these words. It is not correct for the majority who made the decision to make such an interpretation without revealing who, what institution, or what idea is being protested and opposed. According to the justification; if reading the oath or the phrase 'We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal' is not an act of indiscipline and the Great Leader Mustafa Kemal Atatürk is the common value of our nation and our state, then a sense of opposition cannot arise due to this act. Of course, it is possible that there are those who feel opposition to these values in a way that is contrary to the Constitution and the laws. However, the TSK should take values that are in accordance with the Constitution and the law as a basis and should not act in line with the demands and wishes of those who feel opposition. A constitutional state requires this. A very large part of society (around 90 percent according to public opinion polls) is of the opinion that the reputation of the State and the TSK was not damaged due to the lieutenants' action. As a matter of fact, the reactions in public opinion after the announcement of the dismissal penalty from the TSK are also an indication that the phenomenon that damages the reputation of the State and the TSK is not what happened after the ceremony, but the fact that this itself is considered a reason for punishment.”

At the end of the 16-page petition, it was requested that the “stay of execution” regarding the dismissal decision be issued immediately without taking the Ministry of National Defense's defense, as it would lead to “greater and irreparable damages,” and that the transaction be cancelled after a hearing is held.

As Minister of Defense Yaşar Güler stated, they are certainly not going to talk to TÜSİAD when making a decision; but after this important contradiction pointed out by the lawyers, one cannot help but ask:

Since when is saying “We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal” considered a “protest” behavior in the eyes of the TSK, and what could the lieutenants have been “protesting” by saying this?!

Müyesser YILDIZ

February 15, 2025