Constitutional Court detail in the Çorlu train massacre case: 'An unjust verdict will be reached'

The next hearing for the Çorlu train massacre case had been postponed to February 29. Lawyers for the case stated that the application made to the Constitutional Court (AYM) to ensure all those responsible are tried will not be concluded in time for the hearing.

12punto

Six years have passed since the Çorlu train disaster, which killed 25 people, including 7 children, and injured 317 citizens, yet those responsible have not yet been punished.

"IT WILL NOT BE READY FOR THE HEARING ON THE 29TH"

Reminding that the 19th hearing of the case will take place on February 29 and that the investigation and judicial process have been full of scandals from the very beginning, the lawyers said, “If those responsible are judged based on 'probable intent,' this will set a precedent. We expect a result where human life is protected. We will learn whether the judicial process values capital or human life. On the other hand, a large portion of those responsible have not been brought to justice. We have an open application at the Constitutional Court. The result of that application will not be ready for the hearing on the 29th.”

"IF THEY CONCLUDE THAT 'THOSE RESPONSIBLE COULD NOT HAVE FORESEEN IT'"

Onur Şahinkaya, one of the lawyers for the families who lost their loved ones, made the following statement to İlayda Kaya from BirGün regarding the judicial process:

“One of the main agendas of this hearing will be the nature and amount of the penalty to be given. We will see whether the court will impose a sentence based on simple negligence, conscious negligence, or probable intent. Did these people cause these deaths due to their indifference, will they receive a heavy sentence, or did they cause these situations by ignoring a situation they could have foreseen, out of indifference or by prioritizing corporate profits and disregarding human life? The court will provide the answer to this. If the court reaches the conclusion that 'those responsible could not have foreseen these events,' it will impose a light sentence for simple negligence. Unfortunately, in such cases, courts in the country, as in the 'Soma' example, try to impose the minimum possible sentence. Especially in workplace accidents and cases involving public officials, the general tendency of the courts is to impose a sentence at the level of 'negligence' rather than 'probable intent,' and if that is not possible, 'conscious negligence.'”

"WILL THE STATE VALUE CAPITAL OR HUMAN LIFE?"

Reminding that the next hearing will be held on February 29, Şahinkaya continued: “If the deserved evaluations are made and the penalties are imposed, it will be in favor of society. However, because bosses and public officials would carry out their activities at a much higher cost and with more personnel, their profitability would decrease. In this sense, the courts pursue a legal policy that protects capital and bureaucracy. We will see in court whether this action continues. In the Çorlu train massacre, if those responsible are punished for 'probable intent,' this will be a precedent-setting decision. Human life will have been protected. We expect a result where human life is protected. In the judicial process, we will learn whether the state values the cost of capital or human life.”

"AN UNJUST VERDICT WILL EMERGE FROM HERE"

Noting that some of those responsible have not been brought to justice, Onur Şahinkaya stated the following:

“Whatever decision is reached, even if the highest level of punishment is given for 'probable intent,' a large portion of those responsible have not been brought to justice. People at the general directorate who played a role in these matters and whose responsibilities were determined by expert reports have not appeared before the court. There is an open application regarding this at the Constitutional Court. However, it appears that the result of that application will not be ready for the hearing on the 29th. In any case, an unjust and incomplete verdict will emerge from here. Serious resistance was shown in terms of clarifying the event. Whoever caused this event was not removed from their post, evidence was not delivered to the court, and it emerged during the trial process that the conditions that caused the accident on this train line continue to be operated today. Therefore, we want those responsible to be tried, all evidence to be shared, and the train lines to be made safe.”