Can Atalay cited as example in Ergenekon conspiracy trial at the Court of Cassation

Müyesser YILDIZ/12Punto.com.tr

While one of the plaintiffs in the case, lawyer Hüseyin Buzoğlu, was explaining how the Ergenekon judges and prosecutors committed the crime of "deprivation of liberty" and cited the failure to release Hatay MP Can Atalay despite the Constitutional Court (AYM) ruling as an example, the Presiding Judge warned him "not to enter into daily politics." 

The 52nd session of the trial, which is being held at the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation acting as a court of first instance and has been ongoing for 5 years, was attended via SEGBİS (Audio and Visual Information System) by defendants Mehmet Murat Yönder and Mehmet Murat Dalkuş, who are imprisoned for membership in an organization, and by former presiding judge Hasan Hüseyin Özese, who was released a few months ago, from Istanbul. 

Former member Hüsnü Çalmuk, who was also revealed to have been released under judicial control last week, was present in the courtroom. 

The hearing, which was attended by Ergenekon victims İbrahim Özcan, Bülent Sarıkahya, Erdal Şahin, Murat Yücel, and lawyer Hüseyin Buzoğlu, along with their attorney Erkin Etike, began with the prosecutor reading the 27-page final opinion submitted to the court yesterday. The prosecutor requested that all defendants be punished for "misconduct in office and deprivation of liberty" in a chain of events, assessing that they committed these acts with organizational intent and within the scope of terrorism offenses.    

"LET'S SPEAK OUTSIDE OF DAILY POLITICS"

When asked for their statements regarding the opinion and the documents received in the file, plaintiff lawyer Hüseyin Buzoğlu pointed out that despite such serious allegations, the defendants were released and the decision to hear Mehmet Ali Pekgüzel was abandoned, and requested that all defendants be present in court for their defense against the final opinion.

Subsequently, citing the failure to release Hatay MP Can Atalay despite the AYM ruling as an example regarding the crime of "deprivation of liberty," lawyer Buzoğlu said, "This issue will bring about very serious debates. After President Erdoğan said he spoke with the President of the Court of Cassation, the Court of Cassation Presidency defended the decision of the 3rd Criminal Chamber." Presiding Judge Abdülkadir Güngören intervened and warned, "Speak about this case outside of daily politics." 

However, lawyer Buzoğlu continued using the Atalay example as follows: 

"A competent jurist like Prof. Doğan Soyaslan determines that the members of the 13th High Criminal Court and the 3rd Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, who did not comply with the AYM's release decision, committed the crime of deprivation of liberty. These gentlemen also consciously, intentionally, and with instructions given by the organization, caused my client to remain imprisoned for years.

Without showing effective remorse, they have also confessed that they did it intentionally. The prosecution has very accurate findings regarding the commission of the crime. Taking these into account, I request that an arrest warrant be issued for the defendants."  

Plaintiff Murat Yücel stated that he was also tried in the September 12 courts, but he did not experience what he went through in the Ergenekon court, that he went through a complete ordeal, that these people did not show the mercy shown by the Martial Law Court President Nurettin Soyer and his prosecutor of that period, and that they had their families dispersed with batons and gas, saying, "I don't think I deserved these. I want them arrested because there is a suspicion of flight." 

Plaintiff İbrahim Özcan also spoke as follows: 

"There is a saying by Rumi: Whatever is in the jar, that is what spills out. We understood that this jar is empty. Now it is up to the Turkish Nation to fill this jar. Kuddusi Okkır passed away in this case. It seemed meaningful to me that he was not mentioned at all in the opinion."

CLAIM THAT "THE PROSECUTOR READ A PREPARED TEXT"

After the plaintiffs, defendant Hüsnü Çalmuk, when asked for his demands, requested the expansion of the prosecution and claimed, "The prosecutor read a prepared text. The prosecutor is attempting to mislead the court." While Çalmuk was talking about former Chief of General Staff Işık Koşaner, whom he wanted to be heard as a witness during the Ergenekon trials and whom he had brought to the hearing, he said "İlhan Koşaner" several times.  

Defendant Hasan Hüseyin Özese requested that former Minister of Justice Bekir Bozdağ and Binali Yıldırım, who made the statement that "Ergenekon existed," be heard as witnesses. Özese also requested that the arrest warrant request against him be rejected on the grounds that he has a fixed residence and there is no possibility of him fleeing or tampering with evidence.   

After the plaintiffs and defendants requested time to prepare their defense against the final opinion, the Court rejected the requests for the arrest of the defendants and the hearing of witnesses, and adjourned the hearing to December 13.