Özgür Özel speaks from Silivri! 'Who will be held accountable for this shameful situation?'

Following the rally in Silivri last night, CHP Chairman Özgür Özel visited CHP's presidential candidate and IMM Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, who is being held at Silivri Prison, this morning. After meeting with İmamoğlu and the detained bureaucrats, Özel made a press statement. 

Özel's statements are as follows:

"During our visit today, we met with our Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, our valued friend Mehmet Ali Çalışkan, as well as our female friends Ceyda Akyak, Fatoş Pınar Türker, Elif Güven, İpek Elif Atayman, and Güldem Işık."

In addition, our Group Deputy Chairman Ali Mahir Başarır met with Ayşe Barım. We have also just learned the news that Esila, whom I visited last week at Bakırköy Women's Prison, has been released after 37 days along with Arda and Mehmet following their court appearance. Because of this release, neither Esila, nor her family, nor we, nor anyone in Turkey is in a position to say, 'Oh, how well you did, how right you were, thank you.'

Because keeping young people who would not spend even a single day in prison even if they were convicted of the alleged crime, and who have no prior criminal record, in prison for 37 days is wrong. Keeping young friends away from their families during the holiday for crimes that do not even carry a single day of prison time is shameful enough as it is. Since this shame was corrected after 37 days, who will be held accountable for those 37 days?

No one owes anyone a debt of gratitude. Let us be clear about this. What has happened is a disgrace and a great shame. It is Mussolini's method of pre-execution. Everyone is innocent while being tried. There is the presumption of innocence. If they are convicted later, they have the right to appeal. Everything must be completed, and if it is finalized, they serve their sentence as appropriate and necessary. No one can be subjected to pre-execution at the accusation stage, even before an indictment exists.

Those who do this are dictatorial regimes. Detention is a very exceptional measure. Sometimes it is even to protect the person being detained. For example, if they are involved in a traffic accident. It is a fatal accident. Emotions are very high. Detention is a necessary measure even for the safety of the person being detained. In very, very exceptional cases. Here, there is nothing, no evidence, just allegations, no proof, just slander.

"NO EVIDENCE, A COMPLETELY POLITICAL OPERATION"

There is no evidence for this. Making arrests in such situations is nothing more than an inability to cope with the people being arrested and a way to vent one's spite against them. This is the prevailing sentiment in Çağlayan right now. The prevailing sentiment in Silivri, however, is one of righteousness, moral superiority, the fact that the slanders cast have found no resonance in the hearts of the nation, that they have not been proven on concrete grounds, and that this unproven situation is nothing more than a confirmation of complete innocence and the satisfaction that this creates.

The chief prosecutor, sent here from Ankara as part of a political operation, cannot find anything, despite being told, 'Go look, you will find it as if you had placed it there yourself.' Because it does not exist. Remember in the past, those who said, 'Even if nothing happened, something must have happened' while canceling elections, those who said, 'Sir, the election has been tainted,' and when asked why they were repeating it, replied, 'Because they stole it,' and those who said, 'Just watch, they won't be able to steal it now, they will get the Ottoman slap'—they received the democracy slap from this nation two months later, yet they still haven't learned their lesson.

The situation we are facing today is the same. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was saying, 'In a month, they won't be able to look each other in the face.' He was saying they wouldn't be able to look their families in the face. I just looked Mayor Ekrem in the face a moment ago. They look their families in the face during family visits. We look our families in the face.

'NO ONE ELSE SEES IT BUT YOU'

We see nothing but innocence and righteousness. Mr. Tayyip said everything would come to light within a month. Yesterday was the 55th day, and he asks, 'What did you see? Did you see any proof?' There is none. No evidence. No proof. No MASAK report. He raids this place, he looks at that place. He said there was bribery. There is no money. He said there was a jammer in the bag. There is no crime in using a jammer. He asked, 'Why did you buy a jammer?' It turned out that AK Party mayors during the AK Party era had bought them. It even turned out that they had vehicles equipped with jammers. Where he claimed there was bribery and money, a jammer was found. He said, 'They bought a jammer, they are guilty.'

It turned out that his own people bought the jammer. Everything they say turns out to be empty, turns out to be a lie. So, what have you seen now? Mr. Tayyip, prove it. 'I saw an octopus. I saw its head here. I saw its arms in Anatolia. I saw one of its legs abroad.' Is there anyone else who sees it besides you? No.'THIS IS NOT A STATE OF LAW'

As the female prisoners I visited today also expressed, from the very beginning, the slanders cast by Ladin and Çınar did not hold up in a single instance where they claimed there was a counterpart. 'This person took this from that person'—they didn't take it. 'This person gave this to that person'—they didn't give it. Where is what was given? It doesn't exist. Where is what was taken? It doesn't exist. Now, under these conditions, they keep taking them, saying, 'We are going to the doctor,' and taking them to the prosecutor. Can this be done to a convict, to this prisoner? They say, 'Come on, we are going for a doctor's check-up.'

It is as if this is a detention center. They go there as if it were a daily routine; there is no lawyer, nothing. They appear before the prosecutor under the pretext of going to the doctor. 'You didn't testify as I wanted. Look, you won't be able to see your children. If you testify as I say, you will go home from here.' A state of law cannot function like this. It cannot be done through blackmail and threats. 'Look, don't testify as you described, but as I describe.' What are you talking about? They are telling lies, they are telling slanders. There can be no judgeship or prosecution like this. The ship of justice cannot sail with such slanders.

"WE ARE AT A DEAD END WITH THE GENTLEMAN"

The ship of justice will capsize. And we are at such a point now that we are at a dead end with the gentleman. Our friends have nothing to explain because there is no such situation as they claim. And he cannot prove it either. The system has just stalled. We are looking at each other's faces. He needs to release them.

"INSTEAD OF SAYING WE WERE DECEIVED, ERDOĞAN SHOULD TURN BACK FROM THESE MISTAKES WHILE THERE IS STILL TIME"

So, we have held them for this long, what are we going to say? Our people need to be released, but the prosecutor won't let them go. How will this happen? 'Write the indictment.' 'I can't write it, I have no evidence.' 'Let us go then.' 'Well, what will I tell the public?' Mr. Tayyip spoke boldly. By God, if Mr. Tayyip sees fit, let him appoint the three lawyers he trusts the most. Let us appoint the three lawyers we trust the most. Regarding these allegations—that is, it would be a very optimistic scenario—if they are deceiving Mr. Tayyip again, just as Zekeriya Öz deceived him, if Akın Gürlek is deceiving Mr. Tayyip, then instead of saying 'May my nation forgive me, I was deceived' in 3 or 5 years, they should sit down today while there is still time, examine this, and turn back from these mistakes. We have reached this point now.

"WE ARE TIRED OF REPEATING OURSELVES"

We are tired of explaining our innocence. They could not find anything to prove their allegations. Now, sir, 'testify as I say. Benefit from effective remorse.' Suppose they did. Suppose tomorrow they say, 'I heard it. I said that.' My friend, you need proof, you need proof. Now my friends are telling me. The testimony the prosecutor wants: There is a criminal organization. It is clear who is to be given everything. They told us those things too. The woman says, 'I didn't say that. I have nothing to do with these matters. I decide what work is to be done.' 'No, no, say that pressure came to us from Mr. Ekrem.' It didn't come. Where will I prove that pressure came? It didn't come. No phone call came. No instruction came.

"THE SYSTEM IS BLOCKED! THEY CANNOT PROVE IT"

The system has reached a point where it is completely blocked. They cannot prove anything. We have no crime to explain, so our friends have nothing to confess. Look, if there is a crime and it is confessed, that is evidence. If there is no crime and it is stated only to please a prosecutor based on lies, that is slander. There is no difference in the words between confession and slander. There is only a difference in the arrangement. If you try to force someone to provide the slander that a prosecutor wants when they cannot find a confession, you are just making two people throw accusations. They supposedly save themselves. But they cannot. Why can't they? Because the issue of effective remorse is only a matter for sentencing reduction.

We cannot just walk away as the prosecutor suggests. If it turns out tomorrow that the person who slandered has committed perjury, they face even heavier penalties. Why are you forcing people into crime? Look, if you find a crime, present it. If you cannot find one, do not push people into crime. Slander is a crime. If the people you force to slander prove their innocence tomorrow, the person who forced the slander will be in trouble. Especially since half of the prosecutors from the previous era who forced people to slander are now in prison themselves.

Half of them are enjoying themselves in Pennsylvania, friends. But all those who slandered are in prison. Therefore, no one should try to push anyone into crime. Honestly, if the perpetrator of this business is someone, the intermediary is Akın Gürlek, and the victim is Tayyip Erdoğan, and if Tayyip Bey is being deceived, let him send three lawyers, and we will send three lawyers to explain it. No. If the perpetrator of this business is Erdoğan, if the mastermind is Erdoğan, and if the person he assigned is Akın Gürlek, then let Mr. Akın go back to Erdoğan and say, 'It didn't happen as you said. It didn't turn out as you expected. We couldn't find anything. We cannot explain anything with octopuses or whatever.'

The law is not interested in octopus descriptions. The law is interested in concrete evidence. Let them say, 'We couldn't invent a criminal organization just because we wanted to,' and let this end. If Mr. Devlet is saying, as in the past, 'If there is a criminal, let them be tried and punished; if not, let them be acquitted,' then the time for that acquittal has come. Let him make a request. Let the indictment be written. Let the trial proceed without detention. Let TRT even come and broadcast it live. Let the slanders be seen. Let the solid answers be seen as well. We are tired of being right and explaining our righteousness. Let someone come out. Come on, let them say, 'It happened just as Tayyip Bey said. Let it be as Mr. Akın said.' But it's not there. What are we supposed to do about something that doesn't exist?

Since we are not going to force something that doesn't exist just to please you, you will admit your mistake and our friends will be released. A Turkey without terrorism, trials without detention, and social reconciliation can all happen on the same ground. You cannot settle scores with the honest mayors of the party founded by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk while, on one hand, you talk about a Turkey without terrorism and, on the other, engage in negotiations and reconciliation with the PKK party founded by Abdullah Öcalan, with the founders thanking each other.

You cannot enter into this type of relationship with the chairman of the party founded by Atatürk and his party. You cannot carry out this process with the founder of a party that has been committing terrorist acts for 45 years while having a conflict with the party to which you owe your democracy to this day.

"WE ARE FOR A TURKEY WITHOUT TERRORISM! YOU SHOULD ALSO BE FOR TRIALS WITHOUT DETENTION!"

If you do, it will backfire in the conscience of the nation. We have been saying this since the first day. We are here on the condition that this process stops the bloodshed, prevents mothers from crying, involves the parliament as a counterpart, ensures the process is transparent, and does not exclude or leave martyrs' families and veterans in a difficult situation. We are for a Turkey without terrorism.

You should also support trial without detention. Let the tension in Turkey subside, let the stock market rise, let these billion-dollar reserves not be burned in vain, and let no one else be harmed by these matters. That is all we had to say.

News Source: 12punto

Related News

Özgür Özel speaks from Silivri! 'Who will be held accountable for this shameful situation?'

İmamoğlu’s ‘Silivri’ message to Erdoğan: You were tried on charges similar to those directed at me, but you were not imprisoned for even a single day

Invitation to Silivri rally from İmamoğlu