People's rights should be protected in Turkey's Ergenekon probe
Güncelleme Tarihi:
The scene in Turkey when relationships and details of actions of the "Susurluk" gang were being brought to light was as follow:
People were participating in a campaign to switch off the lights in their homes at night.
The lights of the public house in which members of However, the then prime minister, Necmetin Erbakan, underestimated this show of solidarity, referring to them as "trivial". What did Susurluk symbolize? Was it not the symbol of a gang within the state? * * * How does society view the "Ergenekon" investigation? The answer to this question appeared in Milliyet daily on Monday. A&G, one of Those in the country who say, "Everything continues within the rule of law during the trial process", stands at 32.8 percent. In other words, a figure that is 15 points less than the level of support which the ruling Justice and Development Party gained in the recent 2007 general elections. Some 26.9 percent say, "There is a gang organization within the state, but people other than gang members are being included in a bid to intimidate them". Can those, whose feelings of hatred and revenge have emerged during the Ergenekon trial, be pleased with this result? In addition, the percentage of people who think along their lines is only 6 points higher than those who say, "Be careful, legal mistakes are being made". No, they cannot be happy with this result. And that is because there is a third party that think "the trial is an entirely political maneuver by the AKP". They make up14.5 percent of those surveyed. If you combine this figure to the previous one it adds up to 41.4 percent. In other words, 41.4 percent of society disapproves of the progress of the trial. They either completely dismiss the trial or believe that "it is being used for political means". Of course, when you add together the figures of the first two groups, it reveals that 59.7 percent of the public believe in the "gang’s existence". The real problem is complicated at this point. Which of these results should we take into consideration? The figure that reveals "there is a gang" or the one that says, "There is no gang, but even it does exist, the trial is being used for political means". * * * I see those in the first and third groups as "definite believers”. I believe that they are motivated by their ideologies, their personal hatred and intolerance. In view, there is no difference between "the political approaches" of these two groups. I place myself the second group. In other words, I say, "There are gangs. But political beliefs, prejudices and retribution motives are involved in the process of combating these gangs." I think the same applies to the "Susurluk" incident. I support launching an in-depth investigation on the weapons that were dug up, as well as the struggle against gangs and coup plotters if they exist. But I am against making legal mistakes and also shun punishing those who hold opposing opinions during this process. This is because I believe that both “cause” and “procedure” are inseparable elements of the rule of law and the judiciary. I am concerned that these mistakes could negatively effect the direction of the trial. * * * What has surprised me most during this trial process is the stance of those that I had assumed were "democrats". I have nothing to say to those "definite believers". But we heard statements like, "Bringing down the gangs is the most important thing. Nothing will happen if the lives of a couple of people is ruined during these efforts," from those who refer to themselves as democrats. We still continue to read statements like this. They also say: "In the past, similar things were done to people. Now it is being done to others. They should also accept this." This statement signals a disintegration of justice, democracy and conscience. Where do they stand in this survey? They stand among those that say, "What would happen if the rule of law and human rights were violated just once?" Unfortunately, this question was not asked in the survey. We may have seen a number of familiar "democrat" intellectuals' names in that group had such a question been asked. * Ertugrul Ozkok is editor-in-chief of Hurriyet Daily. This article is published in Hurriyet Daily on Jan. 27.