×
Secondary evidence
Paylaş
LinkedinFlipboardLinki KopyalaYazı Tipi
The Court of Appeals made such a verdict that the team of prosecutors probing the so-called "Ergenekon gang" may soon find themselves without any credible evidence in the glossy volumes of indictments that were largely constructed on decoding telephone conversations between the alleged suspects.
Obviously, as is the case in democracies respecting the supremacy of law, there are established procedures in Turkey as well regarding how a judicial investigation can be launched and carried out; how a court can handle a case; the rights of the detained or the accused; and of course under the basic "presumption of innocence" principle, no one can be condemned as guilty of any crime unless sentenced by a court.
Over the past almost two years, in 12 separate waves, houses and offices of hundreds of individuals were raided Ğ including the residences of former chief prosecutor Sabih Kanadoğlu of the Court of Appeals and Association for Supporting Contemporary Life, or ÇYDD, chairperson Professor Türkan Saylan, who we lost last week after an exemplary 74-year life defending the modern Republic, gender equality and girls' education rights, and rebelling against illiteracy, primitivism and radicalism Ğ by police on orders of the so-called Ergenekon prosecutors; over 100 people were detained, scores were arrested and many people were kept behind bars for months, some of them well over one year, without an official charge brought against them.
The backbone of that operation was information obtained by the police intelligence through authorized, and perhaps, unauthorized, phone taps and environmental listening.
All through the past two years, many people respecting the supremacy of law and equality of all in front of the law, including this writer, were critical of the way the Ergenekon probe was being conducted and complaining of gross violation of established procedures as well as international norms of law.
Thus, the detained and arrested people within the scope of the probe were subjected to a summary execution on the front pages or on TV screens in the media in allegiance with the government. They were accused. Declared guilty. Sentenced. Their penalties were being executed swiftly. Yet, most of the detained or arrested were not even officially charged with any wrongdoing.
Political vendetta
When people like this writer were crying that not only the fundamental "presumption of innocence" principle of contemporary law was violated but individual rights of people were violated with the servicing to the allegiant media the most discreet and sacred conversations between wife and husband, mother and child, between lovers or between bosses, editors and their staff, the allegiant media was attacking us of trying to defend the "gang" members by concentrating on "possible violation of procedures" and ignoring the "crimes exposed." The procedures of investigation or of trial, however, are the backbone of the functioning of the judicial system; otherwise a country may land in a "judicial-political tyranny" if and when a political administration can bend the laws to suit its political designs. Still, the allegiant media continued publishing the details of the ongoing investigation and sections of the indictments in a manner to suit the political purpose of the authorities that serviced those documents to them in contravention of the laws.
Now, for a second time the Court of Appeals made a verdict in examining a case in which several people were sentenced for decoding telephone conversations provided sufficient evidence of the existence of a gang and membership in a gang established with the aim and intention of forgery. The Court of Appeals ruled against the sentencing of the lower court stressing that unless supported by concrete evidence, a person cannot be sentenced taking into account only the decoding of telephone conversations because telephone decoding could only be "secondary evidence" under the Turkish legal system. Naturally, this verdict will not be taken into account by the Ergenekon prosecutors and the Ergenekon case will continue, as will the detentions and arrests within its scope.
But, whatever the verdict of that case, unless the secondary evidence, that is decoding of phone tapings, is supported with hard evidence, which we could not see anything substantial to that end so far, eventually the Ergenekon verdict will be annulled by the Court of Appeals. Why this suffering then?
Over the past almost two years, in 12 separate waves, houses and offices of hundreds of individuals were raided Ğ including the residences of former chief prosecutor Sabih Kanadoğlu of the Court of Appeals and Association for Supporting Contemporary Life, or ÇYDD, chairperson Professor Türkan Saylan, who we lost last week after an exemplary 74-year life defending the modern Republic, gender equality and girls' education rights, and rebelling against illiteracy, primitivism and radicalism Ğ by police on orders of the so-called Ergenekon prosecutors; over 100 people were detained, scores were arrested and many people were kept behind bars for months, some of them well over one year, without an official charge brought against them.
The backbone of that operation was information obtained by the police intelligence through authorized, and perhaps, unauthorized, phone taps and environmental listening.
All through the past two years, many people respecting the supremacy of law and equality of all in front of the law, including this writer, were critical of the way the Ergenekon probe was being conducted and complaining of gross violation of established procedures as well as international norms of law.
Thus, the detained and arrested people within the scope of the probe were subjected to a summary execution on the front pages or on TV screens in the media in allegiance with the government. They were accused. Declared guilty. Sentenced. Their penalties were being executed swiftly. Yet, most of the detained or arrested were not even officially charged with any wrongdoing.
Political vendetta
When people like this writer were crying that not only the fundamental "presumption of innocence" principle of contemporary law was violated but individual rights of people were violated with the servicing to the allegiant media the most discreet and sacred conversations between wife and husband, mother and child, between lovers or between bosses, editors and their staff, the allegiant media was attacking us of trying to defend the "gang" members by concentrating on "possible violation of procedures" and ignoring the "crimes exposed." The procedures of investigation or of trial, however, are the backbone of the functioning of the judicial system; otherwise a country may land in a "judicial-political tyranny" if and when a political administration can bend the laws to suit its political designs. Still, the allegiant media continued publishing the details of the ongoing investigation and sections of the indictments in a manner to suit the political purpose of the authorities that serviced those documents to them in contravention of the laws.
Now, for a second time the Court of Appeals made a verdict in examining a case in which several people were sentenced for decoding telephone conversations provided sufficient evidence of the existence of a gang and membership in a gang established with the aim and intention of forgery. The Court of Appeals ruled against the sentencing of the lower court stressing that unless supported by concrete evidence, a person cannot be sentenced taking into account only the decoding of telephone conversations because telephone decoding could only be "secondary evidence" under the Turkish legal system. Naturally, this verdict will not be taken into account by the Ergenekon prosecutors and the Ergenekon case will continue, as will the detentions and arrests within its scope.
But, whatever the verdict of that case, unless the secondary evidence, that is decoding of phone tapings, is supported with hard evidence, which we could not see anything substantial to that end so far, eventually the Ergenekon verdict will be annulled by the Court of Appeals. Why this suffering then?
Paylaş
LinkedinFlipboardLinki KopyalaYazı Tipi
