For HSYK Deputy Chairman Kadir Özbek and HSYK member Ali Suat Ertosun, who express various ideas based on distortions or misreports in the booklet: “Appointment and assignment models in which the government plays an influential role are acceptable for older democracies that have a certain culture of law. They cannot, however, be recommended for new democracies and countries that do not have a developed culture of law [like Turkey].”
Even if we accept that what Özbek and Ertosun say is true, the biggest responsibility for this falls on the existing HSYK system, which they are dying to preserve to maintain the current state of the culture of law which they scorn as “underdeveloped.” Even a cursory look into the role the HSYK has played in critical cases up to now will amply show that the likes of Özbek and Ertosun actually do not care about the law or legal systems, but twist the law to serve the interests of a particular group and create all sorts of obstacles for members of the judiciary who are actually seeking justice. Peering into a list drawn up by former prosecutor Reşat Petek of some past cases, we can understand whether the HSYK serves the interests of law and justice or those of a particular group. Here is that list:
Petek was removed from his position as the chief prosecutor of Yozgat by the HSYK after bringing an action against those who denied headscarved girls the right to an education during the “postmodern” military coup of 1997.
Court delegations in Bursa, Edirne, Samsun and other cities were dissolved and appointed to various cities by the HYSK after they issued a court decision to stop the implementation of the Higher Education Board’s (YÖK) circular banning the headscarf on university campuses.
In 2000 the HYSK removed disbarred prosecutor Sacit Kayasu immediately after he prepared an indictment against Kenan Evren, who led the military coup of Sept. 12, 1980.
İstanbul High Criminal Court President Mustafa Akın was removed from office by the HYSK while a trial of people accused of embezzlement at Kentbank was underway. Akın had declared that he had seen Hüseyin Süzer, the brother of Kentbank head Mustafa Süzer, at the office of HSYK Deputy Chairman Mahmut Acar, who subsequently removed Akın from office.
Judge Habip Kılınç and prosecutor Gültekin Avcı, who were overseeing a case on a traffic accident near Konya’s Karapınar district in which 49 passengers burned to death in a Mercedes bus, were removed from their posts and appointed to other positions in Mardin and Siirt by the HYSK because of their opinions and decisions against Mercedes and the company’s executives.
Having uncovered the connection between the mafia and the deep state in the Susurluk case in 1997, İstanbul 14th High Criminal Court President Sedat Karagül was appointed to another post by the HSYK. Although he was the head of a high criminal court, he was appointed to the İstanbul courthouse as an ordinary judge in 2001 because he had heard the Susurluk case in the past. In his place, Metin Çetinbaş, who is today serving as a lawyer for defendants in the Ergenekon case, was appointed as the head of the İstanbul 14th High Criminal Court. After this appointment, the Susurluk case was gradually covered up.
Prosecutor Mustafa Kelkit, who was conducting the “Küre” investigation, one of Turkey’s biggest probes into shadowy deep state connections, and prosecutor Dilaver Kahveci, who was leading the “Atabeyler” investigation, were removed by the HSYK from their positions at a high criminal court where they were in charge of terror and organized crime cases and appointed as ordinary prosecutors in the Ankara Courthouse.
Former State Security Court (DGM) prosecutor Ömer Süha Aldan, who discovered that members of the judiciary were trying to manipulate legal cases in the “Neşter” (Scalpel) operation, was removed from office at a specially authorized high criminal court and assigned as an ordinary prosecutor to the Ankara Courthouse.
The prosecutor who prepared the indictment on the military officers who were involved in the bombing of a bookstore in Şemdinli, and whose indictment was accepted by the court, Ferhat Sarıkaya, was removed from office and disbarred by the HSYK, which went further by disbanding the court delegation that sentenced the Şemdinli defendants to 39 years in prison each. The delegation appointed in their place issued a decision of lack of jurisdiction, and the case file was sent to a military court.
The HSYK’s attempt to remove the prosecutors conducting the Ergenekon investigation from office escalated into a crisis in 2009. New judges who were appointed by the HSYK made controversial decisions to release defendants in the Ergenekon and Sledgehammer (Balyoz) trials.
The specially authorized prosecutors conducting an investigation into the implementation of an anti-reactionary action plan in Erzurum were stripped of all their powers. Then members of the Supreme Court of Appeals paid a congratulatory visit to the HSYK and the same high judges brought photocopies of the investigation files of the Erzurum High Criminal Court to the Supreme Court of Appeals, eventually releasing the defendants. Indeed, this incident clearly showed the corruption in the judiciary and triggered the preparation of the constitutional reforms that will be voted on in the upcoming referendum.
In the summer of 2010, the HSYK also attempted to relocate specially authorized judges and prosecutors in Erzurum, Diyarbakır and İstanbul conducting probes into the deep state, but failed to so because the justice minister blocked their attempts.
Erzincan Chief Public Prosecutor İlhan Cihaner, who was indicted for being a member of a terrorist organization and who is currently on trial, has yet to be suspended from office by the HSYK and illegally returned to his post immediately after being released.
The constitutional reform package will place the existing HSYK into the garbage bin of history. Although Özbek and Ertosun claim that Turkey does not deserve it, the referendum package will save the Turkish judicial system from being a weapon in the hands of a group of people who pursue ideological and sectarian interests. Even the single fact that it will put an end to the HSYK’s despotism is sufficient reason to say “yes” in the referendum.
