But sometimes observing and analyzing one single court case may tell you many things that you cannot learn from a dozen books written about this country. Or reading a report that analyzes a case can do all this for you.
The report “Murder in Anatolia -- Christian missionaries and Turkish ultranationalism,” which was written and has just been published by the European Stability Initiative (ESI), is a very good example of this kind of “illuminating” narrative that I have been trying to explain.
This report is written exclusively about the Malatya trial that concerns the killing of three missionaries in Malatya in 2007. As a lawyer, I have been working on this case since the day these barbaric murders took place in Malatya. The report is, even for me, refreshing and is encouraging me to look at the murders and the case from different angles once again.
During the preparation of the report, I gave an interview to Ekrem Eddy Güzeldere from the ESI, but to be honest, I did not expect such a wonderful analysis to come out at the end of the process. I would like to congratulate Ekrem and Gerald Knaus, founding chairman of the ESI and fellow at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard University, for preparing this excellent report.
From this single report you can learn a lot about Turkey: missionaries, murderers and their world, the complex and sophisticated crime network in Turkey, the deep state, JİTEM and so many other things.
The report starts with cast of characters: The victims; the main suspects; key witnesses; and Ergenekon suspects with alleged links to Malatya. Just by reading this who’s who of the Malatya murders you get a good picture of the complex network behind these murders. Then report continues with “Turkey’s anti-Christian campaign (2001-2009)” in which section you can see how deeply the Ergenekon gang is involved in those campaigns. After all this background information you start to read the report.
“Murder in Anatolia” is a must-read report. For the sake of not killing your appetite to read it yourself, I will stop here. But before finishing this piece I just would like to include a quote from its “Conclusion -- The Meaning of Malatya” section:
“The question whom to believe is not only a dilemma for judges; it is also a dilemma for anybody following this trial (and other, similar, and even more complicated ongoing court cases which involve allegations that the so-called “deep state” or senior generals might have been involved in carrying out or preparing illegal operations).
“This is not a new dilemma. When a Mercedes and a truck crashed in the town of Susurluk in November 1996 the Turkish public learned that Abdullah Catli, a convicted mafia killer then wanted by the police, was travelling together with a member of parliament and a former Deputy Police Commissioner. It later turned out that Abdullah Catli also had contacts with gendarmerie commanders, as well as with Grey Wolf ultra-nationalists. Police established that the last person to whom Catli spoke on the phone before the Susurluk accident was a person who was also referred to a number of times in the Malatya court toom [sic]: Veli Kucuk, the alleged founder of JITEM. Two reports (one by the Turkish Parliament and one by an Inspector, Kutlu Savas, appointed by the Turkish Prime Minister), looking into the connections between the state and organised crime groups following the Susurluk incident in 1997 and 1998, also discussed this shadowy organisation. The Savas Susurluk Report noted that ‘although denied by the General Command of the Gendarmerie, the existence of JITEM cannot be ignored.’ And yet at the time the General Commander of the gendarmerie and the Chief of General Staff, argued that JITEM was a piece of fiction.”
You can read and download the full report from: http://www.esiweb.org/index.php?lang=en&id=156&document_ID=124.
Have a good read and have a good Sunday.
