The original document was reportedly mailed to İstanbul Chief Public Prosecutor Aykut Cengiz Engin on Friday by a military officer whose name was not made public. A photocopy of the action plan was originally discovered in the office of arrested lawyer Serdar Öztürk on June 4 as part of the investigation into Ergenekon, an underground organization allegedly plotting to overthrow the government.
The police had said the photocopied signature fit Col. Dursun Çiçek’s handwriting, and the gendarmerie produced a report saying the signature matched the colonel’s. The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) said after inspecting the document that there was no indication that the signature had been added to it later on in any attempt at forgery. It is the strongest evidence yet in the case against Çiçek, whose signature is allegedly on the document.
The Military Prosecutor’s Office had said no further action was necessary and that it was a photocopy and not an original but made no mention of efforts to locate the original document. The prosecutor did not clearly state that the document was “fake,” nor did they clearly state that it was a copy of an “original” action plan, but did note that a photocopy alone could not create criminal and legal responsibility, citing legal requirements that original documents be obtained. A while after the prosecutor’s announcement, the chief of General Staff referred to the plan as a “piece of paper.”
According to the letter written by the military whistleblower, a search was conducted of Çiçek’s house five days after the revelation of the document, and police waited at his home for five hours on the day of the raid to give him more time to destroy evidence. In addition, the whistleblower noted that the reasons behind why Çiçek had used a different signature to the one on the document at the time of the police search had not been investigated.
Another claim in that regard is that all documents and computer reports at Çiçek’s Third Information Support Unit, under the General Staff’s Information Support Department, were destroyed and that the officer was only able to save the original version of the alleged military plot. The whistleblower wrote that this destruction was initiated by Çiçek, and Gen. Mutlu Arıkan and a major were witnesses to Çiçek’s action.
The Military Prosecutor’s Office had stated that they started an investigation as the Taraf daily had published the photocopied document. But they did not detain Çiçek. And they did not start a search at Çiçek’s Third Information Support Unit. This leads one to believe that Çiçek was busy destroying evidence at the time.
