Coup trial deepens schism between bar associations

The first time the dichotomy surfaced was on Apr. 27, 2007, when the General Staff released an electronic memorandum warning against fundamentalist religious movements being on the rise. Following the statement, bar associations from big cities -- notably İstanbul, Ankara and İzmir -- released messages of support, while 22 bar associations in smaller Anatolian towns spoke out against the interventionist statement. The 22 bar associations accused the TBB of politicizing and moving along the line of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP).

This time, the rift is greater. When the İstanbul Bar Association last week organized a march in İstanbul’s Taksim Square against recent allegations of wiretapping supported by 46 out of 78 bar associations, a group unfurled a banner reading, “Welcome to Taksim, coup-supporting bar” from a hotel window. The 22 Anatolian bar associations also stood against the TBB. Speaking on behalf of these bars, Yozgat Bar Association President Yusuf Başer said he believed the investigation into Ergenekon -- a clandestine network charged with plotting to overthrow the government -- has been a real litmus test for the judiciary.

“The duty of a bar is to be against illegal acts, not applaud Ergenekon. We want the rule of law to be fully established in Turkey more than anyone else, but the approach of the İstanbul Bar Association and the TBB concerning social matters is an indication that they would not like to see the rule of law but the rule of judges. What bars should do is stand against illegal acts no matter who is committing them. They also tried to make the march look like it has been supported by all bars across the country. We cannot stand them anymore.”

He also accused the TBB of trying to put pressure on the judiciary.

Burhan Kuzu, head of Parliament’s Constitutional Commission, said about the recent conflict: “Even members of the judiciary claim the judiciary has been politicized. The fact that jurists in Turkey do not act impartially became evident in the Feb. 28 [1997] and the Apr. 27 [2007] processes.”

Ali Aydın, who heads of one of the opposing bars, the Kayseri Bar Association, stated his opinion that the İstanbul Bar Association wielded influence over the TBB just like a dukedom. According to Aydın, those bar associations who supported an argument by the former chief prosecutor of the Supreme Court of Appeals, Sabih Kanadoğlu, that the deputy quorum for electing a president is 367 -- against President Abdullah Gül’s election in 2007 in an interpretation that had never before been argued in Turkey’s parliamentary history -- and the central administration criticism of the Ergenekon investigation clearly means that these bars are favoring a military takeover against the democratically elected government. The bar associations that support Kayseri and Yozgat, namely the bar association of Sivas, Burdur, Eskişehir, Erzincan, Çankırı, Düzce, Karaman, Kastamonu, Kütahya, Mardin, Nevşehir, Şırnak, Tokat, Trabzon, Iğdır, Kırklareli, Yalova, Aksaray, Afyonkarahisar and Kahramanmaraş, are planning to release a joint statement in the next few days.

Yozgat Bar Association President Yusuf Başer has stated that it was because of the flawed election system that associations of cities got to wield wide influence over the entire TBB.

Head of the Diyarbakır Bar Association Mehmet Emin Aktar also agreed that the TBB is being politicized. “The TBB’s purpose is not to own up to the state and defend the state. The TBB is far from representing all bar associations as it has an image that is supportive of coup planners given its stance regarding the wiretapping allegations and its stance against the Ergenekon trial. This mentality that dominates the TBB should change.”

Sivas Bar Association President Ünal Yılmaz and İstanbul Bar Association’s own Contemporary Lawyers Group have also criticized the İstanbul bar. Kemal Aytaç from the Contemporary Lawyers Group told Today’s Zaman: “This İstanbul Bar Association, which was shut down in the Sept. 12 [1980] period and that has reacted openly against the Feb. 28 process, is today following a pro-status-quo course. There is no such thing as ‘your coup stager, my coup stager.’ Jurists have to oppose coups d’état at all times. They are trampling the supremacy of the judiciary just to make the point that they are anti-Justice and Development Party (AK Party).”