Military probe might turn evidence into ‘piece of paper’

“The verdict is still out on that one,” he insisted during an interview published on Sunday, stressing that the investigation by the military prosecutor is still ongoing. In the interview Başbuğ asserts, “We still do not know whether what we have is the original document,” despite overwhelming evidence indicating otherwise. Following tests conducted by the İstanbul Council of Forensic Medicine (ATK), the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) and the İstanbul Police Crime Laboratory, the Gendarmerie General Command’s Criminal Investigation Department has also confirmed the authenticity of the document.

The plot in question, titled the Action Plan to Fight Reactionaryism, was reportedly drafted by Col. Dursun Çiçek and suggests that the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) made systematic preparations to damage the image of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government and the Gülen movement in the eyes of the public, to play down the Ergenekon investigation and to garner support for members of the military arrested as part of the Ergenekon inquest. Ergenekon is a clandestine criminal organization accused of working to overthrow the government.

At a June 26 press conference Başbuğ had referred to the document as a “piece of paper.” Later the General Staff started its own investigation, with a military prosecutor demanding Çiçek’s arrest, but Başbuğ’s words Sunday indicate that the military might still be trying to protect the colonel. In fact, experts say the original document might have been damaged during a General Staff examination, as Başbuğ spoke of fingerprint tracing in the interview. Experts say this might indeed turn the document into a “piece of paper.”

ATK head Cengiz Haluk İnce has stated that if the document is examined for fingerprints, this would certainly damage the document. Saying that various chemicals are involved in finger print tracing, İnce also recalled that dozens of experts had handled the document during their lab tests. “All those experts touched this document while examining it. It is really hard to find. Are we going to ignore this document if there are no fingerprints on it? Our report and reports from other institutions on the document’s authenticity are out there,” İnce said.

Zeynep Bornovalı, a graphologist, said examiners should show utmost care not to harm the document during testing. “Even the slightest stain that might occur on the document as it is being moved from one place to another will cause it to lose its original form. This might, in turn, negatively affect the investigation. It should be remembered that with every examination, the document’s original form is damaged.”

Attempt to vindicate Çiçek

Ahmet Gündel, a former Supreme Court of Appeals prosecutor, said probing whether the document really belongs to the General Staff was an attempt to bring the investigation to an impasse, stating that detailed procedures never carried out in any investigation were being applied to Çiçek’s case. However, Gündel also said that even if the document was harmed, earlier reports from various institutions had already established the case against Çiçek.

Gültekin Avcı, a retired prosecutor, has stated the opinion that the military prosecutor’s insistence on running fingerprint tests on the document appears to be the result of an order from the General Staff. “There is a disciplined and systemic pattern inside the General Staff regarding this issue. Gen. Başbuğ called it a “piece of paper” in the beginning and never backpedaled on that. They are doing everything to bring it down to the level of a piece of paper. In other words, the General Staff’s attitude regarding the Ergenekon investigation is starting to emerge.”

Reşat Petek, a former public prosecutor, also said that there was a clear attempt to damage the document. “Of course the gendarmerie or the police criminal labs can do examinations, but technical reports for courts are issued by the ATK. In other words, the ATK reports are those that should be taken into consideration. It is significant when they are asking for another examination after this. Plus we are actually speaking about a fourth examination here. Either something will happen to the original document during these go-betweens, or there will be other attempts to obscure its significance.”

Sacit Kayasu, another former retired prosecutor, said: “Those who want a re-examination of the wet signature do not trust TÜBİTAK or the ATK. This is a very bad situation. This does not do anything but hurt the reputation of the state. In addition to that, the wet signature should be protected. Damage to the document -- intentional or otherwise so -- is unwanted.”