You would expect a strong government investigation (or inquiry). But no, Ankara did not assign any inspectors to the region for an administrative investigation. Inspectors were sent for a preliminary review.
Let me explain for those who are unfamiliar. An investigation is initiated to review an incident, elaborate the arguments of the informants and/or complainants, collect all evidence, relevant subject matter expert reports, collect statements from the suspects and collect the opinions and views from the relevant units and institutions on whether the act in questions should be legally punished.
A preliminary review, however, refers to an action by the inspectors who would collect the relevant information and documents and issue a report as to whether an investigation should be held. Based upon this report, the authorized units decide whether to initiate an investigation. In such decisions, a justification should be underlined.
This second process is taking place in the case of the Uludere massacre. Two civilian inspectors and a military reviewer were sent to Ankara for a preliminary review. Those familiar with the administrative process know that an investigation is initiated even in relatively insignificant cases. However, such an investigation was not opened in the Uludere massacre case. The authorities probably thought that if an investigation was allowed there could be political repercussions, the whole process could spin out of control and the political administration might confront serious criticism. For this reason, the pulse of the people was taken by a preliminary review for a proper diagnosis. This would give the administration some time, and it is for this reason that this method is used to prematurely close a case that may bear some political risks.
I was told that the inspectors talked to more than 50 people as part of the preliminary review. The inspectors believe that an investigation should be opened, but this requires consent by the relevant authorities in Ankara. One of two different views will determine the fate of the process. Will the views of those who want the prime minister to have control by releasing a statement on the first day of the incident or the views of those who push the prime minister to a pro-state view, arguing that the state committed no mistake, be more influential? I think the second group will be influential because Uludere is not just an incident where 34 villagers were bombed by warplanes.
Despite this troubled process, there are a few promising things. For instance, the Diyarbakır specially authorized prosecutor decided to address the incident. I got the impression that the office of the prosecutor would act decisively and identify the details of the incident. Of course, if the political administration fails to extend its support, the relevant institutions may act reluctantly to share information with the office of the prosecutor. The whole process will then become even more complicated given that the intelligence units are also involved.
