Observers, however, believe the claims were put forward in an attempt to remove from the agenda the recent arrest of Col. Dursun Çiçek, who was put behind bars for drafting an action plan aimed at discrediting the ruling party.

    The Justice Ministry stressed that telephones belonging to members of the Supreme Court of Appeals and İstanbul Chief Public Prosecutor Aykut Cengiz Engin were in no way being wiretapped. "Inspectors affiliated with the ministry demanded that the relevant courts issue orders for the wiretapping of the telephones of 56 judges and prosecutors as part of probes they were conducting. Hereupon, the courts ruled that the telephones of those judges and prosecutors be wiretapped [in 2008].

However, the Justice Ministry Inspection Committee subsequently decided that there was no need for the wiretapping of 46 of those judges and prosecutors. Deliberations over the remaining judges and prosecutors are ongoing,” read the statement. TİB President Fethi Şimşek also denied the claims, stressing that a directive from an İstanbul high criminal court calling for a chief public prosecutor and members of the Supreme Court of Appeals to be wiretapped had not been followed.

The wiretap controversy emerged late on Wednesday after claims that the telephones of İstanbul Chief Public Prosecutor Engin had been wiretapped since 2008 as part of a probe into a criminal organization known as Ergenekon. Then came allegations that the telephones of some members of the Supreme Court of Appeals had also been wiretapped since 2008. The TİB’s Şimşek also complained that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s telephone was illegally wiretapped for six years by Ergenekon suspects. “The point we have arrived at is thought provoking. We did not witness a single debate over the illegal wiretapping of the prime minister. This is a double standard. TİB wiretaps are done in line with court decisions,” he stated.

Aydınlık Editor-in-Chief Deniz Yıldırım and the security chief of the Ulusal TV station, Ufuk Akkaya, were arrested recently on grounds that they had wiretapped the prime minister’s telephone.

According to most observers, a heated debate over wiretaps was part of a systematic campaign to remove the arrest of Col. Çiçek from the agenda.

“The other evening, Col. Çiçek, who has his signature on an action plan that is deemed to be plot against the nation, was arrested for a second time. The extension of the junta at the General Staff was expected to be the order of the day, but the country’s agenda totally changed with wiretaps. What fortuitous timing!” exclaimed Adem Yavuz Arslan, a columnist for the Bugün daily.

Arslan also expressed the view that the wiretap controversy revealed a war within the judiciary.

“The telephones of individuals are wiretapped in line with court decisions. This means that courts will not issue a decision for a wiretap if they do not have sound evidence or documents at hand. … However, there is a chaotic situation before us. This is almost a war. One part of the judiciary is at war with another part of the judiciary. This war will certainly not yield any benefits for the country,” Arslan added. With the heated debate on wiretaps, Çiçek’s arrest fell to second place in the country’s top developments. The colonel was arrested and sent to Hasdal Prison in İstanbul on suspicion of “membership in a terrorist group.” He is believed to have prepared a document that details a Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) plan to destroy the image of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and the faith-based Gülen movement. Though Col. Çiçek is a key figure in the plot row, the plot is not believed to be solely the work of the colonel. Prosecutors are expected to expand the scope of the investigation and find out who gave the Çiçek the order to prepare the plan.

According to Alper Görmüş, a Taraf daily columnist, the Turkish media is “divided into different camps,” which means that it cannot produce “objective journalism” on various issues. “What we are witnessing is that while a party in the media highlights certain developments in line with its ‘beliefs’ [views], another party either minimizes or ignores them. While one party criticizes this move, it does the very same a few days later and is subjected to similar criticism,” he added.

Görmüş said the same paradox exists in state institutions. “While one part of the state seeks the continuation of the status quo, including military tutelage, another part seeks the normalization and democratization of the country. … Instead of engaging in theatrics, we should acknowledge one fact, which is that it would be a dream to expect the media to be ‘objective’ in extremely polarized societies. We need to read many sources to understand what really is going on in the country. This is what I do personally,” the columnist stated.

Council of State President Mustafa Birden joined the wiretapping debate on Friday. Speaking to reporters, he said: “The wiretapping of telephones belonging to members of the judiciary and this being given frequent place in news reports is nothing but an attempt to take full control of the judiciary.” He also made a statement against wiretapping activities and said everyone should refrain from any act that would destroy the independence of the judiciary and contravene the principle of separation of powers.

Jurists emphasize right to privacy in wiretapping debates

According to jurists, inspectors need to present sound evidence to courts in order for them to issue a decision to wiretap individuals’ telephones.

“If it is a judge or prosecutor whose telephone will be wiretapped, then inspectors need to be more careful. We cannot voice any objection to wiretaps that have been approved by court decision. The recent debate over wiretaps results from an ongoing political wrangle,” stated Yakup Erikel, the chairman of the Legal Research Association (HUDER).

Erikel also emphasized that wiretaps should not be aimed at violating the right to privacy of individuals. “We should not forget that this right is guaranteed by the Constitution,” he added. Reşat Petek, a former public prosecutor, said every individual is equal before the law and that debates over wiretaps should not focus on the status or position of the individual whose telephone is being wiretapped.