Lawyer changes remarks on Gülen Movement in connection with murder of Hrant Dink
A co-plaintiff lawyer representing the family of Hrant Dink, a Turkish citizen of Armenian descent who was shot dead by an ultranationalist teenager in January 2007, has told Today's Zaman that remarks he made in an interview with the Hürriyet Daily News misrepresented what he really meant to say.
Cem Halavurt claimed in the Feb. 25 interview -- in which he focused on the suggestion that a presidential report concluding the murder was committed by an organized crime group and calling for officials suspected of involvement to be investigated might be a turning point in the Dink case – that: “The nationalists and the Fethullah Gülen group saw the murder coming. They both agreed to commit to the murder. They all wanted to profit from the outcomes of the murder.” Asked by Today's Zaman if his statements were correct, Halavurt said he needs to correct his wording:
“It is not possible to accuse the whole group. I meant to say that there are some people like Ramazan Akyürek in the police department who are known to be followers of Fethullah [Gülen]. The same goes for the İstanbul and Trabzon police departments’ intelligence services. They have not been investigated for their role in the murder despite several requests for an investigation into those officials, since there is evidence that they knew about the plan to murder Dink. I should also say that I do not mean to accuse nationalists either. I meant to point out the neo-nationalist group [ulusalcı] nested in the structure of Ergenekon.”
Dink was the editor-in-chief of the Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos and an outspoken member of the Armenian community. Despite judicial expert opinion to the contrary,
Dink was convicted of violating Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK). The article has been criticized for stifling freedom of speech as it forbids insulting “Turkishness.”
Halavurt also said the “Gülen movement” benefited from the outcome of the murder since he thinks: “They have used this murder against their opponents. … Two admirals in the “Kafes” [Cage] case wanted to be part of the Hrant Dink trial; they are saying that it is because they wanted to prevent the murder that they are now in prison. There is a power struggle going on within the court cases.”
Halavurt also claimed that the Ergenekon investigation started after the murder of Dink. Ergenekon is a clandestine criminal network accused of working to topple the government. Dozens of Ergenekon suspects, including military officials, businessmen, journalists and academics, are currently in prison on terror and coup charges as part of the Ergenekon case.
Asked by Today’s Zaman if co-plaintiff lawyers of the Dink family share Halavurt’s opinion as presented in the Hürriyet Daily News -- that the Gülen society “agreed on the commitment of the murder,” -- Arzu Becerik, another co-plaintiff lawyer in the Dink case, said that “nobody can say that.”
Commenting on the words of Halavurt, human rights lawyer Orhan Kemal Cengiz said as Halavurt himself admitted, he “makes no sense.”
Cengiz, who is also one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the Zirve murder case of April 2007, when three people who sold Christian literature were brutally killed, said first of all the Ergenekon investigation started following the discovery of hand grenades inside a house in İstanbul’s Ümraniye district in the summer of 2007, not as a result of Dink’s murder.
Secondly, Yasin Hayal, a major suspect in the killing of Dink, said that he was mainly in contact with the gendarmerie commander in Trabzon, Cengiz added.
“Let’s not forget that the Santoro, Dink and Malatya murders were mentioned as ‘operations’ in the Cage Operation Action Plan. I agree that those murders would not have happened if police had not turned a blind eye. And it is also possible that the police was under the influence of anti-missionary propaganda at the time,” he said in reference to the Cage (Kafes) plan, a suspected Naval Forces Command plan targeting Turkey’s non-Muslim communities.
Cengiz said that it is one thing to turn a blind eye to the murder plans, and it is another thing to be among those planning the murder.
“Obviously, Halavurt is quite confused. His state of mind is quite dangerous for a lawyer. His remarks show that he lacks a clear understanding of the situation. I suspect that this unhealthy point of view could have contributed to their loss of the case,” he said.
In April 2010, an indictment regarding the Cage Operation Action Plan was added to the case file on the 2007 Malatya murders. The plan calls the killings of Dink, Catholic priest Father Andrea Santoro and three Christians in Malatya an “operation.” An antidemocratic group within the Naval Forces Command aimed at fomenting chaos in society with those killings, but complained that the plan failed when large groups protested the killings in mass demonstrations.
Evidence collected in the Ergenekon investigation suggested that the brutal killings might have been organized by Ergenekon, which is suspected of a large number of murders and bombings aimed at creating chaos in the country to serve the organization’s ultimate purpose of overthrowing the government.
“All those who tried to have Dink convicted are in jail as Ergenekon suspects,” Cengiz added.
Garo Paylan, one of the leading members of the “Hrant’s Friends” group, who, in their ongoing search for justice, call on the government to punish the perpetrators of Dink’s murder, told Today’s Zaman that Halavurt’s remarks are quite “provocative.”
“If he holds accountable the whole Gülen group for the murder, then this is crossing a line. This is like saying ‘all Armenians are betrayers.’ On the other hand, we expect a statement from the same group saying that if there are followers of Fethullah Gülen in the police and if they were involved in the murder of Dink, the group supports their punishment to the end.”
According to the final verdict in the five-year-long murder trial of Dink, the suspects had no ties to a larger crime network but acted alone. Judge Rüstem Eryılmaz said amid growing outrage over a trial that many feel has failed to shed light on alleged official negligence or even collaboration; and that while he personally cannot deny the murder was the work of an organized network, the evidence submitted to the court was not sufficient to issue such a ruling. In addition, the prosecution believes the killers are affiliated with the Ergenekon network. The case went to the Supreme Court of Appeals.
- Created on .