Case Monitoring

Ankara court issues warrant against former German MP Memet Kılıç 

Ankara – Ankara Chief Prosecutor’s Office had filed a lawsuit against former German Green Party MP Memet Kılıç on “insulting the president” charges based on an interview he gave to online news website ABC. Kılıç, whom MLSA represents in court, faces this charge based on the remarks he made in an interview published on July 12, 2017 with the title “Charge of Genocide against Erdoğan: The Banana Republic treatment.”

First hearing of the trial was held before Ankara 36th Criminal Court of First Instance today. While Memet Kılıç, who lives in Germany, did not attend the hearing, his lawyer Veysel Ok represented him in the courtroom. 

Lawyer Ok reminded the court that Memet Kılıç lives in Germany and said, “Kılıç resides and works in Germany. I demand his defense statement to be taken in Germany and letters rogatory to be authorized immediately.”

President Erdoğan’s lawyer alleged that Germany often rejects such demands of letters rogatory in similar insult cases and added, “Germany classifies these charges as ‘political offenses’ and refuses to respond to letters rogatory. For this reason, I demand a warrant to be issued against Memet Kılıç.”

Lawyer Veysel Ok objected this claim, assured that he would take necessary actions to make sure that Kılıç’s defense would be provided in Germany. 

However, the court ruled in favor of President Erdoğan’s lawyer and decided to issue a warrant against Memet Kılıç, which means that he will be taken in police custody upon entry to Turkey in order for his defense statement to be taken. 

Veysel Ok protested against this decision and stated: “You issued this warrant without even trying the course of letters rogatory. I wish you tried this course first and then issued a warrant if Germany denied such a demand. You took the President’s lawyers word for granted and ruled only by listening to their statement. They didn’t even provide any document that shows that Germany actually refuses letters rogatory requests in ‘insult’ cases. What you’re doing will only drag the prosecution.” 

The court refused to reconsider their decision and adjourned the trial until February 26, 2020.