Semra Pelek
The fourth hearing of the case in which Istanbul Bar Association Board Member lawyer Fırat Epözdemir is tried on charges of “membership in an organization” and “making propaganda for an organization” was held today at Istanbul 24th High Criminal Court. The court ruled for Epözdemir’s acquittal on the grounds of lack of evidence.
The hearing began half an hour later than scheduled. Istanbul Bar Association President Prof. Dr. İbrahim Özden Kaboğlu and board members, Human Rights Association (İHD) Co-Chair Oya Ersoy, lawyers from bar associations of different countries, MLSA Co-Director Veysel Ok, and many lawyers attended the hearing.
The prosecutor, repeating the opinion on the merits presented at the previous hearing, demanded that Epözdemir be punished.
Starting his defense statement by thanking his colleagues who supported him, Epözdemir said, “The reason I am being tried here is because I am a member of the Istanbul Bar Association Board. For this reason, I repeat the defense statement I made in the first hearing.”
Referring to the calls made in 2015 to draw attention to the human rights violations during the curfews in Cizre, Epözdemir recalled the death of 10-year-old Cemile Çağırga and that her mother had to keep her body in a deep freezer. Stating that he went to Cizre to identify the human rights violations on site, Epözdemir said, “I was arrested because of such a hollow case file.”
Bayram Doğan, one of Epözdemir’s lawyers, drew attention to irregularities in the investigation process and stated that there had previously been a decision of “no ground for prosecution” (KYOK) regarding Epözdemir, but that this decision was lifted without justification. Doğan said, “A decision to launch an attack on the Istanbul Bar Association was made, and an investigation was launched accordingly.”
Doğan stated that his client was accused of being a member of the Peoples’ Democratic Congress (HDK), and said, “HDK’s social media accounts are active. There is no investigation or ban against it. It is claimed that my client was the HDK Bağcılar Co-Chair, but there is no record of such a chairmanship.”
Lawyer Pınar Bayram emphasized that the HDK statements cited as the basis for the accusation were made after Epözdemir’s trip to Cizre, and said, “It is claimed that he went to Cizre based on this statement when there was no such statement at the time. This claim goes against the ordinary course of life.”
Bayram also stated that Epözdemir’s efforts to document human rights violations in Cizre during the conflict period as a lawyer fell within the scope of legal practice, and that protecting human rights is a constitutional duty. She said, “There is no crime in this file, but there is legal practice, there are laws, there is the constitution.”
Speaking at the hearing, Istanbul Bar Association President Prof. Dr. İbrahim Özden Kaboğlu pointed out the aspects of Epözdemir’s arrest that constituted a violation of the constitution. Recalling Article 138 of the Constitution, Kaboğlu emphasized the independence of judges and said, “It has been stated that there is no link between the evidence and the accusation.” Kaboğlu said, “I tell the young lawyers to whom I grant licenses why the right to a fair defense is the most violated right in this country. This right is violated in the triangle of accusation–defense–verdict.”
After a recess, the court announced its decision and ruled for Epözdemir’s acquittal on the grounds that there was not sufficient evidence that he committed the crime.
After the hearing, Epözdemir made a statement in front of the courthouse together with the lawyers who came to support him. Istanbul Bar Association President Kaboğlu said in a speech here, “With this decision, we have also seen that there are still independent judges in Turkey.”
