SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS UNLAWFUL SENTENCES IMPOSED ON PEOPLE’S LAWYERS

SUPREME COURT’S APPROVAL DECISION IS A DECLARATION THAT THERE IS NO LAW IN TURKEY
WE WILL NOT FALL IN LINE, WE WILL NOT BOW DOWN

WE WILL NOT STOP FIGHTING FOR JUSTICE!

The 16th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals announced yesterday (on 15.09.2020) its decision dated September 3, 2020, at the end of the appeal examination regarding the penalties given to the lawyers of the people.
Upon the decision of the 16th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, the judgments given against the lawyers Aycan Çiçek, Aytaç Ünsal, Behiç Aşçı, Engin Gökoğlu, Naciye Demir, Özgür Yılmaz, Süleyman Gökten and Şükriye Erden were approved; the provisions of the lawyers Ahmet Mandacı, Ayşegül Çağatay, Didem Ünsal, Yağmur Ereren Evin, Yaprak Türkmen and Zehra Özdemir to be corrected, corrected and approved; Lawyers Barkın Timtik, Ezgi Çakır and Selçuk Kozağaçlı decided to overturn the provisions.

The Supreme Court decided that the decision about the people’s lawyer Ebru Timtik, who was immortalized on the 238th day of the death fast resistance for the right to a fair trial, was also reversed because of death.
Thus, the Supreme Court of Appeals upheld the decision on 14 of the 18 lawyers, who were sentenced to a total of 159 years and 2 months by the Istanbul 37th High Criminal Court, and reversed the decision on four lawyers.
This Decision of the Supreme Court is the Announcement of Lawlessness and Unlawfulness.

This decision of the Supreme Court, which has the title of “Supreme Court”, once again showed that the Supreme Court is no different from the courts of first degree, that it is a part of the same mechanism, a stick in the hands of fascism.
Supreme Court 16. According to this decision, the criminal Department declared that Turkey is not a rule of law, legal ideals such as the rule of law and judicial independence have no place in the law of fascism, the political power of the entire judiciary, including the Supreme Court has declared that they acted with the AKP fascism orders and instructions.
With this decision, the Supreme Court also confirmed our determination that “fascism has no law, fascism is lawless”, which we have defended for many years.

There Is No Law, No Justice In This Decision

The Supreme Court, with this decision, has adopted both domestic legal regulations in Turkey (Constitution, Criminal Procedure Code, etc.) and ignored the European Convention on human rights without hesitation on this issue.
Supreme Court 16. When this decision of the criminal Department is examined, it is seen how we are faced with lawlessness and arbitrariness from the first sentences.

Looking at the whole decision, it seems that it was a hasty, sloppy decision that contained many contradictions in itself.
In the whole of the decision, there are expressions that are not understood what they mean on many issues, open to all kinds of interpretation, ambiguous and contradictory. The reason for this is the difficulty of the Supreme Court in covering up so much unlawfulness. The Supreme Court had difficulties in explaining the illegality and finding a cover for them.
In the first sentence, the Supreme Court, ignoring the lawlessness witnessed by everyone, claimed that “a fair trial was conducted in accordance with the principle of equality of arms, in which sufficient opportunities for defense were granted.” However, all violations of the law in this case were also reported by the following bar associations and international legal organizations. Even counting these illegalities one by one will take a long time, so we do not see the need to explain it. On the other hand, the Supreme Court has proved once again that it is not independent and impartial by ignoring and ignoring so many unlawfulness, and that its duty and mission is not to provide justice but to “make decisions in accordance with the wishes of the political power”.

In the file brought before the Supreme Court 16th Criminal Chamber as a result of the appeal of our colleagues, there are legal disputes (disagreements) between the local court (Istanbul 37th High Criminal Court) and the defense party on many issues regarding the judgment. As a defense Party, none of our concrete objections, which are the basis of these disputes, that many procedural rules are not followed, that the right to defense and a fair trial is ignored, that the evidence is not adequately discussed and in accordance with the principle of equality of arms, have been examined by the Supreme Court, these disputes have not been resolved.

In the decision of the local court, almost no matter in need of explanation was not clarified by the Supreme Court, and many issues were left unclear and open to interpretation in the decision of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has clarified only a few procedural issues, and has made some minor procedural corrections that have no effect on the merits. However, there are very serious procedural errors in the trial that will also affect the merits of the case. The Supreme Court has either ignored them or approved them with a classic answer that is “in accordance with the procedure and the law” without any logical explanation or justification.

For example, they said “in accordance with the procedure and the law” about all of them in a classical way, without even the need to provide justifications on issues such as obtaining and analyzing digital evidence, refusal of the judge who cannot be impartial because they took part in the investigation phase, and the procedure of hearing witnesses. For example, the Supreme Court of Appeals said that the confessor named Berk Ercan, who is the main basis of the sentences given to the lawyers of the public, heard as an anonymous witness, despite being a known (open) witness, preventing the witness from being questioned by defense lawyers by the court, intervening in the defense of lawyers and restricting the right to defense, the decision was made by the defendants and lawyers. He stated that, after being forcibly expelled from the hall, it was not against the law to read the prosecuted lawyers into the empty hall without asking their last words.
However, all of these are related to the Code of Criminal Procedure and the European Convention on Human Rights 6, which regulates the right to a fair trial. It is clearly contrary to its article. In the law and contract, the procedure for listening and questioning witnesses and the obligation to exercise the right to defend effectively are clearly stated. These were not observed in the trial of the people’s lawyers, but the Supreme Court claimed that they were in accordance with the law. This clearly shows that the Supreme Court does not take into account the law and the law when making decisions. In other words, the Supreme Court did not do what it was actually supposed to do, and it did not conduct legal supervision of the decision of the court of first instance, but only the approval of this decision, acting as a notary.

The Decision Of The Supreme Court Is A Political Decision, Not A Legal One.

In its decision, the Supreme Court did not do what it should do, but tried to criminalize revolutionary advocacy in accordance with the wishes of the political power, AKP fascism, and ruled that the lawyers on trial characterized the advocacy activities as organizational activities and that this form of advocacy constituted a crime of “terrorism”. Lawyers are also members of the organization in order to prevent obstruction of the capture of the organs of the investigation, the suspects in cuffs for the RESIST (to use his right to remain silent against them and they refused to accept anything that’s) suggestion in the direction of professional activities; participate in client and commemorations, funerals, and participate in meetings used for walking and basic rights and freedoms, participation in democratic activities such as panels and conferences speaker and listener, or even abroad, to accept crime and made. This is a clear indication that the Supreme Court has made a decision of a political rather than a legal nature.

This decision of the Supreme Court on the lawyers of the people is a political decision, not a legal one. The Supreme Court, just like the Istanbul 37th High Criminal Court, gave its decision in accordance with the demands and instructions of the AKP fascism, not the law. This situation is so obvious that the Supreme Court decided that the provision against Selçuk Kozağaçlı and Barkın Timtik was overturned because it was “unlawful”, but did not even dare to release. Because the Supreme Court knows that the AKP government will not like such an release decision. So there is no law in this decision of the Supreme Court, there is no justice.

In its decision, the Supreme Court approved the murder of Ebru, who resisted hunger for 238 days and was immortalized for both the law and the right to a fair trial

THIS DECISION WAS MADE TO BRING THE PEOPLE’S LAWYERS INTO LINE
WE WILL NOT FALL IN LINE, WE WILL NOT BOW DOWN, WE WILL NOT GIVE UP THE FIGHT FOR JUSTICE!

This decision of the Supreme Court is null and void against history.

History will acquit us!

WE WILL WIN! BECAUSE WE ARE RIGHT AND LEGITIMATE.

PEOPLE’S LAW OFFICE / INTERNATIONAL OFFICE

E-mail: iplo.hhbe@gmail.com
Mobil phone: +30 6970393735

Source:  https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=172410487793132&id=102297394804442