Double standards from the European Court of Human Rights

The European Court of Human Rights found during the trial of Abdullah Ocalan in the State Security Court in 1999 that Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding the right to a fair trial, Article 5 related to the length of detention, and Article 3 regarding ill-treatment were violated in March 2003, and it presented its final decision on the necessity of retrying the terrorist head or reopening the case file, claiming that it was not a fair trial, to the Committee of Ministers in the Council of Europe.

During the trial of the terrorist head, the member of the soldier, the member of the establishment of our State Security Courts, was removed from the establishment, and the sentence of death was not implemented, suspended, and the death penalty was removed.

Despite all this, a retrial or reopening of the case file is demanded on the grounds that the judge was not fair.

Both personally and our members of the Justice Defenders Association (ASDER), which I am a member; even if we are the furthest away from his thoughts, opinions, and actions; We believe that prosecuting any person without any defense or treating him outside the judiciary using inhuman methods in the defense stage or taking any person or dealing with him as outside the judiciary does not bring any value to the people and organizations that carry out these transactions, and the procedures specified as a result of these The trial is also unfair.

As such, regarding the decision of the ECHR, we consider it as a political, biased, and double standard practice, not legal. We do not believe that these Courts and their decisions protect the rule of law and establish Justice.

Because without defense, without any criminal charges, without trial in the court specified by law, and despite duty being performed at the highest level, only because they live their beliefs and by claiming they are not disciplined, dozens of ASDER members have been eliminated by the decision of the Turkish Supreme Military Council of the Armed Forces, and even they wanted to know the crime was not answered and they applied to the European Court of Human Rights with the idea that we might find justice there. "There is no indication that the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention and its Protocols have been violated." it was rejected without being discussed with the rationale. This means that the processing, which is established by the Government without judgment, was in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights.

On the other hand, the same court, world States a legitimate government recognized by the family, the Republic of Türkiye on the overthrow by force of arms and split the target area and for this cause, children, women, or old, close to the innocent thirty thousand on the head of an organization that murdered people, to make a special exclusive jurisdiction for the sake of it, even the laws were changed but did not find the trial fair. It is not possible to think that the decision made is legal.

This political decision has nothing to do with the rule of law and the establishment of justice. Already, the European Council's endeavor is in the first Article of Council Status, ".. is to protect and spread the BASIS and PRINCIPLES, which have common existence among its members, and to establish a closer unity in order to ensure their economic and political development.  .. The aim of the Council is to reach a single European State". It is expressed in the form (1)

The principles of the cultural union expressed in the Council's fundamental status and considered the basis of the European Union are stated as "... in carrying out the political merger of the European States; the common traditions such as former Greek Philosophy, Roman Law, the West Christian Church, Renaissance Humanism and the French Revolution will be benefited." It is expressed in the form "(2)

It would be heedless to expect the decisions of the ECHR, which is a sub-unit of the Council of Europe, whose purpose and references are known, to be legal, as shown in the examples. As a member of Türkiye's Council of Europe, just after the ten constituent members, it is impossible to understand what they expect from this membership as a member in 1949.

OPEN THE WAY TO JUDGE ELDERLY TOO

The subject has a dimension that hurts, harms, and insults us, even thinking about it is like a nightmare.

On the one hand, people who share the values and beliefs of the nation and live their beliefs in front of public opinion, in universities, in the judiciary, and in the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye have been shown as if they were hostile to the state.

On the other hand, special trial procedures have been developed for the person who has been trying to demolish the State, organized and silage for 20 years, causing the state to be destroyed by material moral resources, the burden of the nation's foreign debt, and allow this trial process to be negotiated with the real enemies on the ground of our nation. Even submit to the pressures.

To get the man inside, is it necessary to cooperate with outside power centers?

If we want to have a reputation on earth as a state or as a nation and do not want others to intervene, is it not necessary to put our people and their values in front of everything?

If you submit to foreign pressure and consider the chaos of our country; it also gives Abdullah Öcalan the right to be tried again; you are responsible to history if you do not give them the right to be prosecuted for AGE victims and redo their extorted social rights, which have been deprived of being judged. Neither the Government nor the Parliament can escape this responsibility. Thursday, May 12, 2005

Adnan Tanrverdi
Retired Brigadier General
ASDER Gnr. Chairman

(1)New Guide Encyclopedia C.3, Pg. 36
(2) a.g.e
You can find other articles by the author at www.adnantanriverdi.com or www.asder.org.