Human Rights Watch (HRW) has called for an end to the injustice in the Gezi Park trial, following an opinion by a prosecutor at Turkey’s top court of appeal. The prosecutor requested the court to uphold the conviction of Osman Kavala and his co-defendants, but HRW argues that the opinion lacks legal reasoning and perpetuates a deep injustice.
Osman Kavala and seven others were convicted by an Istanbul court 15 months ago on charges of attempting to overthrow the government for their alleged involvement in the 2013 Gezi Park protests. These protests initially started in response to an urban development plan in central Istanbul but quickly spread to other cities in Turkey.
HRW highlights that the prosecutor’s opinion disregards two binding judgments from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) that ordered Kavala’s release and discredited the evidence presented during the trial. Additionally, there is an ongoing Council of Europe infringement process against Turkey regarding this case.
The Gezi trial is a mockery of justice and exemplifies Turkey’s rule of law and human rights crisis, said Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director at HRW. He further argues that the misuse of criminal charges and prolonged detention to suppress critics of the Erdogan government has become the primary form of political persecution in Turkey.
The Court of Cassation’s 3rd Penal Chamber will review the case in the coming months and determine whether to uphold or quash the convictions. However, the timing of this decision is currently unknown.
The prosecutor also opposes the release of Can Atalay, an elected member of parliament from the Workers’ Party of Turkey (TIP), who was recently elected in the country’s parliamentary election held on May 14.
HRW points out that based on Turkey’s Constitution and case law from the Constitutional Court, Atalay should be able to benefit from parliamentary immunity and be released from prison to assume his parliamentary seat.
HRW criticizes Prosecutor Şahin’s 77-page opinion, stating that it relies on unsupported assertions and information from the original indictment, which the ECtHR deemed irrelevant and insufficient. The prosecutor also offers abstract reflections on criminal intent and unsubstantiated views about civil society organizations, human societies, and other themes. He references sources ranging from 14th-century philosopher Ibn Haldun to US psychologist Abraham Maslow and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Republic, without demonstrating how these sources are relevant to the criminal prosecution of Kavala and the other defendants.
According to Williamson, when prosecutors and courts rely on conspiracy theories and abstract assertions instead of analyzing the evidence related to the alleged crime, they violate the basic principles of criminal law. He argues that the Gezi trial is a political show trial from beginning to end. Therefore, HRW calls for the defendants to be acquitted of all charges and released unconditionally, in order to rectify the gross injustice and create an avenue for a new approach where the Turkish government ceases to employ detention and criminal proceedings as instruments of repression.
