Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
03ANKARA6570
2003-10-21 08:48:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Ankara
Cable title:  

COURT CONTINUES TO DENY RELEASE OF LEYLA ZANA,

Tags:  PGOV PREL PHUM TU 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

210848Z Oct 03
C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 006570 

SIPDIS


DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE


E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/21/2008
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM TU
SUBJECT: COURT CONTINUES TO DENY RELEASE OF LEYLA ZANA,
CO-DEFENDANTS


REF: ANKARA 5217 AND PREVIOUS


(U) Classified by Polcouns John Kunstadter; reasons 1.5 b and
d.


C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 006570

SIPDIS


DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE


E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/21/2008
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM TU
SUBJECT: COURT CONTINUES TO DENY RELEASE OF LEYLA ZANA,
CO-DEFENDANTS


REF: ANKARA 5217 AND PREVIOUS


(U) Classified by Polcouns John Kunstadter; reasons 1.5 b and
d.



1. (SBU) Summary: An Ankara court continues to refuse to
release Leyla Zana and three other Kurdish former MPs pending
the outcome of their retrial. The defense has sought the
release in each of the trial's eight hearings. Defense
attorneys and a member of Parliament argued at the last
session that the court's refusal violates the rulings of the
European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). An EU contact told us
the EU will criticize the conduct of the trial in its
upcoming Progress Report on Turkey. End Summary.



2. (U) An Ankara State Security Court (SSC) October 17
refused, for the eighth consecutive time, a defense request
for the release of four former MPs from the pro-Kurdish
independence Democracy Party pending the outcome of their
retrial on charges of membership in an illegal organization
(the PKK). The defendants -- Leyla Zana, Hatip Dicle, Orhan
Dogan, and Selim Sadak -- were convicted in a controversial
trial in 1994. They later won their appeal to the ECHR, and
were granted a retrial under recent EU-related GOT reforms.
At each session of the retrial, which began March 28, the
court has refused to release the defendants. Poloff attended
the October 17 session, as did representatives from the EU
Turkey office, European embassies, international and domestic
NGOs, and the Turkish Parliament.



3. (U) Lead defense attorney Yusuf Alatas told the three SSC
judges that his clients were entitled to a presumption of
innocence in light of the ECHR appeal ruling in their favor,
and argued that the court's refusal to release them
constituted a violation of the ECHR ruling. Cavit Torun, a
member of the parliamentary Human Rights Committee, told
reporters during a break in the session that he agrees that
the court's refusal to release the defendants violates the
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights.
Defense attorney Hasip Kaplan averred in court that Turkey's
SSC system is inconsistent with EU membership and contrary to
the current trend of GOT human rights reform. He called on
the SSC to ask the Constitutional Court to abolish the SSC
system. The court did not respond.



4. (U) During the hearing, the court read the testimony of
jailed PKK militant Ejder Pacal, who claimed that Leyla Zana
traveled to a PKK camp in Lebanon in 1991 and attended
courses given by PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan. Alatas
challenged Pacal's testimony, arguing that the witness should
have testified in court before the defendants rather than in
prison, where attorneys were unable to cross examine him.
Alatas further questioned Pacal's motives, claiming that
Pacal had received an award from the government for his
service as a witness. Alatas noted that Pacal's original
testimony, also taken in prison, was cited by the ECHR in its
ruling that the defendants' first trial was unfair.



5. (C) After the hearing, Sema Kilicer, political officer at
the EU Ankara office, told us EU observers are highly
critical of the SSC's conduct of the trial. She said the
trial will receive a brief, unfavorable mention in Turkey's
EU Progress Report, to be released November 5.


--------------
Comment
--------------



6. (C) Our contacts continue to believe, as reported reftel,
that the court will likely rule to convict the defendants
after 1-3 more hearings. Then defense will appeal,
unsuccessfully. In order to blunt the controversy, they
predict, the court will sentence the defendants to time
served, releasing them slightly before 2005, when their
prison terms are set to expire.








EDELMAN