TURKISH COURT OVERTURNS CONVICTIONS OF TWO ACCUSED

C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 001206

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/18/2017
TAGS: PGOV PTER MOPS TU
SUBJECT: TURKISH COURT OVERTURNS CONVICTIONS OF TWO ACCUSED
IN 2005 SEMDINLI BOOK STORE BOMBING

REF: A. 2006 ANKARA 3638


B. 2006 ANKARA 409

C. 2005 ANKARA 6772

Classified By: DCM Nancy McEldowney, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).


1. (C) SUMMARY: A Turkish appeals court on May 16 overturned
the convictions of two jandarma non-commissioned officers
(NCO) indicted for their role in the November 2005 bombing of
a bookstore in the southeastern city of Semdinli and ruled
that the case should have been tried by a military court.
The decision surprised and disappointed those who saw the
indictment as a triumph of rule of law over military
adventurism but was justified by others who claim that the
accused were framed on flimsy evidence in an attempt to drive
a wedge between the government and the military. The
decision will be referred back to the originating court,
which can accept or appeal it to a higher court. A military
court could accept the case as a continuation of the original
trial. While protests in the southeast followed the 2005
bombing, the reaction to the appeals court decision there has
been disappointed resignation. END SUMMARY.


2. (SBU) In the latest twist of an already convoluted case, a
Turkish Court of Appeals overturned the conviction of two
jandarma NCOs who had been sentenced to 39 years and 5 months
in prison -- the longest sentence ever meted out to law
enforcement officers -- for their role in the November 9,
2005 bombing of a bookstore in the ethnically-Kurdish town of
Semdinli in the southeastern Hakkari province (ref a). The
NCOs were indicted together with a civilian labeled a PKK
informant after weapons and documents -- including a supposed
"hit list" -- linking them to the jandarma were found in
their vehicle (ref c).


3. (C) In its decision, the appeals court ruled that the
investigation into the bombing was flawed and that, because
the NCOs are military police, the proper venue would have
been a military court. Jandarma forces are commanded by a
four-star general, GEN Isik Kosaner, whose previous position
was Deputy Chief of the General Staff. However, except in
times of war or in the event of Marshal Law, the jandarma are
considered law enforcement officials who technically report
to the Ministry of Interior. For that reason, the Legal
Counsel to the Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies (ASAM)
told us, the civilian court was the proper venue for the
trial and the appeals court ruling was legally incorrect.


3. (C) Reaction in Hakkari province to the verdict was
disappointment in a court system they had hoped would bring
justice to the bookstore owner killed in the attack and
demonstrate that the military was not above the law. The
Mayor of Semdinli, Hursit Tekin, said that citizens of the
region were outraged that perpetrators who had been caught
red-handed may go free, dashing their confidence in the
judiciary. The DTP Mayor of Yuksekova, Salih Yildiz, called
the decision undemocratic and a violation of the rule of law
-- but expected. In Ankara, the reaction was mixed. The
publisher of a weekly defense magazine (Savunma ve Havacilik)
said the accused had been framed and the appeals court
decision was the only way to rectify the verdict. The ASAM
legal counsel agreed that the case was manufactured by those
trying to harm the military's reputation. However, like
several other lawyers we spoke with, he expressed discomfort
with an appeals court decision which appeared blatantly
political and not based in law. We are not aware of any
reports of violence over the ruling.


4. (SBU) The original ruling court may choose to accept the
appeals court verdict or send it to a higher appeals court
for consideration. If the higher court agrees with the
original ruling, the sentence will stand. If, however, it
decides that the NCOs should be tried by a military court,
the military will have to agree to accept the case. If they
reject the case, it will go to the court of jurisdictional
disputes for a decision. If the military does accept the
case, the trial will be presented as a continuation of the
civilian trial. In addition to trying the NCOs, the military
court would also have to consider the case of the civilian
PKK informant who was convicted and sentenced to 39 years and
10 months in prison. However, a ruling handed down by a
military court over a civilian defendant could be challenged
in the European Court of Human Rights. None of the lawyers
we spoke with were willing to suggest the likely outcome of
the case, but all agreed that the process would be long and

may be designed to exceed the length of public interest.

Visit Ankara's Classified Web Site at
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/ankara/

WILSON