Seven and a half year prison terms sought for Selahattin Demirtaş and Sırrı Süreyya Önder

In the trial on organisational propaganda charges of former HDP Co-Chair Selahattin Demirtaş and HDP MP Sırrı Süreyya Önder due to the speeches they made at the 2013 Newroz celebrations in Istanbul, Önder said that his words had been distorted by the police. The hearing prosecutor requested that the file be remitted to them to draft the recommendation on the merits. Following a fifteen-minute recess that was held in the hearing, the prosecutor said that the recommendation on the merits was ready. However, the lawyers, outraged at being denied the opportunity to speak, were removed from the courtroom. The prosecutor read his recommendation to an empty courtroom.

 With Selahattin Demirtaş, on a sickness report, unable to attend the hearing held in Istanbul Serious Crime Court No 26’s courtroom situated opposite Silivri Prison, Sırrı Süreyya Önder was in attendance. Among the numerous spectators present in the courtroom to follow the proceedings were HDP MPs Ziya Pir, Erol Dora, Lezgin Botan, Hüda Kaya, Meral Danış Beştaş, Celal Doğan, Garo Paylan and Ali Atalan, HDP Central Executive Committee members Çilem Küçükkeleş and Ali Kenanoğlu, HDP Deputy Co-Chair Beyza Üstün, EMEP Central Executive Committee member Levent Tüzel, musician Ferhat Tunç, Swedish parliamentarian Yılmaz Kerimo, German parliamentarian Hakan Taş, Diyarbakır Bar Association Chair Ahmet Özmen, Swedish consular representatives and lawyer Margaret Owen of the UK-based Widows for Peace Through Democracy organisation. Before the hearing commenced an argument ensued over gendarmerie officers being seated in the place allotted to lawyers. The first to address the court was Fırat Epözdemir, Attorney-at-Law, who stated that his client Demirtaş's sickness report was in the file and requested that his defence be heard at the subsequent session. Veysi Eski, Attorney-at-Law, also applied for the granting of time for the defence.

 “Political intervention trial”

 Member of parliament Sırrı Süreyya Önder, who is being prosecuted in the trial along with Demirtaş, further addressed the court and initially voiced his reaction to gendarmerie officers being seated in the lawyers’ places, inquiring, “Who is trying us here? Can the law enforcement agencies and gendarmerie be the ones addressed like this?” Önder, indicating that he would make statement on procedural matters, recalled that he had addressed the presiding judge saying, “In that case, by all means continue” in response to his testimony being curtailed at the previous hearing. Önder said this comment had been portrayed as, “This is the extent of my defence” in the record. Önder, making the analogy with regard to the proceedings that, “This wolf will eat this lamb,” commented, “This is a political intervention trial. We say our elimination is sought at the behest of those who pray five times a day and blaspheme five times a day. We only have to speak and a case report for defaming the president is filed against us.”

 “Penal judgment has no validity”

 Önder, noting that the matters at issue were not independent of the solution process, said, “The judgment in penal terms you will pass here has no validity for us. We are engaged in political representation. Our words are imbued with honour. We will stand by these words but their being taken out of context is unacceptable. Whenever the sense of justice receives rough treatment, it is impossible to speak of an independent judiciary. My concern is for a fair trial to go unwounded.” Önder, stressing that they were subject to duress, said, “Demirtaş is one of the candidates who is going to stand for president and he is a politician who corresponds to a very definitive place in this country. Demirtaş has been taken to heart by many people, from nationalists to Yazidis and Armenians to Laz. His only basic rhetoric is peace. The date on which this rhetoric crystallised was Newroz of 2013.” Önder, referring to the Afrin operation, asked, “How will peace come through waging war?” Önder, opining that Demirtaş was Turkey’s future, said, “He has jolted the established order with the values he represents. We are opposed to him being sacrificed in a trial.”

 Police distortion

 Önder, saying the solution process turned into the hope of the peoples of Turkey along with Newroz of 2013, said, “There is a police transcript of the speech I made there and the prosecutor is laying charges based on this. We say that a material error is involved. I have obtained these speeches from news channels. When I said ‘HDP’ this was entered as ‘HPG’ in the police transcript. My words, ‘They have turned this country into a cemetery and we will turn it into a rose garden’ became, ‘We will turn the cemetery into a cemetery.’ Are we grave diggers? This course of action is aimed at dragging out the proceedings. We apply for the record of the speech to be requested from the Turkish Radio and Television Corporation, Anadolu Agency and accredited TV stations.”

 “We cannot slip home from the courts”

 Önder, recalling that the presidential election was nigh, said, “We are the third largest party in parliament having a say on this country’s future. We say that this country is verging on a danger leading towards polarisation that is both regional and internal to it. We want campaigning to take place under equal conditions. This is the prologue to democracy and its essential component. We will explain to the people that the political command’s theses are untenable. Let alone campaign for the elections, we are denied to the opportunity to slip home from the courts.” Önder, stating that the pending proceedings should be adjourned to a date after the election process, commented, “Otherwise, politics will have turned the judiciary into a tool for its own machinations. The passing of a judgment will leave a stain in the people’s minds. If the judiciary does not intervene in this process, Demirtaş will be one of the candidates who makes it into the second round. It is sufficient for the judiciary not to permit itself to be used as a political instrument.” Önder's testimony was frequently interrupted by the presiding judge.

 Lawyers denied a say

 The presiding judge switched off the microphones of the lawyers who wished to address the court following Önder's testimony and gave the floor to the hearing prosecutor to obtain his recommendation. The prosecutor, asserting that Demirtaş had abused the right of defence and also that Önder had submitted his defence, sought the remitting of the file to the prosecution for the recommendation on the merits. The prosecutor said that the decision on the date of the hearing was at the court’s discretion and a fifteen-minute recess was held in the hearing.

 Recommendation drafted in fifteen minutes

 In the interim ruling he read, the presiding judge claimed that Demirtaş had not submitted a defence at the sixth session and said his defence had been heard at Bakırköy Serious Crime Court No 2. The presiding judge, arguing that Demirtaş had failed to submit a defence in bad faith, said that Önder's defence had been heard at the previous hearing. The presiding judge, noting that they had no such intention as preventing anybody from entering the electoral process, gave the floor to the prosecutor for the recommendation on the merits. And the hearing prosecutor intimated that the recommendation on the merits was ready.

 Lawyers removed

 Fırat Epözdemir, Attorney-at-Law, who then addressed the court, saying they expected the court to abide by procedural provisions, remarked, “With our client capable of submitting a defence, you cannot make do with the defence before Bakırköy Serious Crime Court No 2. Technically, you have not yet commenced the hearing. Bakırköy Serious Crime Court No 2 remitted this case to you on non-jurisdiction grounds. You have not even read the decision accepting the indictment.” The presiding judge, barring the lawyers from speaking, ruled that the lawyers be removed on the grounds that they were disrupting the proceedings and for three lawyers to remain in the courtroom, and held a recess in the hearing. The lawyers, having learnt following discussions with the bench that the bench had no intention of reversing its decision, vacated the courtroom saying, “We will not be part of this lawlessness. Let the bench read the recommendation to an empty courtroom.” The spectators also vacated the courtroom to applause and condemnation. The slogan, “Rights, the law, justice” was shouted in the corridor.

 Adjourned until 8 June

 In his recommendation on the merits, the prosecutor sought the punishing of Demirtaş and Önder for organisational propaganda. Önder, who was given the floor following the recommendation, requested time for the defence on the merits and commented, “The removal of the lawyers is a flaw in terms of a fair trial.” The court then in its interim ruling granted Demirtaş and Önder along with their lawyers time for the preparation of the defence on the merits and adjourned the hearing until 8 June, citing such grounds as the heavy load of cases involving detention and courtroom availability. The bench, ordering the hearing to be held at Istanbul Judicial Complex in Çağlayan, ruled that Demirtaş attend the hearing via video link.

Selahattin Demirtaş ve Sırrı Süreyya Önder için 7,5 yıla kadar hapis talebi