El 6 de octubre, Lighthouse Reports publicó un vídeo en su cuenta de Twitter en el que revelaba la campaña de la UE de hombres enmascarados encargados de rechazar a los solicitantes de asilo en las fronteras de la UE. En este vídeo se puede ver claramente a los hombres enmascarados golpeando a los solicitantes de asilo con cachiporras mientras intentan escapar y se pueden oír los gritos de las personas golpeadas. La organización sin ánimo de lucro señala casos similares en Croacia, Grecia y Rumanía.
Gracias a los testimonios de las víctimas o de antiguos policías o agentes de la guardia, a las grabaciones e investigando como se gastan los fondos de la UE, Lighthouse Reports reunió pruebas sólidas de la implicación de la UE y de los gobiernos nacionales. La organización detalló el caso de Croacia y afirmó que las grabaciones permiten identificar los uniformes de los enmascarados como chaquetas de la Intervention Police. La the Intervention Police es la rama antidisturbios de la policía croata, cuyos chalecos están financiados por el Fondo de Seguridad Interior de la UE. La organización consiguió filmar 11 pushbacks en Croacia. En Rumanía se realizaron pushbacks similares. En Grecia se recopilaron y analizaron 635 vídeos de presuntos empujones en el Egeo, de los cuales al menos 15 mostraban a hombres enmascarados en acción.
This afternoon Aegean Boat Report received an emergency call from a group of 12 people, who had been forced into a life raft by masked men on a Greek coast guard vessel, and left drifting east of Simi. The group consisted of men, women and several small children. @YlvaJohanssonpic.twitter.com/ecZcKYgTIU
El informe también puso de manifiesto el uso de la violencia por parte de los policías, con varios testimonios de solicitantes de asilo agredidos. Los testimonios de los policías que participan en las operaciones fronterizas confirman el uso habitual de la violencia. También se sabe que las pertenencias de los migrantes son robadas y confiscadas, y posteriormente quemadas.
La UE está, por tanto, implicada en la represión perpetrada en la frontera por las policías nacionales gracias a su apoyo financiero y material. La política de la UE en materia de migración ya fue muy criticada por la política de contención llevada a cabo en las fronteras, realizando acuerdos con terceros países como Turquía o Libia.
Estas políticas internas y externas de contención llevadas a cabo por la UE y los Estados miembros van en contra de todos los valores fundamentales de la UE, del marco legal de los derechos humanos de la UE y de los reglamentos de la UE sobre migración.
Los migrantes rechazados en las fronteras pueden ser refugiados de países fronterizos con Europa, como Turquía, o nacionales de terceros países (Siria o Afganistán) que utilizan los países fronterizos europeos como tránsito para llegar a Europa. Por tanto, los pushbacks perpetrados en las fronteras de la UE por los enmascarados pueden tener consecuencias trágicas para los migrantes, especialmente para los refugiados que huyen de los países fronterizos de Europa. Por ejemplo, si un solicitante de asilo turco que huye de la persecución del gobierno turco es rechazado en la frontera griega, tendrá que volver a Turquía, donde su vida podría estar en peligro. Un refugiado sirio rechazado en la frontera europea podría continuar su vida en Turquía. Por tanto, los ejércitos de la sombra están violando el principio de no devolución, según el cual nadie debe ser devuelto a un país en el que se enfrentaría a torturas, tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantes y otros daños irreparables.
This afternoon Aegean Boat Report received an emergency call from a group of 12 people, who had been forced into a life raft by masked men on a Greek coast guard vessel, and left drifting east of Simi. The group consisted of men, women and several small children. @YlvaJohanssonpic.twitter.com/ecZcKYgTIU
[1]OHCHR, “The principle of non-refoulment under international human rights law” (available in https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Migration/GlobalCompactMigration/ThePrincipleNon-RefoulementUnderInternationalHumanRightsLaw.pdf, 14/09/2020)
Photo is taken from https://www.lighthousereports.nl/investigation/unmasking-europes-shadow-armies/
On the 6th of October 2021, Lighthouse Reports released a video on its Twitter account revealing the reality of an EU campaign compromising masked men in charge of turning away asylum seekers at EU borders. In this video, one can clearly see masked men beating asylum seekers with bludgeons while they are trying to escape along with their screams from being beaten up. The nonprofit organization points out similar cases in Croatia, Greece, and Romania.
Thanks to the testimonies of the victims, former policemen, and guard officers, videos containing footage, and tracing the money trails back to EU funds, Lighthouse Reports gathered strong evidence of the involvement of the EU and national governments. The organization gave detailed insight into the case of Croatia and stated that the footage allows for identification of the uniforms of the masked men as jackets used by the Intervention Police. The Intervention Police are the Croatian police’s riot control branch, whose jackets are financed by the EU’s Internal Security Fund. The organization managed to film 11 pushbacks in Croatia. Similar findings were carried out in Romania. In Greece, they collected and analyzed 635 videos of alleged pushbacks in the Aegean, at least 15 of them showing masked men in action.
This afternoon Aegean Boat Report received an emergency call from a group of 12 people, who had been forced into a life raft by masked men on a Greek coast guard vessel, and left drifting east of Simi. The group consisted of men, women and several small children. @YlvaJohanssonpic.twitter.com/ecZcKYgTIU
The report also highlighted the use of violence from the officials, with several testimonies of assaulted asylum seekers. Testimonies of police involved in border operations confirm the regular use of violence. It is also known that the belongings of migrants are stolen and confiscated, later burned.
The EU is therefore involved in the pushback perpetrated at the border by national police thanks to its financial and material support. The EU policy on migration was already highly criticized because of the policy of containment carried out at the borders, making agreements with third countries such as Turkey or Libya.
Those internal and external policies of containment carried out by the EU and the Member States go against all the fundamental values of the EU, the EU human rights legal framework, and the EU regulations on migration.
Migrants pushed back at the borders can be refugees from countries bordering Europe, such as Turkey, or nationals from third countries (Syria or Afghanistan) which use European neighboring countries as a transit to reach Europe. The pushbacks perpetrated at the EU borders by the masked men can therefore have tragic consequences for migrants, especially for refugees fleeing from bordering countries of Europe. For instance, if a Turkish asylum seeker fleeing from the persecution of the Turkish government is pushed back at the Greek border, they will be forced to go back to Turkey, where their life might be in danger. A Syrian refugee pushed back at the European border will continue his life in Turkey. The shadow armies are therefore violating the principle of non-refoulement, according to which no one should have to return to a country where they could face torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and other irreparable harm.
This afternoon Aegean Boat Report received an emergency call from a group of 12 people, who had been forced into a life raft by masked men on a Greek coast guard vessel, and left drifting east of Simi. The group consisted of men, women and several small children. @YlvaJohanssonpic.twitter.com/ecZcKYgTIU
[1]OHCHR, “The principle of non-refoulment under international human rights law” (available in https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Migration/GlobalCompactMigration/ThePrincipleNon-RefoulementUnderInternationalHumanRightsLaw.pdf, 14/09/2020)
Ce hashtag a été créé pour lutter contre la peine de neuf ans et six mois de prison prononcée contre Ayse Ozdogan par une cour d’appel suprême turque.
Malgré la réaction sociale massive en Turquie sur les médias sociaux, Ayse Ozdogan a été arrêtée samedi dernier. Son frère a déclaré sur Twitter que “l’exécution n’a pas été reportée, ils sont venus chercher ma sœur”. Les motifs de sa condamnation étaient les suivants : être administratrice dans une résidence étudiante privée, avoir un compte à la Bank Asya, utiliser l’application Bylock et être membre d’une organisation terroriste armée, à savoir le Mouvement Gulen.
Le Mouvement Gulen est considéré comme une organisation terroriste selon le régime d’Erdoğan, qui a accusé le groupe de participer à la tentative de coup d’État de juillet 2016. Depuis ce jour, le gouvernement mène une sévère répression sur le membre des groupes ou les personnes liées au groupe d’une manière ou d’une autre.
L’arrestation d’Ayse Ozdogan a suscité une telle controverse en Turquie parce qu’elle est atteinte d’un cancer en phase terminale. Elle avait déjà été placée en détention peu après une première opération le 12 novembre 2019. Sa détention a provoqué une réaction massive et une campagne en ligne lancée par Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu, un militant des droits de l’homme et député du Parti démocratique des peuples (HDP) a conduit à sa libération le 27 décembre 2019.
Cependant, son état de santé s’est aggravé car elle n’a pas pu subir sa deuxième opération. Le cancer s’étant propagé, la dent, le palais, l’os zygomatique et les ganglions lymphatiques d’Özdoğan ont été retirés lors d’une opération d’urgence. Elle a donc perdu sa capacité à voir et à entendre en raison du traumatisme subi par les os de son visage.
Ayse Ozdogan se souvient de son audience avec le juge :
Je me suis présentée devant le juge alors que j’avais encore des blessures dans la bouche et sur le visage et que mes points de suture n’avaient pas été retirés. À la suite de la décision d’arrestation prise par le juge, je suis tombée malade et je me suis évanouie à la fin de l’audience. Le premier jour, j’étais seule dans une cellule, il faisait froid et j’ai dû dormir sur le sol. Je cognais mes zones opérées contre le mur du lit superposé car j’avais du mal à marcher. Quand on m’a emmené dans le service, mon visage et mes yeux étaient tellement enflés que je ne pouvais plus voir.
Özdoğan suffers from cancer and is facing imprisonment on a terrorism conviction. According to the Human Rights Association, there are currently 1,605 sick prisoners in Turkish prisons, 604 of whom are critically ill. Critics have slammed authorities for refusing to release them. pic.twitter.com/zdnVCSC33L
Malgré les preuves évidentes de l’état de santé d’Ayşe Özdoğan et les risques d’une détention, il a été déterminé dans le rapport du 3ème Comité de spécialisation de la Présidence de la médecine légale le 1er octobre 2021, ” que des métastases n’ont pas été trouvées lors de ses examens, qu’elle a été suivie à intervalles réguliers sans traitement : elle a vécu sa vie dans des conditions carcérales “. Il a été conclu qu’elle peut poursuivre sa peine seule et que sa peine peut être poursuivie en prison en assurant un contrôle polyclinique régulier.”
Selon l’Association des droits de l’homme (İHD), il y a plus de 1 605 prisonniers malades dans les prisons turques, dont environ 604 sont gravement malades. Malgré les rapports médico-légaux et médicaux indiquant qu’ils sont incapables de rester en prison, ils ne sont pas libérés.
Este hashtag se creó para luchar contra la condena de nueve años y seis meses de prisión, contra Ayse Ozdogan, dictada por un tribunal supremo de apelación turco.
A pesar de la masiva reacción social en Turquía en las redes sociales, Ayse Ozdogan fue detenida el sábado pasado. Su hermano dijo en twitter que “la ejecución no se pospuso, vinieron a recoger a mi hermana”. Los motivos de su condena fueron ser administradora en una residencia de estudiantes privada, tener una cuenta en el Banco Asya, utilizar la aplicación Bylock y ser miembro de una organización terrorista armada, concretamente del Movimiento Gulen.
El Movimiento Gulen es considerado una organización terrorista según el régimen de Erdoğan, que acusó al grupo de participar en el intento de golpe de Estado de julio de 2016. Desde ese día, el gobierno está llevando a cabo una severa represión en contra de los miembros del grupo o las personas vinculadas a él de una u otra manera.
Su detención fue tan controvertida en Turquía porque Ayse Ozdogan padece un cáncer terminal. Ya había sido detenida poco después de una primera operación el 12 de noviembre de 2019. Su detención provocó una reacción masiva y una campaña en línea iniciada por Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu, activista de derechos humanos y diputado del Partido Democrático de los Pueblos (HDP), que llevó a su liberación el 27 de diciembre de 2019.
Sin embargo, su salud empeoró porque no pudo ser operada por segunda vez. El cáncer se había extendido y a Özdoğan le extirparon el diente, el paladar, el hueso cigomático y los ganglios linfáticos en una operación de urgencia. Por tanto, perdió la capacidad de ver y oír debido al traumatismo que sufrieron sus huesos faciales.
Ayse Ozdogan recordó su audiencia con el juez:
Me presenté ante el juez cuando todavía tenía heridas en la boca y en la cara y no me habían quitado los puntos. Como consecuencia de la decisión del juez de detenerme, me puse enferma y me desmayé al final del tribunal. El primer día estuve solo en una celda, hacía frío y tuve que dormir en el suelo. Golpeé mis zonas operadas contra la pared de la litera porque tenía dificultades para caminar. Cuando me llevaron a la sala, tenía la cara y los ojos tan hinchados que no podía ver.
Özdoğan suffers from cancer and is facing imprisonment on a terrorism conviction. According to the Human Rights Association, there are currently 1,605 sick prisoners in Turkish prisons, 604 of whom are critically ill. Critics have slammed authorities for refusing to release them. pic.twitter.com/zdnVCSC33L
A pesar de las evidentes pruebas del estado de salud de Ayşe Özdoğan y de los riesgos de una detención, se determinó en el informe de la 3ª Comisión de Especialización de la Presidencia de la Medicina Forense del 1 de octubre de 2021, “que no se encontró ninguna recurrencia o metástasis en sus exámenes, fue seguida en intervalos regulares sin tratamiento y vivió su vida en condiciones de prisión. Se llegó a la conclusión de que puede continuar su condena sola proporcionando un control policlínico regular.”
Según la Asociación de Derechos Humanos (İHD), hay más de 1.605 presos enfermos en las cárceles turcas, de los cuales aproximadamente 604 están en estado crítico. A pesar de que los informes forenses y médicos afirman que no pueden permanecer en prisión, no son liberados.
This hashtag was created to fight against the nine years six months sentence prison against Ayse Ozdogan issued by a Turkish Supreme court of appeals.
Despite the massive social reaction in Turkey on social media, Ayse Ozdogan was arrested last Saturday. On Twitter, her brother said that “The execution was not postponed; they came to pick up my sister.” The grounds for her conviction were being an administrator in a private student dormitory, having an account at Bank Asya, using the Bylock, and being a member of an armed terrorist organization, namely the Gulen Movement.
The Gulen Movement is considered a terrorist organization according to Erdoğan’s regime, which accused the group of taking part in the attempted coup in July 2016. To this day, the government is carrying out severe repression about the member of the groups or the persons linked to the group in one way or another.
Her arrest was so controversial in Turkey because Ayse Ozdogan has end-stage cancer, and despite her poor health, she has been sent to prison. She had already been detained shortly after a first operation on November 12, 2019. Her detention provoked a massive reaction, and an online campaign started by Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu, a human rights activist and deputy from the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), led to her release on December 27, 2019.
However, her health got worse because she could not get her second surgery. The cancer had spread, and Özdoğan’s tooth, palate, zygomatic bone, and lymph nodes were removed in an emergency operation. She, therefore, lost her ability to see and hear due to the trauma her facial bones suffered.
Ayse Ozdogan recalled her hearing with the judge:
I went before the judge while I still had wounds in my mouth and face, and my stitches were not removed. As a result of the judge’s decision to arrest me, I became ill and fainted at the end of the court. Later, due to the interventions on my body and face, I was sobered up and sent to prison. The first day I was alone in a cell, it was cold, and I had to sleep on the floor. I slammed my operated areas against the wall on the bunk bed because I had difficulty walking. When I was taken to the ward, my face and eyes were swollen enough to obscure my vision completely.
Özdoğan suffers from cancer and is facing imprisonment on a terrorism conviction. According to the Human Rights Association, there are currently 1,605 sick prisoners in Turkish prisons, 604 of whom are critically ill. Critics have slammed authorities for refusing to release them. pic.twitter.com/zdnVCSC33L
Despite the evident proofs of the health condition of Ayşe Özdoğan and the risks of detention for her care, it was determined in the report of the 3rd Specialization Committee of the Presidency of Forensic Medicine on October 1, 2021, “that Ayşe Özdoğan did not find any recurrence or metastasis in her examinations, was followed at regular intervals without treatment, and did not receive active treatment; she lived her life in prison conditions. It has been concluded that he can continue his sentence alone and that his sentence can be continued in prison by providing regular polyclinic control.”
According to the Human Rights Association (İHD), there are more than 1,605 sick prisoners in Turkish prisons, approximately 604 critically ill. Despite the forensic and medical reports stating that they cannot remain in prison, they are not released.
The question the rapporteur will try to answer is the following: Can we conclude that the Turkish state is taking action to abduct political opponents and it is not investigated properly into these facts? To answer it, he will present three different topics, namely the execution of international abductions by the Turkish government, the executions of domestic abductions, and the presence of effective investigations.
Preliminary topics:
The report relied on examples of 27 cases of national abductions and 68 of international abductions. The reporter pointed out that other independent sources concluded the same findings, and that he relied mainly on the Ankara bar association report, report of International investigations, court findings, journal reports.
The report only takes into account abductions from 2016 to now. The rapporteur recalled the legal criteria for an enforced disappearance to be found: to be arbitrarily deprived of their freedom by state officials or under state’s orders, and the refusal to communicate the place or the whereabouts of the victims. The prohibition of enforced disappearance is a ius cogens norm, which means that every state is bound by the prohibition even if they did not ratify treaties that prohibit it. The rapporteur recalled that Turkey ratified the ICCPR and ECHR, which prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of liberty, the use of torture and establishes the right to life.
International abductions:
There are different ways to be internationally abducted:
Turkish citizens who lived abroad (teacher), their passports are canceled and handed over to IMT and brought back to Turkish
When the host state is not fully agreeing, Turkey intervened directly in the territory of the host state. For instance, it happened in Kenya: Kenya refused the extradition of the Turkish citizen so Turkey intervened and abducted him.
The most common way is to do it with the consent of the host country, they work together to bring them back illegally to Turkey without following the legal channel asking for extradition.
In 2017, the MIT (National Intelligence Organization of Turkey) was created a special department which is for human abductions or executions, in charge of executing international operations abroad. The UN wrote an open letter to Turkey stating that it could stop concluding secret agreements with other countries to carry out international abductions and bringing people back illegally to Turkey.
After being abducted, the victims disappear for weeks or months or are never seen again. They resurface with strong allegations of torture (electric chocs, beatings).
The minister of foreign affairs and the president himself acknowledge publicly carrying out international abductions in the newspaper, to show their power and for people to be afraid. They pretend that people who disappeared are terrorists and that the current state of emergency allowed them to arrest them in other countries.
Domestic abductions:
Domestic abductions are executed in a very similar pattern: large scale operations are carried out (example of abduction by 40 people heavily armed), are always visible in busy areas (middle of the highway with a lot of witnesses), often with cars and victims are forced into a black Volkswagen van. The kidnappers don’t care about being seen, or about their license plates being traced. When the people resurface, it always happens in police stations or the anti-terrorism department in Ankara. One victim recalled that he was abducted by the secret services which forced him to call the authority and to sign incriminating papers against him. There is no trace of legal detention when they disappear.
Several elements prove the involvement of the authorities in those abductions. One victim recalled that he worked for the secret services and that he was abducted by a former colleague. The camera footages and testimonies of victims and eyes witnesses demonstrated that the kidnappers were wearing TEM jackets (antiterrorism unit), or presented themselves as being police officers, or police who took them for “Interrogations”.
The Turkish position on domestic abductions is different from international abductions: it denies any involvement or ignores the accusations it and does not even count it. The ones abducted are always political opponents mostly belonging to the Gulen movement. When they resurface they all have made self-incrimination or with regards to others. The objective of those abductions is therefore to gather evidence to incriminate other persons, so the state does not acknowledges it according to the rapporteur.
The Turkish government does not carry out effective investigations. The relatives of the family members are very active in filling complaints, gathering evidence, camera footage, eyewitnesses. They hand them over to the prosecutor and nothing happens, even the most obvious acts like checking the license plate or tracking the phone of the victims. Non-investigative acts are executed, and the cases are closed after a while without findings. In addition, if relatives become to vocals, they are pressurized to retract the complaint. According to the rapporteur, no one has been convicted for abductions in Turkey even if the Turkish criminal code prohibits arbitrary deprivation of liberty, the use of torture. In addition, the code of criminal procedure establishes a duty to investigate
Witness 1: Mustafa Ozben
The witness lived in Istanbul and was a lawyer for the bar of Ankara. Until the failed coup he was a university teacher and was a member of the Gulen movement since 1993. According to him, being a member is based on goodness, which means doing good acts for humankind. After the coup, his university has been shot down, so he was unemployed. He took measures to hide like using his father’s credit card, not staying at his legal residence…
On the 9th of May of 2017, after taking his daughter to school and went to shops, he was abducted while going back to his car. Around 3 or 4 people surrounded him, beat him, and put him into a black transporter van. They put a sack over his head and beat him, insulted him, screamed at him, put plastic cuffs around his ankles and his hands. They took him to a huge warehouse in a small cell (6×9 feet, 3msquare) with a very hard mattress and carpets all around the walls. It was a tiny place with a camera and sound system to establish contact with him, and with an aeration system with a continuous sound, which he recalled as a type of torture.
During the first days of detention, they knocked at the door and put him on his knees, took him outside to be interrogated. They turned his face against the wall so he cannot see anything because it was extremely important for them not to be seen. They said that this is a place that neither exists nor does not exist where they are the state. They told him that if he helps them, they will forget about all the complaints made against him and, give him a new identity, money, and opportunities. But if he does not, they know human anatomy very well and everything about torture, and he may start to beg them to kill him. The witness answered that he did not commit any crimes and that he was only a member of the Gulen movement. The perpetrators asked him which general he called on the day of the coup. According to the witness, they were unskilled, and they knew just a few things about him and most of it has been fabricated. They needed to fill the complaints with facts, information, and names because they made everyone a terrorist without any proof.
He was always blindfolded. One day, he went out of the cell without a blindfold so he can describe the warehouse, with cells and corridor and interrogations room. He lost 20 kilos there, he was hungry and thirsty most of the time, and they were trying to break his resistance.
The detention lasted for 92 days. He was also tortured. In one of the interrogation rooms, they were two cuffs on the wall, he saw sticks, blood. They used electric chocs, beating, sex instruments and say that they are going to penetrate him. they tried everything that could break him, threatening him his family. There were no windows or clocks. They put headphones over his head, with national music or noise that put him crazy. He was also worried for his children and his wife while he was detained: not knowing was also part of the torture.
They released him and left him off in a neighborhood in Ankara. He supposed he was released because her wife was fighting for him to be released. He was released on Tuesday, and on Wednesday he was supposed to buy a cell phone and to meet them again on Friday to pretend that he had never been abducted and that he was only hiding at home.
In January 2021, the victim was abducted at his workplace and victim of systematic torture for 6 days. He was from a family of socialist workers and working as an electrician. He was defending the rights of workers and was part of a trade union, participated in press releases and press conferences, and was detained many times.
When he disappeared, his lawyer made an application before the relevant prosecutor, with requests for the base station information to collect all the footage, because he was abducted at his workplace which is also a bus station. However, no persecutor was appointed to the file and even the one on duty did not take action.
They applied to other institutions such as the Turkish Grand National Assembly, Human Rights Commission, Ministry of Interior, or Ministry of Justice, the anti-terrorism branch in Istanbul to make a statement for their client to be released but it never happened. Democratic and legal institutions, unions and confederations, political parties waged a very meaningful struggle for the client to be found. There were demonstrations in many European cities, his family was all over Istanbul, especially in Galatasaray square in Istanbul, which became the symbol of the struggle for disappearances. There were also demonstrations in his neighborhood, workplace… despite the curfew. The European Parliament sent an open letter to the ministry of interior for them to make a statement, but they did not answer.
While he disappeared, the victim was threatened with rape, suspended, handcuffed upside down, kept naked for days or hours, and subjected to brutal beatings.
After he was found, his lawyer filed a criminal complaint about kidnapping and systematic torture, but it is progressing very slowly even though they provide the license plate of the bus and footage of the scene of the crime. The prosecutor acts with indifference and effortlessness, and they become perpetrators as well according to the lawyer.
He has released after 6 days thanks to the struggle made by his family and the massive social reaction. After he was released, he got physical and psychological treatment. He can work and maintain his life but not talk in public about what he went through.
Witness 3: Mesut and Meral Kaçmaz
The man was a school principal and director of public relations in Pakistan, and his wife was a science and English teacher in Pakistan as well. He used to go to turkey frequently.
On the 27th of September, at night, 15-20 armed people came to this house and said that they are going to take them to a safe house. They did not show any legal documents to prove they were policemen and were not wearing uniforms. When they protested, the couple and their children were beaten up. Meral Kacmaz fainted at the door of the house, and they have been taken to different vehicles. Mesut was continuously beaten up in the car.
They brought them to the place where they were detained. There was no sunlight but iron bars ad curtains. It was very scary, but they had to calm down for their two daughters (15 and 17 years old). They had been all handcuffed, beaten, and blindfolded. Meral recalled that for the first time in her life she had to clean up blood from his kids’ bodies.
After 17 days, they said they will take them to the capital of Pakistan where they will be allowed to meet their lawyers and people from the Turkish embassy. The kidnappers handing them over to the Turkish intelligence, so the Turkish government sent them a private air croft to reach Turkey. During all the flight, the husband has been tortured, threatened by his family, and they told him: “you are going to accept whatever we say, or we are going to rape your wife and daughters in front of you”.
The wife was taken into custody in Turkey without the children for 6months. She felt half dead because she has been forcibly separated from his kids. She recalled that she was able to see other women in other cells crying for their children. They make her believe that she will never leave the jail, but she did not sigh what they wanted her to sign,
Their first hearing started on the 13th of February 2018, and after the second hearing on the 26 April 2018, her wife was released. On the 3rd of July, the husband was released, but they sentenced them to 6years and 3 months of detention. They know that the judiciary is controlled by the government, which says the “ultimate truth” and nobody can change it
The kidnappers told us that they received their file from the intelligence services in Pakistan and that it was clear. One of the kidnappers says “sorry sir, you are being ruled in turkey by a dictator and this is the order of Erdogan”.
The court’s allegations for their detention were that he deposited money to Asia bank, but he doesn’t know the real reason, he guessed he was chosen randomly or to disconnect the relation between Tukey and Pakistan as he was the director of public relations.
El 20 de septiembre empezó la primera sesión del Tribunal de Turquía en Ginebra. Como recordó la Dra. Françoise Barones Tulkens, el Tribunal de Turquía es un tribunal de opinión, que no pertenece al ordenamiento jurídico de un Estado ni a una Organización Internacional. Es un tribunal extraordinario nacido de la determinación de la sociedad civil. Aunque sus decisiones no sean vinculantes, es un instrumento y una plataforma para dar reconocimiento, visibilidad y voz a las personas que denuncian violaciones de sus derechos fundamentales. El tribunal es independiente, respeta el principio de un juicio justo y utiliza un método judicial para emitir sus decisiones. El objetivo fundamental del tribunal es alertar a la opinión pública y a los responsables políticos y contribuir al avance del derecho internacional y nacional.
El tribunal escuchará a seis rapporteur sobre la tortura, los secuestros, la libertad de prensa, la impunidad, el acceso a la justicia y la independencia judicial y los crímenes contra la humanidad en Turquía. También se escuchará a 15 testigos, y el gobierno turco recibió una invitación para asistir al juicio y las copias del informe, pero no ha contestado.
Al final, el tribunal formulará una opinión sobre la conformidad de las acciones de Turquía con el derecho internacional de los derechos humanos y el derecho internacional humanitario. El tribunal no tiene poderes de investigación y no incurrirá en responsabilidad penal o civil. La decisión, aunque no vinculante, tiene valor moral y da herramientas jurídicas a las víctimas, los abogados o las ONG.
Primer rapporteur sobre la tortura:
Los principales textos legales que recoge la prohibición de la tortura son la Convención la Tortura y la convención europea de los Derechos Humanos. Estas convenciones establecen el mínimo que las leyes nacionales deben incluir en el código penal, y que la tipificación de la tortura con sanciones de prisión es una obligación. Igualmente, un acto que cumple los criterios de la definición de la tortura no puede ser considerado un delito menor, como un trato inhumano, por ejemplo. La prohibición de la tortura es absoluta, lo que significa que ninguna excepción o derogación puede justificar su uso. El estado puede ser responsable por no haber protegido a los ciudadanos de los actos de tortura perpetrados por actores privados, y por no haber investigado. La carga de la prueba recae en las víctimas, pero si existe una sospecha razonable de que fueron en detención, el acusado tendrá que aportar pruebas de lo contrario.
El rapporteur se basó en las estadísticas publicadas por el gobierno turco. Sin embargo, señaló las discrepancias entre las cifras proporcionadas por las ONG y por el gobierno. Por lo tanto, el rapporteur alegó que el gobierno no ha investigado todas las alegaciones. Por ejemplo, 2063 personas denunciaron actos de tortura a la ONG Derechos Humanos en Turquía entre 2000 y 2015. El rapporteur señaló que el número de casos abiertos se redujo en un 50% entre 2013 y 2015. Sin embargo, los indicadores demuestran que el número de casos aumentó y no disminuyó. La explicación sería la disminución de la voluntad del gobierno de castigar lo responsables de actos de tortura. Esos actos son principalmente el uso excesivo de la fuerza en la detención, las palizas, las humillaciones, las agresiones sexuales y los choques eléctricos.
La tortura ha sido una práctica extendida en Turquía durante décadas, especialmente después del golpe de Estado de 1980. En la década de 2000, se aplicó una tolerancia cero con respecto a la tortura, lo que provocó mejoras. Sin embargo, en los últimos 10 años se observa un resurgimiento de la tortura, en una impunidad casi total. Actualmente, se examinan 441 casos ante el TEDH por violaciones del artículo 3, lo que representa más casos que los investigados por Turquía.
Los grupos los más afectados por actos de tortura son miembros del movimiento kurdo, del movimiento Gulen, delincuentes juveniles y ordinarios. Además, la forma de reprimirlos depende de la necesidad de la policía de convertirlos en informantes.
El rapporteur concluyó que el uso de la tortura es sistemático y organizado, sin investigaciones, castigos ni la debida diligencia. Para defenderse, el gobierno turco argumentó que las víctimas no aportan ninguna prueba médica, que son oponentes políticos y que el índice de condenas por actos de tortura es muy bajo.
Testigo 1: Mehmet Alp
El primer testigo es profesor de química y administrador en una escuela de una región turca del sureste del país. El 18 de abril de 2018, fue secuestrado por la fuerza después de llevar a su hijo a la escuela. Un coche llegó detrás de él y los hombres lo subieron al coche. Le dijeron que eran policías y que uno de sus alumnos se había unido al PKK, y que otros estudiantes asistían a reuniones del movimiento Gulen y también se unieron al PKK. Finalmente lo liberaron y el 20 de abril fueron a su casa y detuvieron a su esposa durante 4 días. Este secuestro se explica por el fin del proceso de paz entre el PKK y el gobierno y el inicio del conflicto armado. Intentaron buscar protección avisando a las autoridades, pero no hicieron nada.
Un mes antes del golpe, fue detenido de nuevo y le hicieron preguntas sobre el movimiento Gulen. En total, estuvo detenido en 4 cárceles y 17 celdas. Durante 2 meses, no pudo comer frutas ni verduras, ni ver a un médico. Empezó a tener problemas internos, como hemorragias internas. Sin embargo, los guardianes recibieron la orden de no aceptar su petición de tratamiento porque era considerado un terrorista perteneciente al movimiento Gulen. Después de esos dos meses, finalmente lo llevaron al hospital y le detectaron un cáncer intestinal. En noviembre, fue trasladado de nuevo. El 28 de mayo de 2017, dos personas le quitaron las esposas y lo llevaron a 200 km de distancia. Le hicieron preguntas sobre las funciones que cumplió durante el golpe de Estado del 15 de julio. Respondió que no había participado en el golpe, que no tenía nada que ver con el grupo Gullen. Se negó a firmar los documentos. Tenía una bolsa sobre la cabeza y estaba en una habitación oscura, debajo de la prisión. Le pegaron la cabeza y el cuerpo con cosas metálicas. Se desmayó, sangraba por la nariz. Lo metieron en una furgoneta y finalmente llegó al hospital. En esta prisión, conoció a un académico torturado con electricidad.
Consiguió escribir todo lo que había pasado gracias a papel higiénico. No se le permitió ver a su abogado ni a su mujer.
El 6 de junio debía presentarse ante los tribunales, y los guardianes le amenazaron a él y a su familia si confesaba ser víctima de tortura. No dijo nada y entonces fue declarado culpable.
Se le acusó, en primer lugar, de falsificación, luego de ser miembro de una asociación armada y, por último, de participar en el golpe de Estado. Tras ser liberado, acudió a las autoridades, pero no pasó nada porque la policía, los fiscales y el tribunal trabajan juntos. Sólo pudo luchar por sus derechos en países libres, porque en Turquía es imposible.
Testigo 2: Erhan Dogan
El segundo testigo era profesor de historia en Ankara. Cuando se produjo el golpe de Estado, trabajaba en una escuela del grupo Gulen en Ankara. Una semana después, hubieron muchas detenciones y las escuelas cercanas al grupo Gulen fueron saqueadas, quemadas y destruidas. Diez días después, un profesor de su escuela le llamó porque los policías preguntaban por él. Fue a la escuela y vio a gente esperándole. Lo sujetaron por el cuello y lo empujaron contra la pared. Le insultaron de terrorista, le golpearon y le dijeron que si se negaba a obedecer sus órdenes, toda su vida se convertiría en una miseria, incluida su familia. Le preguntaron con quién se había reunido. Le pidieron diez nombres de altos cargos del grupo Gulen. Además, querían que aceptara que era miembro de una organización terrorista y que firmara documentos que lo incriminaban. El testigo contestó que no era un terrorista, por lo que lo torturaron durante un rato. Después vino un policía oficial de Ankara, les robó el ordenador y el teléfono y los llevó a la ciudad de Ankara, a la comisaría antiterrorista.
Una vez allí, fue escoltado por 12 policías que les insultaron, les llamaron perros y les golpearon. Lo separaron de los demás, y le dijeron que podía morir, y que aquí muere mucha gente y nadie lo sabe. Lo llevaron a un gimnasio, con gente vestida de naranja y esposada. Había sangre a su alrededor en las paredes, lo que demostraba que aquí torturaban a los detenidos. Le dieron un pequeño trozo de pan, mermelada y una botella de agua. Los otros detenidos eran eruditos. Uno de ellos era diabético y todas sus peticiones de atención fueron desestimadas. Recordó varios actos de tortura, como estar desnudo con agua fría, golpes con cachiporras o cuatro oficiales golpeándole la cabeza contra la pared y haciéndole preguntas sobre el grupo Gulen. Una vez, le ataron con las manos hacia atrás y le dejaron colgado al techo una o dos horas. Después de eso, recordó que pensó que se le habían roto todos los huesos y que no era capaz de caminar. Le llevaron ante una persona vestida de médico, que le preguntó cómo estaba. Respondió que había sido torturado, por lo que los funcionarios lo volvieron a llevar y lo torturaron de nuevo. La segunda vez respondió que estaba bien, así que volvió al gimnasio.
Uno de los acontecimientos más impactantes que vivió fue escuchar los gritos de las mujeres detenidas en las celdas adyacentes, que suplicaban a los guardas que no las violaran. Los guardas amenazaron a su esposa e hija, que podrían acabar como esas mujeres.
Cuando fue llevado al tribunal, el policía que lo torturó vino con él, y el juez no le hizo preguntas, porque ya había sido escuchado cuando fue detenido. El juez decidió su detención y fue llevado a la prisión de delitos agravados. Allí sufrió la ira de los palestinos, porque los presentaron como miembros terroristas.
Los llevaron a una celda para 16 personas, y eran unas 50 personas. Las condiciones de vida eran precarias: tenían que esperar 40 minutos para ir al baño, y tenían agua caliente una vez a la semana durante 30 minutos. Además, los guardas les insultaban constantemente.
Un día les dijeron que una delegación del Comité Europeo de Derechos Humanos iba a venir. Les dijeron que si decían algo sobre los actos de tortura, no podrían ver a su familia (a la que sólo podían ver una vez cada dos meses) o los enviarían a aislamiento. La delegación finalmente vino, pero nadie dijo nada.
El testigo recordó que oían constantemente la frase “aunque salgas tu vida será un infierno”.
En total estuvo detenido durante 10 mese. Después de ser liberado, descubrió que los motivos de su detención eran que trabajaba en una escuela perteneciente al grupo Gulen, era miembro de un sindicato, tenía una cuenta bancaria en el banco Asia y utilizaba la aplicación llamada Bylock.
Acudió a los tribunales en cuatro ocasiones y fue condenado a 7 años y 6 meses de prisión, sin un juicio justo. Interpuso un recurso ante el tribunal administrativo y fue liberado bajo control judicial. El tribunal confirmó finalmente la sentencia y ahora su caso está siendo revisado por el tribunal de casación. Mientras tanto, escapó de Turquía. Dado que su familia lo consideraba un terrorista y la presión de la sociedad influenciada por el discurso del gobierno, decidió huir de Turquía. Ahora se encuentra en Alemania, donde intenta reconstruir su vida con su familia.
Testigo 3: Eren Keskin, abogado de derechos humanos
La abogada afirmó que no sólo la policía o los soldados son culpables, sino tambien los fiscales que no investigan, los jueces que absuelven a los culpables y los médicos forenses que no documentan la tortura.
La abogada señaló que uno de los principales problemas es la documentación de la tortura, porque los jueces sólo aceptan los informes forenses como prueba de la tortura cuando la ley no establece una lista exhaustiva de pruebas aceptables. Sin embargo, los médicos forenses son funcionarios dependientes de la autoridad política y están vinculados al gobierno. Por lo tanto, no aportan pruebas de actos de tortura. Por ejemplo, publican el informe de una persona casi muerta diciendo que puede permanecer en prisión ya que su estado de salud lo permite.
Turquía ya fue condenado por el ECthR en el caso de Sukran aydin, porque no había ningún informe de un médico independiente o de centros de rehabilitación.
Según el testigo, la tortura siempre ha sido una política de Estado, aunque esté legalmente prohibida. Los abogados están mantenidos al margen del sistema porque son defensores, y a veces no se les permite visitar a sus clientes en la cárcel.
La abogada ha sido condenada como terrorista armada, por primera vez después de 30 años trabajando como abogada. Espera ser detenida todos los días, como muchos políticos del HDP que están en la cárcel sólo por sus pensamientos.
Le 20 septembre dernier a débuté la première session du Tribunal pour la Turquie à Genève. Comme l’a rappelé le Dr. Françoise Barones Tulkens lors de l’introduction, le Tribunal pour la Turquie est un tribunal d’opinion : il ne relève pas de l’ordre judiciaire d’un Etat et n’est pas tribunal mis en place par une Organisation Internationale. Le tribunal est un tribunal extraordinaire né de la détermination de la société civile. Même si ses décisions ne sont pas contraignantes, il est un instrument et une plateforme pour donner reconnaissance, visibilité et voix aux personnes qui dénoncent des violations de leurs droits fondamentaux. Le tribunal est indépendant, respecte le principe d’un procès équitable et utilise une méthode judiciaire pour rendre ses décisions. L’objectif fondamental du tribunal est d’alerter l’opinion publique et les gouvernements et de contribuer à l’avancement du droit international et national.
Le tribunal entendra six rapporteurs sur la torture, les enlèvements, la liberté de la presse, l’impunité, l’accès à la justice et l’indépendance judiciaire et les crimes contre l’humanité en Turquie. 15 témoins seront également entendus. Le gouvernement turc a également reçu une invitation et une copie des différents rapports mais il n’a pas donné suite.
Le tribunal formulera une opinion sur la conformité des actions de la Turquie avec le droit international des droits de l’homme et le droit international humanitaire. Le tribunal n’a pas de pouvoirs d’investigation et n’engagera pas de responsabilité pénale ou civile. La décision, bien que non contraignante, aura une valeur morale et donnera des outils juridiques aux victimes, aux avocats ou aux ONG qui souhaitent agir par la suite.
Premier rapporteur sur la torture :
Les principaux textes juridiques qui ont consacré l’interdiction de la torture sont la Convention contre la torture et la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme. Le rapporteur a rappelé que ces conventions établissent le minimum que les lois nationales doivent inclure dans le code pénal, et que la criminalisation de la torture par des sanctions d’emprisonnement est une obligation. En d’autres termes, un acte qui remplit les critères de la définition de la torture selon la Convention contre la torture ne peut être considéré comme un crime mineur, comme un mauvais traitement par exemple. L’interdiction de la torture est absolue, ce qui signifie qu’aucune exception ou dérogation ne peut justifier son utilisation. La responsabilité de l’Etat peut être engagée s’il n’a pas protégé les citoyens contre les actes de torture perpétrés par des acteurs privés, et pour défaut d’enquête et de poursuites. La charge de la preuve incombe aux victimes, mais s’il existe une suspicion raisonnable de torture pendant une détention, les accusés devront apporter la preuve du contraire.
Le rapporteur s’est appuyé sur les statistiques publiées par le gouvernement turc. Cependant, il a souligné des divergences entre les chiffres fournis par les ONG et par le gouvernement. Le rapporteur a donc soutenu que toutes les plaintes n’ont pas fait l’objet d’une enquête par le gouvernement. Par exemple, 2063 cas de personnes ont été dénoncés une violation de l’interdiction à la torture à l’ONG Human rights in Turkey entre 2000 et 2015. Le rapporteur a noté que le nombre de dossiers ouverts a diminué de 50 % entre 2013 et 2015. Cependant, les indicateurs démontrent que le nombre de cas a augmenté et n’a pas diminué. L’explication serait la diminution de la volonté du gouvernement de punir les auteurs d’actes de torture. Ces actes sont principalement l’usage excessif de la force en détention, les passages à tabac, les humiliations, les agressions sexuelles, les chocs électriques.
La torture est une pratique répandue en Turquie depuis des décennies, surtout après le coup d’Etat de 1980. Dans les années 2000, une tolérance zéro envers la torture a été appliquée, ce qui a conduit à quelques améliorations. Cependant, au cours des 10 dernières années, on constate une résurgence de la torture, dans une impunité quasi totale. Actuellement, 441 cas devant la CEDH pour des violations de l’art3 sont examinés, ce qui représente plus de cas que ceux sous investigation par les autorités turques.
Les groupes visés sont les membres du mouvement kurde, du mouvement Gulen, les mineurs et les criminels de droit commun. En outre, la manière dont ils sont réprimés dépend de la nécessité pour la police de les transformer en informateurs. Les membres du PKK, de l’organisation d’extrême gauche ou du mouvement Gulen sont plus susceptibles d’être enlevés, et les épouses des hommes suspects détenues.
Le rapporteur a conclu que le recours à la torture est systématique et organisé, sans enquêtes, sanctions et diligence raisonnable. En réponse à cela, le gouvernement turc a fait valoir que les victimes ne fournissent aucune preuve médicale, qu’elles sont des opposants politiques et que le taux de condamnation pour acte de torture est très faible.
Témoin 1: Mehmet Alp
Le premier témoin est un professeur de chimie et un administrateur dans une école d’une région turque du sud-est de la Turquie. Le 18 avril 2018, il a été enlevé de force après avoir emmené son enfant à l’école. Une voiture est arrivée derrière lui, et les hommes l’ont fait monter dans la voiture. Ils se sont présentés comme des policiers, et ont avancé qu’un de ses élèves aurait rejoint le PKK et le gouvernement. Mr Alp a essayé d’avertir les autorités, mais rien n’a été fait.
Un mois avant le coup d’État, il a été arrêté à nouveau et interrogé sur le mouvement Gulen. Au total, il a été détenu dans 4 prisons et 17 cellules. Pendant 2 mois, il n’a pas pu manger de fruits ou de légumes, ni voir un médecin. Il a commencé à avoir des problèmes internes tels que des hémorragies internes. Cependant, on a dit aux gardes de ne pas s’occuper de lui parce qu’il était considéré comme un terroriste appartenant au mouvement Gulen. Après ces deux mois, il a finalement été amené à l’hôpital où on lui a diagnostiqué un cancer de l’intestin. En novembre, il a été transféré à nouveau. Le 28 mai 2017, deux personnes lui ont enlevé ses menottes et l’ont emmené à 200 km de là. Ils ont continué à lui poser des questions sur les fonctions qu’il a remplies pendant le coup d’État du 15 juillet. Il a répondu qu’il n’avait pas participé au coup d’État et qu’il n’avait rien à voir avec le groupe Gulen. Il a refusé de signer les documents qu’ils lui ordonnaient de signer. Il avait un sac sur la tête, et était dans une pièce sombre, sous la prison. Ils l’ont battu sur la tête et le corps avec des objets métalliques. Il s’est évanoui et saignait du nez. Il a été mis dans une camionnette et finalement transporté à l’hôpital. Dans cette prison, il a rencontré un académicien torturé à l’électricité.
Il a réussi à écrire tout ce qu’il a vécu grâce à du papier toilette. Il n’a pas été autorisé à voir son avocat ni sa femme.
Le 6 juin, il devait passer devant les tribunaux, et les gardiens l’ont menacé, lui et sa famille, s’il disait quoi que ce soit sur les actes de torture dont il avait été victime. Il n’a donc rien dévoilé et a été déclaré coupable.
Il a été accusé en premier lieu de falsification, puis d’être membre d’une association armée et enfin de participation au coup d’État. Après avoir été libéré, il s’est adressé aux autorités, mais rien ne s’est passé car la police, les procureurs et le tribunal travaillent ensemble. Il n’a pu se battre pour ses droits que dans les pays libres, car en Turquie cela est impossible.
Témoin 2: Erhan Dogan
Le deuxième témoin était professeur d’histoire à Ankara. Lorsque le coup d’État a eu lieu, il travaillait dans une école appartenant au groupe Gulen à Ankara. Une semaine après, de nombreuses arrestations ont commencé à avoir lieu et les écoles proches du groupe Gulen ont été pillées, brûlées, détruites. Dix jours plus tard, un enseignant de son école l’a appelé parce que des policiers le réclamaient. Il s’est rendu à l’école et a vu des gens qui l’attendaient. Ils l’ont pris par le col et l’ont poussé contre le mur. Ils l’ont insulté de terroriste, l’ont battu et lui ont dit que s’il refusait d’obéir à leurs ordres, sa vie entière serait détruite, y compris sa famille. Ils lui ont demandé avec qui il avait eu des réunions ou des discussions. Ils lui ont demandé dix noms de hauts responsables du groupe Gulen. En outre, ils voulaient qu’il reconnaisse être membre d’une organisation terroriste et qu’il signe des documents l’incriminant. Le témoin a répondu qu’il n’était pas un terroriste et a donc été torturé pendant un certain temps. Un policier officiel d’Ankara est ensuite arrivé, a volé leur ordinateur et leur téléphone et les a emmenés dans la ville d’Ankara, au poste de police antiterroriste.
Une fois arrivé au poste, il a été escorté par 12 policiers qui les ont insultés, les ont traités de chiens et les ont battus. Il a été séparé des autres, et ils lui ont dit qu’il pouvait mourir, et que beaucoup de gens meurent ici et que personne ne le sait. Ils l’ont emmené dans un gymnase, avec des gens en orange et des menottes. Il y avait du sang autour de lui sur les murs, ce qui était la preuve que des détenues étaient torturés ici. Il a appris plus tard que les soldats arrêtés après le coup d’État étaient torturés dans cette pièce. On lui a donné un petit morceau de pain, de la confiture, une bouteille d’eau. Les autres détenus étaient des universitaires. L’un d’eux était diabétique et toutes ses demandes de soins ont été rejetées. Il se souvient de plusieurs actes de torture, comme d’avoir été déshabillé avec de l’eau froide sur lui, et d’avoir été battu avec des matraques ou quatre officiers qui lui frappaient la tête contre le mur et lui posaient sans cesse des questions sur le groupe Gulen. Une fois, ils l’ont attaché avec les mains derrière, et ¡l’ont laissé pendu au plafond pendant une ou deux heures. Après cela, il s’est souvenu qu’il pensait que toutes ses os étaient cassés et qu’il ne pouvait plus marcher. Ils l’ont amené auprès d’une personne habillée comme un médecin, qui lui a demandé comment il allait. Il a répondu qu’il avait été torturé, alors les fonctionnaires l’ont ramené et l’ont à nouveau torturé. La deuxième fois, il a répondu qu’il allait bien, alors il est revenu au gymnase.
L’un des événements les plus marquants qu’il a vécus a été d’entendre les cris des femmes détenues dans les cellules voisines, qui suppliaient les gardes de ne pas les violer. Les gardes ont aussi menacé sa femme et sa fille, en lui disant qu’elles pourraient finir comme ces femmes. Il a alors pensé au suicide, mais il ne l’a pas fait en raison de ses croyances religieuses.
Lorsqu’il a été emmené au tribunal, le policier qui l’avait torturé l’accompagnait, et le juge n’a pas posé de question, car il avait déjà été entendu lorsqu’il a été arrêté. Le juge a donc décidé de l’arrêter et il a été emmené à la prison pour crimes aggravés. Là, il a souffert de la colère des Palestiniens, car il a été présenté comme terroriste.
On les a emmenés dans une cellule pour 16 personnes, dans laquelle environ 50 personnes étaient détenues. Les conditions de détention étaient précaires et insalubres: ils devaient attendre 4o minutes pour aller aux toilettes, et ils avaient de l’eau chaude une fois par semaine pendant 30 minutes. Il étaient constamment insulté par les gardiens.
Un jour, les gardes leur ont annoncé qu’une délégation du Comité européen des droits de l’homme allait venir faire une inspection. Ils les ont averti que s’ils disaient quoi que ce soit d’autre que le texte qui leur avait été donné, ils ne pourraient pas voir leur famille (qu’ils ne pouvaient voir qu’une fois tous les deux mois) ou ils seraient envoyés en cellule d’isolement. La délégation est finalement venue, mais personne n’a rien dit.
Le témoin s’est souvenu qu’ils entendaient constamment la déclaration suivante : “même si tu sors, ta vie sera un enfer”.
Il a été détenu au total pendant 10 mois sans aucune inculpation. Après sa libération, il a découvert que les motifs de sa détention étaient qu’il travaillait dans une école appartenant au groupe Gulen, qu’il était membre d’un syndicat, qu’il avait un compte bancaire à la banque Asia et qu’il utilisait l’application Bylock.
Il est passé devant le tribunal à quatre reprises et a été condamné à 7 ans et 6 mois de prison, sans procès équitable. Il a présenté un recours devant le tribunal administratif, et la plus haute instance l’a libéré sous contrôle judiciaire. Le tribunal a finalement confirmé la sentence et son cas est actuellement examiné par la cour de cassation. Entre-temps, il a fui la Turquie. Étant donné que sa famille le considère comme un terroriste et la pression de la société influencée par le discours du gouvernement, il a décidé de fuir la Turquie. Il est passé par la Grèce ant de rejoindre l’Allemagne oú il essaye de se reconstruire avec sa famille.
Témoin 3 : Eren Keskin, défenseur des droits de l’homme
L’avocat a rappelé que les coupables ne sont pas seulement les policiers ou les gardes qui torturent, mais aussi les procureurs qui n’enquêtent pas pas, les juges qui acquittent les coupables et les médecins légistes qui occultent la torture.
Le témoin a souligné que l’un des principaux problèmes est la documentation de la torture, car les juges n’acceptent que les rapports médico-légaux comme preuve alors que la loi n’établit pas une liste exhaustive des preuves recevables. Cependant, les médecins légistes sont des fonctionnaires dépendant de l’autorité politique et donc liés au gouvernement. Ils ne fournissent donc pas de preuves d’actes de torture. Par exemple, ils publient le rapport d’une personne presque morte en indiquant qu’elle peut rester en prison.
La Turquie a déjà été condamnée par l’ECthR dans l’affaire Sukran aydin, car il n’y avait pas de rapport d’un médecin indépendant ou de centres de réhabilitation.
Selon le témoin, la torture a toujours été une politique d’État, même si elle est légalement interdite. Les avocats sont tenus à l’écart du système parce qu’ils sont des défenseurs, et parfois ils ne sont pas autorisés à rendre visite à leurs clients en prison.
Le témoin a été condamné en tant que terroriste armé, ce qui est la première fois après 30 ans de travail en tant qu’avocat. Elle s’attend à être détenue tous les jours, comme de nombreux politiciens du HDP qui sont en prison uniquement à cause de leurs idées.
On the 20th of September started the first session of the Turkey Tribunal in Geneva. As recalled by Tulkens during the introduction, the Turkey Tribunal is an opinion tribunal. In other words, it does not fall within the judicial order of a state or from a court set up by an International Organization. The tribunal is an extraordinary court born of the determination of civil society. Even if its decisions are not binding, it is an instrument and a platform to give recognition, visibility, and a voice to people alleging violations of their fundamental rights. The tribunal is independent, respects the principle of a fair trial, and uses a judicial method to release decisions. The fundamental objective of the Turkey tribunal is to alert public opinion and policymakers and to contribute to the advancement of international and national law.
The tribunal will hear six rapporteurs about torture, abductions, press freedom, impunity, access to justice and judicial independence, and crimes against humanity in Turkey. 15 witnesses will also be heard, and the Turkish government received an invitation to attend the judgment and copies of the report but is not present.
In the end, the tribunal will formulate an opinion on the conformity of Turkey’s actions with International Human Rights law and International Humanitarian Law. The tribunal does not have investigative powers and will not engage in criminal or civil liability. The decision, although not binding, has a high moral authority and gives legal tools for victims, lawyers, or NGOs who want to take action afterward.
First rapporteur on torture:
The main legal text which enshrined the right not to be tortured is the Convention against Torture and the European Convention on Human Rights. The rapporteur recalled that those conventions establish the minimum that national laws should include in the criminal code and that the criminalization of torture by imprisonment sanctions is an obligation. In other words, an act that fulfills the criteria of torture according to the CAT cannot be considered a minor crime, such as ill-treatment for instance. The prohibition of torture is absolute, which means that no exception or derogation can justify the use of torture (terrorism). The responsibility of the state can be engaged if it failed to protect citizens from acts of torture perpetrated by private actors, and for failure to investigate and to prosecute. The burden of proof is on the victims, but if there is a reasonable suspicion of torture while they were deprived of their liberty, the government will have to provide evidence to the contrary.
The rapporteur relied on statistics released by the Turkish government. However, he pointed out discrepancies between figures provided by NGOs and by the government. The rapporteur alleged therefore that all allegations have not been investigated by the government. For instance, 2063 cases of people denunciated to the NGO Human rights in Turkey between 2000 and 2015. The rapporteur noted that the number of cases opened declined of 50% between 2013 and 2015. However, the indicators demonstrate that the number of cases increased and did not drop. The explanation would be the decrease of the will of the government to punish torture. The acts of torture documented in Turkey are mainly the excessive use of force in detention, beatings, humiliations, sexual assault, electrics chocs.
Torture has been a spreading practice in Turkey for decades, especially after the coup d’Etat in 1980. In the 2000s, zero-tolerance towards torture has been applied, which lead to some improvements. However, over the last 10 years, a resurgence of torture can be noted, in almost total impunity. Currently, 441 cases before the ECtHR for violations of art3 are examined, which represent more cases than those investigated by Turkey.
The targeted groups are members of the Kurdish movement, of the Gulen movement, juvenile, and ordinary criminals. In addition, The way they are repressed depends on the necessity of the police to turn them into informants. Members of the PKK, extreme left wings organization, or Gulen movement are more likely to be abducted, and wives of the suspicious men detained.
The Rapporteur concluded that the use of torture is systematic and organized, without investigations, punishment, and due diligence. In response to that, the Turkish government argued that victims do not provide any medical proof, they are political opponents, and that the convictions rate for acts of torture is very low.
Witness 1: Mehmet Alp
Mehmet Alp, Chemistry Teacher
The first witness is a chemistry teacher and an administrator in a school in a Turkish region in southeastern turkey. On the 18th of April 2018, he was forcibly abducted after taking his child to school. A car arrived behind him, and the men got him into the car. They told that they were policemen, and that one of his students was set to have joined the PKK, and that other students were attending meetings of the Gulen movements and joined the PKK as well. They finally released him and on the 20th of April, they came to his house and took his wife under custody for 4 days. This abduction can be explained by the end of the peace process between the PKK and the government and the beginning of armed conflict had begun again, They tried to warn the authorities, but nothing was done about it.
One month before the coup, he was arrested again and asked about the Gulen movement. In total, he was detained in 4 jails and 17 cells. For 2 months, they were not able to eat fruits or vegetables, neither to see a doctor. He started having internal problems such as internal bleeding. However, the guardians were told not to take care of him because he was considered a terrorist belonging to the Gulen movement. After those 2 months, he was finally brought to the hospital and detected intestinal cancer. In November, he was transferred again. On the 28th of May 2017, two people uncuffed him and brought him 200km away. They kept asking questions about the functions he fulfilled during the coup of the 15th of July. He answered that he did not participate in the coup, he had nothing to do with the Gullen group. He refused to sign the documents. He had a bag over his head, and he was in a dark room, underneath the prison. They beat him over his head and body with metallic things. He fainted, was bleeding from his nose. He was placed in a van and finally got to the hospital. In this prison, he met an academician tortured with electricity.
He managed to write down everything he has gone through thanks to toilet papers. He was not allowed to see his lawyer or his wife.
On the 6th of June, he was supposed to go before the courts, and the guardians threatened him and his family if he said anything about being a victim of torture. He was declared guilty.
He was accused in the first place of falsification, and then of being a member of an armed association, and finally of involvement in the coup. After being released, he went to the authorities, but nothing happened because police, prosecutors, and court work together. He was only able to fight for his rights in free countries, in Turkey it is impossible.
Witness 2: Erhan Dogan
Erhan Dogan, History Teacher
The second witness was a teacher of history in Ankara. When the coup happened, he was working at a school belonging to the Gulen group in Ankara. One week after, a lot of arrests starting to happen, and the schools closed to the Gulen group were pillaged, burned, destroyed. Ten days later, a teacher at his school called him because policemen were asking for him. He went to the school, and he saw people waiting for him. They held him from his collar and pushed him to the wall. They insulted him as a terrorist, beat him and they said that if he refused to obey their commands, his whole life will turn into misery, including his family. They asked Kim who he has had meetings with or discussed. They asked for ten names of the senior officials of the Gulen group. In addition, they wanted him to accept that he was a member of a terrorist organization and to sign the documents. The witness answered that he was not a terrorist so he was tortured for a while. An official policeman from Ankara came afterward, stole their computer, phone, and bring them to Ankara town, the anti-terrorist police station.
One there, he was escorted by 12 policemen who insulted them, called them dogs, and beat them up. He was separated from the others, and they told him that he could die and that a lot of people die here and nobody knows. They took him to a gym, with people in orange and cuffs. There was blood around him on the walls, which was proof that they tortured people here. He learned later that soldiers arrested after the coup were tortured here. He was given a small piece of bread, jam, a bottle of water. The other detainees were scholars. One had diabetics and all their demands for care were dismissed. He recalled several acts of torture, such as being undressed with cold water on him and beat with bludgeons or four officers who hit his head on the wall and kept asking questions about the Gulen group. One time, they tied him with his hands behind, and they left him up hanging from the selling one or two hours. After that, he recalled that he thought that all his buns were broken and he was not able to walk. They brought him to a person dressed up like a doctor, who asked him how he was. He answered that he had been tortured so the officials took him back and tortured him again. The second time he answered that he was fine, so he came back to the gym.
One of the most impactful events he went through was hearing the screams of women detainees in adjacent cells, who were begging the officials not to rape them. The officials threaten his wife and daughter, who might end up like those women. This event made him want to commit suicide during the toilet break, but because of religious beliefs he did not do it
When he was taken to court, the policeman who tortured him came with him, and the judge did not ask a question, because had been already heard when he got arrested. So the judge decided on his arrest and he was taken to the aggravated crime to prison. There, he suffered from the Palestinians’ anger, because they were presented as terrorist members.
They took them to a cell for 16 people, and they were about 50 people. Living conditions were very poor: they had to wait for 4o minutes to go to toilets, and they had hot water once a week for 30 minutes. In addition, the guardians constantly insulted them.
One day, they told them that a delegation from the European Human Rights Committee will come to inspect. They told them that if they said anything apart from the script they were given, they would not be able to see their family (who they can only see once every two months) or they will be sent to solitary confinement. The delegation finally came, but nobody said anything.
The witness recalled that they constantly heard the statement: “even if you go out your life will be hell”.
He was in total detained. 10months without any indictment. After he was released, he found that the grounds for his detention was he worked in a school belonging to the Gulen group, was a member of a trade union, had a bank account at bank Asia, and used the application called Bylock.
He went before court four times and was condemned for 7 years and 6 months of prison, without a fair trial. He presented a recourse before the administrative tribunal, and the highest course released him under judiciary control. The court finally confirmed the sentence and his case is currently reviewed by the cassation court. He escaped Turkey in the meantime. Given that his family saw him as a terrorist and the isolating pressure of the society because of the discourse of the government, he decided to flee Turkey. He crossed over from Turkey to Greece by the river, and he is located in Germany, where he is trying to rebuild his life with his family.
Witness 3: Eren Keskin, human rights lawyer
Eren Keskin, human rights lawyer
The lawyer recalled that not only police or soldiers are guilty, but prosecutors who do not lunch investing, judges who acquit the perpetrators, forensic doctors who do not document torture.
The witness pointed out that one of the main problems is the documentation of torture, because judges, only accept forensic reports as evidence for torture when the law does not establish an exhaustive list of acceptable proofs. However, forensic doctors are civil servants dependent on political authority and therefore linked to the government. They, therefore, do not release proof of acts of torture.
Turkey was already by the ECtHR in the Sukran Aydin case, because there was no report from an independent doctor or rehabilitation centers.
According to the witness, torture has always been a state policy, even if it is legally prohibited. Lawyers are kept outside of the system because they are defenders, and sometimes there are not allowed to visit their clients in prison. For instance, they release reports of people almost dead stating that they can remain in prison.
The witness has been sentenced as an armed terrorist, which is the first time after 30years of working as a lawyer. She expects to be detained every day, such as many politicians from HDP who are in jail only because of their thoughts.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
