to the PDF

GEZİ LEGAL MONITORING GROUP
GEZİ REPORT
(Turkey in the swing of democracy and totalitarianism)
30 December 2014
1
PREAMBLE
This Report, reflects upon the reasons behind the Gezi protests, their formation, results and effects,
and is drafted by the Gezi Legal Monitoring Group which is formed by academicians, legal
professionals, the Union of Turkish Bar Associations, İstanbul Medical Chamber, Chamber of
Environmental Engineers, Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey (DİSK) and nongovernmental organizations in order to monitor the events in the aftermath of the Gezi protests; the
deaths, injuries, arrests, unlawful practices and violations of civil rights. This multifaceted and
comprehensive Report aims to shed light on to the yesterday, today and tomorrow of Turkey in the
swing of democratization and totalitarianism.
This Report, which was shared with the public by the Gezi Legal Monitoring Group on Tuesday, 30th
December 2014, 14:00 in a press conference conducted at Taksim Hill Hotel, was prepared using
objective and scientific methods, with experts belonging to different disciplines related to Gezi
protests.
Regarding the approach and method, three triple features reflect the Report:
-The first triple feature consists of a Multi-disciplinary approach, fields of expertise and scientific
method,
-Data from Law, Medicine and Natural Sciences may be expressed as the second triple feature,
-Domestic, European and International platform is the third triple feature.
The complex nature of the Gezi process made it necessary to have a multi-disciplinary approach, for
that goal, persons with different areas of expertise came together, and as a result of this approach style,
the method applied on the study became the scientific method.
In regards to the disciplines, law, medicine and natural sciences (environmental sciences and ecology
in particular) constitute the main fields of expertise.
Examining the Gezi process with a scientific approach that brings together different areas of expertise
and uses a scientific method required stepping beyond a domestic perspective.The international
obligations of Turkey are not limited to Europe, but extends to United Nations documents as well.
This is why the subject which is mainly examined in a domestic platform, has been examined in light
of the obligations of Turkey originating from European Human Rights Law and International Human
Rights documents.
This study has been dedicated to those who lost their lives during the Gezi process.
2
Those who contributed efforts in the preparation of the report, beginning with the members of Gezi
Legal Monitoring group, and all persons and organizations, cannot be thanked enough for their
voluntary and dedicated contributions.
Raporu yayımlayacak olan Türkiye Barolar Birliği yöneticilerine, katkıları ve duyarlılıkları içten
teşekkür borcumuz var. Rapor, aynı zamanda Türkiye Barolar Birliği internet sitesine konacak;
böylece, yaygınlaşması ve kullanılırlığı kolaylaşacaktır. 08.01.2015
We sincerely thank the administrators of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations, who are going to
publish the report, for their contributions and sensitivity. The report will also be available on the
website of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations, which will help it become more widespread and
readily available. 08.01.2015
İök
On behalf of the
Gezi Legal Monitoring Group
3
GEZI REPORT
(Democracy and Totalitarianism Pendulum in Turkey)
We, as Gezi Legal Monitoring Group, have finally completed the Gezi report entitled as
"Democracy and Totalitarianism pendulum in Turkey," which we have been working on for a while.
Many academics, lawyers, professional and civil society organizations, especially DISK
(Confederation of Revolutionary Workers Unions), Bar Association of Turkey, Istanbul Chamber of
Environmental Engineers have contributed to this multi-faceted work.
The report aims to manifest the unlawful practices, human rights violations and totalitarian
tendency of the regime from a legal perspective with regard to the concrete cases that have been faced
for the last one and a half year period, beginning from the Gezi events. Other purposes of the report
are to share the ongoing legal process, including the trials, with public and make a number of
suggestions for democratization.
Gezi protest which started as a defense of the city and surroundings in 2013 summer, quickly
turned into a strong social opposition, comprising the political reactions and demands coming from
different sections of society. Political power’s attendance to suppress this opposition with violence has
created a political enviroment in which the fundamental rights and freedoms have been violeted in a
continuous manner, the connection with the rule of law and democracy has been severed and all kinds
of opposed thoughts have been criminalized. Although the demands for democratization and freedom
were expressed by peaceful street demonstrations, political power presented them as if an attempted
coup and this accusation took place in the indictments against protesters. This and other developments
occurred after Gezi, show that the country quickly moves from democracy towards an authoritarian or
even a totalitarian regime.
The report takes the Gezi period from different aspects and especially focuses on the following
points:
The social opposition that came to light with Gezi, was particularly formed as a result of the
government policies. Gezi protests which are fed by different factors like the urban and ecological
destructions, interferences with personal liberty and private life, policies over the female body, efforts
to lead society towards conservatism and increasing police violence can not be associated to the
national will hostility, advocacy of coup or other different conspiracies.
When considered from the aspect of Constitution and international human rights law, it will be
seen that they were generaly peaceful activities. Systematic prohibition and suppression of these
activities are against the Constitution and law; they also signify the violation of the right to freedom of
assembly.
4
During this process, the individual freedom of expression, the freedom of the press, and the
academic freedom were suppressed, moreover a large number of employees have been subjected to
inquirements and discharged.
As shown by the investigations and cases sampled in the report, people who used their right to
freedom of assembly about the issues that concern whole society and country, have been subjected to
criminal prosecution. Some of them faced with serious and entirely political accusations.
Deaths and injuries were caused by the unnecessary and excessive usage of force and violence
by the police officials. However, the human rights violations and crimes have not been investigated
effectively, responsible public officials have not been prosecuted and punished. Impunity has become
the general rule and punishment of the officials the exception.
Restrictive new regulations concerning the freedom of expression and the right to freedom of
assembly have gained momentum in order to prevent the revival of social opposition. While the area
of freedoms gets narrow, it is wanted to expand the powers of police forces through the new security
regulations.
The Gezi Report is presented to the public in the hope of providing a contribution to the struggle
for democratic governance based on human rights and the rule of law.
Gezi Legal Monitoring Group
5
RAPPORT DES MANIFESTATIONS DE GEZI
(La Turquie entre la Démocratie et le totalitarisme)
Nous sommes le groupe des observateurs juridiques de GEZI. Nous avons établi le rapport
portant sur les manifestations de Gezi nommé « La Turquie sur la balance de la Démocratie et du
totalitarisme ». Les académiciens, les avocats, l’Union des barreaux de la Turquie, la Chambre des
médecins d’Istanbul, la Chambre des ingénieurs, DISK, les chambres des métiers et les organisations
de la société civile ainsi que de nombreuses autres personnes ont contribué à la réalisation de ce
rapport qui aborde les nombreux aspects des événements.
Le rapport a pour objectif de trouver des solutions pour la démocratisation du pays, à la suite de
l’observation, du début jusqu’à aujourd’hui, des événements étendus sur un laps de temps d’un an et
demi, sous l’angle des règles de droit et à partir des illustrations des pratiques anti-juridiques, de la
violation des droits, des tendances totalitariste du régime et pour partager les informations sur le
processus juridique.
Le mouvement protestataire de Gezi a commencé en été 2013 comme un projet de défense de
l’environnement à la suite du projet de destruction du Gezi Parki, et s’est transformé en mouvement
d’opposition populaire de masse, soutenu par les revendications politiques des différentes catégories
de souches de la population. Cette opposition a fait l’objet d’une oppression violente du gouvernement
en donnant lieu à la violation constante des droits et libertés fondamentaux, du détachement des
valeurs d’un Etat de droit et de la démocratie, en générant une atmosphère où toutes les opinions
contraires ont été considérées comme un délit ou crime. Les revendications de démocratie et de liberté
exprimées par des manifestants pacifistes ont été qualifiées de tentative de coup d’Etat et, ces
accusations ont été introduites dans les réquisitions du Ministère Public. Ces événements ainsi que les
autres ayant eu lieu par la suite sont révélateurs de l’avancement vers un régime totalitaire. Le rapport
a analysé le processus de Gezi sous différents angles et a effectué des constats visés ci-dessus.
Le mouvement Gezi représente l’opposition populaire ayant fait surface et structuré par la
politique d’oppression du gouvernement en place. Les principaux raisons de la naissance du
mouvement Gezi étaient la protection de l’environnement, les libertés individuelles, le respect de la
vie privée, la condamnation d’une politique prenant comme objet le corps des femmes, de contester la
volonté de rendre le peuple plus conservateur et la violence policière. Cependant, le gouvernement a
jugé ces revendications comme une atteinte à l’unité de la nation, une apologie du coup d’Etat et de
complots. Cette position et les affirmations du gouvernement ne sont pas admissibles. A la lumière de
la Constitution et des droits internationaux des hommes, les protestations de Gezi représente un
mouvement pacifiste. L’interdiction systématique et l’oppression de manifestations sont contraires à la
Constitution et aux règles de droit puisqu’il y a violation du droit de se réunir et de manifestation.
Dans ce processus, la liberté d’expression individuelle, la liberté de la presse et la liberté des
académiciens ont été restreintes et de nombreuses personnes ont été licenciés ou d’autres ont fait
6
l’objet de procès. Comme les exemples d’enquêtes et de procès décrits dans le rapport, les personnes
qui ont utilisé leur droit de manifester d’une manière pacifiste, sur les sujets qui intéressent tous les
citoyens et tout le pays, ont fait l’objet de poursuites, certains d’entre eux ont été accusés de délits
politiques et autres délits graves.
L’utilisation non nécessaire ainsi que disproportionnée de la force et de la violence a coûté la
vie à de nombreuses personnes, d’autres ont été blessés et sont handicapés. De plus, les crimes et délits
ainsi que la violation des droits commis n’ont pas été poursuivis de façon effective, les agents publics
responsables des faits n’ont pas été jugés et sanctionnés. L’impunité est devenue la règle, la répression
est devenue une exception. Les droits d’expression et de manifestation ont fait l’objet de dispositions
restrictives afin d’éviter la résurrection du mouvement de contestation populaire. Alors que le champ
des libertés a été restreint, les compétences des forces de l’ordre sont élargies dans le cadre des
nouvelles dispositions législatives de sécurité intérieure.
Nous vous soumettons avec tout notre respect le rapport de Gezi, ayant pour objectif de
contribuer et de renforcer le combat pour le respect des droits de l’homme, ainsi que la mise en place
d’un régime démocratique attaché à un Etat de droit.
Groupe d’observateurs juridiques de Gezi
7
8
The Gezi Report, which focuses on the “political and social events of Summer 2013”, also
displays a general view of the law for2014’s Turkey. For this reason, the report begins with an
introductory section entitled “The general view of Turkey: State of Law and society”. The Report,
which was prepared in light of the general introduction, is consisting of 6 sections:
I.- The Embracement of Gezi Park and the process that fed the social opposition,
II.-The general view of the social layers that Embraced Gezi,
III.- Police brutality and violence, and the investigations conducted as a result,
IV.- Violations of civil rights during the Gezi Protests,
V.-Gezi, Police Brutality and Violence, and impunity,
VI.- Authoritarian changes on legislation after Gezi Events.
Evaluation and Suggestions
INTRODUCTION
THE GENERAL VIEW OF TURKEY:
STATE OF LAW AND SOCIETY
The general view will be demonstrated in light of the international obligations of Turkey and
along the framework of constitutional order and application. In this regard, two pre-observations
concerning human rights could be made:
-International obligations have continuously increased since 1940’s to 2010’s.
-In the constitutional platform, significant progress since 1987 until 2010 has been made.
The practices that have been witnessed in 2013’s and 2014’s Turkey is pointing towards
deepdissidences in the relationship between the society and state. The prominent style of politics has
reached to the threshold of suspending aforementioned rights and law.
In those introductory observations, European Convention on Human Rights(ECHR) will be
taken as the basis in regards to international obligations, whereas the Constitution will be taken as the
pivot for domestic regulations.
9
I.THE MAJORITARIAN PERCEPTION AND ITS OUTCOMES
Even though the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was ratified by Turkey 60
years ago, the state of human rights in years 2013 and 2014 provide some insight onto the level of
democracy as well. In spite of being a member of European Council, which has been named as “Club
of Democracies”, democracy in Turkey, the right of the majority to rule, -in regards to the legislation
policy being applied in the last ten years- can turn into the authorization of the majority to reinforce its
power by creating rules and regulations as it wishes.
The reason for this is that the connection created by the majority gained by elections and “the
will of the nation” is able to put the law to the background, and the values and views being blessed in
the name of the will of the nation, in the end,can be reduced to the will of a single person.
This has two contradicting results:
- Contradiction in continuity: Even though the stability of the government was provided by the
way of the majority of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), political instability has continuity.
- Contradiction in coalition: The executives of the party who have had majority for twelve
years, spoke up about their firm stance against coalition governments at every chance. However, the
rhetoric of continuously badmouthing political and legal coalitions turned out to be a cover for another
coalition: An alliance based on a sect/Tariqa1.
The will of the nation that has been blessed, became estranged to even the majoritarian
perception of democracy. Why? The answer to that may be investigated in the relationship of lawdemocracy. For that reason, it is beneficial to take a look at the place of law in the process. Law is
generated by democracy (democracy should also be regenerated by, progressed and fed by law): in the
order of idea, discussion and majority. The laws being enacted (not just being the will of the group
and/or leader that has numerical majority), reflect the feature of being legitimate and binding rules of
law, only in the entireness of the Constitution, international law, general principles of law and vested
rights.
Regardless of which, in a state of law, once a rule has been established, everyone –including
those who established the rule-, are under the obligation to abide by the rule. In spite of that, the
dominant inclination in the last ten years’ Turkey has been towards the trend of “making law subject
to the will of the numerical majority-holder group’s executives”.
Therefore, the property of the law and democracy complementing each otheryieldedits place to
conflicts for most of the time.
With the means of laws and legislative decrees (KHK), local and environmental privileges have
been increasingly transferred to the center, and in the center, they have been focused on a single
1
The alliance between the AK Party Government and the Gülen Congregation, have transformed into a conflict,
as a result of the bribery and corruption allegations that were uncovered in 17 th and 25th December 2013. This
legal and actual conflict of powers, between these two “old allies”, is still ongoing today.
10
person. As a result,on some occasions, it was attempted to legitimize the will of a single personby the
“will of the nation” rhetoric.
II. PLURALISTIC SOCIETY: HUMAN RIGHTS AS THE INFRASTRUCTURE
OF DEMOCRACY
The political decisions and practices that keep on eroding and depleting the historical
heritage of Turkey may be viewed as a reflection of the perception of human rights. In the spectrum of
human rights regarding relationships, in addition to the serious repressions of personal freedoms and
exercise of collective rights, the rights and freedoms being exercised in a socio-professional contextare
prone to continuous violations as well.The environmental values and rights are, to an extent not
allowed by the rules of law in continental Europe, may become subject to a kind of “wild capitalism”
mindset and implementation.
A)The European Convention and the constitutional order
In the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the “democratic society” exists as a
guarantee of rights. The “democratic society” criterion has reached to the “maximum standard”
threshold on the constitution with the 2001 amendment. How? By adding three more criteria to this
criterion: “democratic order of the society”, and the “secular republic”, “the principle of
proportionality” and “the essence of rights” (article 13). The separate and combined application of
those constitutes an “advanced (or reinforced) chain of guarantees” for constitutional freedoms and
rights.
The infrastructure of Article 13 regarding the restrictions should also be noted: legality,
constitutional causality and the requirement of them not being contrary to the letter and spirit of the
constitution.
Who are the parties being addressed with this article? The requirements of Article 13 are
binding for all bodies of the government; legislative, executive and judicial branches.For this reason,
even the implementation of Article 13 in accordance with its goal alone, will create the result of 1982
Constitution’s metamorphosis -in favor of rights-2.
The terms used by the European Court as the founding members of the society, as well as the
criteria for restrictions are increasingly being reflected into domestic law. Especially the judgments
made by the Constitutional Court (AYM) as a result of individual applications are double
dimensioned:
- On one hand, they bring together European human right law and freedoms with constitutional
law; reinforcing the direct application method of the Convention in domestic law.
2
In reality, 1982 constitution, with the amendments made from 1987 to 2010, has became metamorphosed in
relation to the regime of rights and freedoms and the “positive obligations” generated by them for governmental
bodies. See İ. Ö. Kaboğlu, “Değişmeyen Anayasa Hükümlerinin Değişimi” [The amendment of unamended
Constitution Articles], 1982 Anayasası’nın 30. Yıl Bilançosu [The 30 Year Toll of 1982 Constitution], (Ed.
Nihan Yancı Özalp/Sinem Şirin), XII Levha, February 2014 İstanbul, p.1-12.
11
- On the other hand, it constitutionalizes different branches of law, such as civil and criminal
law.This process, reminds the necessity of implementing the related articles of the Constitution
regarding rights and freedoms to the criminal, administrative and civil courts.
What this means is: judicial authorities are faced with the obligation to interpret and implement
Article 13 of the constitution, along with the other related articles.
B)Politics and Implementation: DeepSplits with Europe
The standards, even though being defined by normative regulations such as the Constitution and
ECHR on one hand, and by the Constitutional Court and European Court of Human Rights as the
bodies responsible for supervising the implementation of those rules; political decision-making
authorities, beginning with the executive branch, may sometimes become estranged to the defined
human rights standards. Not only the bodies affiliated with the executive branch, but –even though
relatively- autonomous institutions such as universities, may sometimes execute unlawful actions and
procedures. In the context of democratic opposition, the attitudes toward the freedom of thought,
expression and collective freedoms do not provide worrying material only about the perception of
rights, but about the clash of law and politics as well.
AYM judgments and ECHR judgments, in regards to their interpretation methods, especially
with the individual application decisions, despite of being expected to converge toward each other3,
there is no observation of any decrease in the resistance of political authorities against ECHR
judgments. This resistance may extend to the threshold of not fulfilling the obligations due to the
ECHR judgments. For instance, the compulsory religion education judgment4 and the religion box on
identity cards judgment5, even though having many years passed after the judgments, are not only not
being implemented, but there is no statement of a will towards implementing them. In spite of ECHR
having established the 10% threshold in legislative elections as exceeding European standards6, let
alone decreasing this threshold, the fact that the problem has been brought before the AYM is creating
a reaction.
1. Judiciary: What is the limit of the freedom of expression?
Indeed, the members of the judiciary may express the issues facing the judiciary bodies with a
critical point of view, in public. However, it is possible that the judiciary members, especially the
heads of supreme courts, who happen to criticize the unconstitutional laws and practices, as well as
politicians who do not implement the legal judgments, are invited to “take off their robes” and into
politics.7 In other words, the freedom of expression can sometimes be begrudged for even defending
judicial independence.
3
For further analysis regarding the subject, see Anayasa ve İnsan Hakları Avrupa Sözleşmesi [The Constitution
and European Convention on Human Rights], (ed. Sibel İnceoğlu), Council of Europe, 2013.
4
ECHR, Hasan and Eylem Zengin v. Turkey, 09.10.2007, (final: 09/01/2008).
5
ECHR, Sinan Işık v. Turkey, 02.02.2010.
6
For ECHR judgment about the election threshold see ECHR, Yumak et Sadak c. Turquie, 30.01.2007.
7
Such an attitude from the political people in the executive branch, is an indication of the highly problematic
nature of their view on the separation of powers.
12
2.The freedom of assembly and demonstration: public order by means of prohibitions
Executive authorities are not settling with just reacting against the democratic opposition of
those who exercise collective freedoms as demonstrations and marches, but from time to time, they
invite them to the political arena as well. Such a political reaction may sometimes, for the subjects of
rights and freedoms, turn into administrative and political sanctions. On one hand, while a multifaceted sanction is being exercised on those who exercise their right to democratic opposition via
assemblies and demonstration; on the other hand, the tendency to perceive squares as political arenas
may become dominant. The attitudes and practices along that direction, infer the denial of the civil
society and “depoliticisation of the society”.
Those who exercise collective freedoms are being ostracized as “marginal groups”; those who
applaud the political and public authorities are considered as “agreeable citizens”. Especially those
who oppose actions and practices destructive to the nature and environment are accused with political
slogans such as “traitors, sellouts, servants of international lobbies, coup d’état supporters”.
In fact, the issue at hand is that the function, whichcannot be fulfilled by the mechanism of
constitutional balance and supervision, is being attempted to be fulfilled by different social classes and
layers, by the means of civil freedoms.
The precautions taken to prevent this, in the name of public safety, may turn “public order”, in
total contrary to the description made by European Court, into a medium where freedoms are not
exercised.
The right to resist, especially in environmental rights, against the disruptive and destructive
practices toward the areas of living and ecosystem, are based on a legitimate ground in rural and urban
locations.
3.Elections: A sword for denial of pluralist democracy?
In large public assemblies, the precautions taken for the group in power and the opposition, may
meet with each other (in an opposite context):
- In order to prevent assemblies held by opposing groups, or worker classes on Labor Day, roads
are being blocked, transportation is suspended and travelling is being prevented.8
- On the other hand, in order to make the transportation channels to the location of an assembly
held by the majority party’s leader, public transportation vehicles may be made unavailable to the
public9.
For instance, closing the Taksim Square for Labor Day memorial is in violation of, the first and
8
The measures taken days before for the Labor Day memorial in Taksim, for preventing crowds from the public
to gather in the Gezi square must be especially emphasized.
9
The Kazlıçeşme assembly organized by the leader of the majority party, as a return match for Gezi...)
Nevertheless, “Gezi” events, in the political science jargon, may be viewed as a civilian and democratic breaking
point.
13
foremost, the ECHR judgment10, as well as Articles 13 and 34 of the Constitution. In the Taksim
prohibition, it went so far that even the press conferences before the assembly have been prevented.
The square, in spite of the court’s judgment, have been metamorphosed; extraordinary measures have
been taken in order to prevent the exercise of the freedom of assembly and demonstration11.
In this environment and conditions, the cost of exercising the freedom might become very
heavy; since the measures being taken along with the decisions and actions of official authorities, may
turn into a cumulative sanction for the subjects of freedom:
- Preventing the use: Blocking roads, stopping transportation vehicles, detaining participants
while they are travelling,
- Not being allowed in the area: for that, the law enforcement forces taking intense, violent
measures,
- Dispersion, spraying water, gas, firing gas grenades:From those, not only the demonstrators,
but also the neighborhood locals and people who have no affiliation with the demonstrations are also
victimized.
- Injuries and death: The intense and indiscriminate use of pepper gas and capsules may
sometimes result in serious injuries and death.
- If the participant of the assembly is a public servant, he may be subject to investigations and
heavy sanctions up to dismissal.
- “Duty” investigation for the doctors and sanctions to the doctors who provide medical services
to Gezi: Again, sanctions against public servants who supported Gezi.
In this process, the article about “unlawful order” has become the most violated article of the
Constitution. Since “the execution of unlawful orders” become continuous, Article 137 of the
Constitution has been constantly violated. Its result –since there were no repercussions to the
violators- has been “a lack of punishment”.
Class actions have been filed, not against public officials committing crimes, but mostly the
subjects of the freedom of assembly and demonstration.
III.THE JUDICIARY AND DEMOCRACY
Independence of the judiciary has beenconstitutionally securedwith a 4-staged legislation
(Article 138 of the Constitution)
-In regards to the judgment process,the order of rules that must be followed by the judges in
10
ECHR, DİSK and KESK v. Turkey, 27.11.2012.
The legal basis for that has been established according to the legislation of September 12 period, with a
regulation prejudicial for freedoms. See Amendment to Various Laws In Order To Enhance Fundamental Rights
and Liberties, (Bill no: 6529, date: 02/03/2014)
11
14
their judgments is: the Constitution, legislation and the law.
-General prohibition (external factor): The absolute prohibition of external interference in the
use of the judiciary authority,
-In regards to TBMM (The Grand National Assembly of Turkey): An absolute ban regarding the
case being tried is in question.
-Regarding legislative, executive and administrative branches: The obligation to abide by and
fulfill the obligations of judicial judgments.
During the process of the events leading to the subject of Gezi Report, the words of the Speaker
of the TBMM stating “Article 138 has collapsed”, is an expression of a bitter truth about judicial
independence12.
In modern states of law, the judge has three important functions: A democracy factor, a
democracy trainer and a democracy actor.
As a democracy actor, the judge, with the mission of cleaning politics, passes the corruptions
that occur in the politics-money relationship through the filter of judicial judgment. Thus, he ensures
that political actors resume their activities along the framework of “clean politics”. Judicial
supervision becomes effective in regards to financial transparency and political supervision. The
allegations of corruption, which subjects the judges to a test of democracy, also creates a chance for
them to face their historical mission. The only constitutional organ, which can pass these allegations
through a reality test, is the judiciary.
A) Coup D’état and The Law
The restructuring of the Constitutional Court (AYM) and High Council of Judges and
Prosecutors (HSYK) via the Constitutional Amendment of 2010 resulted in intense discussions and
polarizations.Those who attacked to the critics of the structural style of AYM and HSYK -4 years ago, faced with the fight between the Government-Congregation that broke out on 17th and 25th December
2013, then begun an offensive against who spoke up for the law. Because politics, instead of the law,
is being centered on, no other choice is being made available other than the warfront and showdown of
“AKP-Congregation”. Whereas, the choice should be “democracy via the law”13.
When this is not the case, the reality of coup d’état and the “invention of coup d’état” are being
jumbled. Thelast 6-7 years of Turkey have been spent withdiscussions of anagenda of a “coup d’état
attempt”allegedly being planned by the soldiers.Another fictitious coup attempt surfaced after the
breaking of the sect-based alliance, named “parallel state”,is looking like it’s going to cover 2010s14.
12
“Article 138 of the Constitution is dead in this country" (3th January 2014).
However, the legal and effective precautions taken against the 17-25th December 2013 operations (and
reached to the extent of transformng the HSYK formation), had zeroed the function of judges in the state of law.
14
The commission that was established in TBMM, after the Parlimentiary Investigation (article 100) launched
about the 4 ministers who resigned due to bribery and corruption allegations, have not been able to reach its
decision yet.
13
15
For this reason, the word “coup d’état” should be defined in a scientific perspective. A coup
d’état is defined as; without following the constitutional processes in effect, by actions taken within
the State and by the administrators or agents (officials), the overthrow of a government which is
subject to the operation15.
B) “Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely”
Even though AYM usually avoids setting asidethe processes it supervises via abstract norm
supervision, the aberrant judgments given to set aside are enough to irritategovernment circles.
Again, the AYM, who set aside the social media ban and consequently have been threatened with
“abolishment”,is now being faced with a similar threat, due to the possibility of it holding that there is
a violation regarding the 10% threshold implementation.
The arrests and detainments beginning on 17th December 2013 is an exact validation of the
words of L. Acton: “Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely”16. Now, the judiciary
should’ve stepped in. The feature of the judiciary being a democracy factor, actor and trainer would
be tested in that period. This was prevented: but, in the chain of “plot” and “witchhunt” confessions,
all the provisions which disables the law and judiciary have been enacted; furthermore, in the name of
“the will of the nation”, the Constitution was nullified multi-directionally:
- Violation of presumption of innocence,
- Not proceeding with the judiciary process,
-Not abiding by judiciary decisions and judgments,
- Fulfilling the exact opposite of the obligations of judiciary judgments,
The outcome may be expressed as double impunity:
- Not punishing those who commit constitutional crime by abusing public authority;
- Cover-up of corruption charges connected with the abuse of public authority.
The executive organ, instead of making sure the corruption allegations are clarified, considered
it licit to resort to tools that are legally controversial, and even illegal17.
While the name of the country and the regime (“new Turkey”, “advanced democracy”) is being
pronounced with exaggerated adjectives, we are faced with a constitutional-political system which was
unable to clear the rottenness that was exposed by the sect-centered internal conflicts of the group in
power.
15
See. “Coup d’Etat”, Dictionnaire constitutionnel, Y. Meny-O. Duhamel, PUF, 1992, p. 240-245. On the other
hand, with the executive branch being the first and foremost, the stepping out of the constitution by the branches
which are direct interlocutors of the constitıtion is called a “constitutional coup”.
16
“Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely” (L. ACTON).
17
The arrests and detainments of 14th December 2014 (and before) can be pointed out.
16
C) Repressions over Universities
The repressions that have begun in the recent years and intensified over the university youth, in
a general context, are intended to prevent the collective use of the freedom of expression of the highereducation youth18. The students, who are under constant undercover law-enforcement surveillance on
the inside, are faced with riot-police threat from the outside. Despite the youth being attempted to be
subdued via constant investigations and disciplinary action and criminal prosecution, “impunity”
continues to constitute a general de-facto status for the law-enforcement forces.
IV.FREEDOM OF RELIGION-SECULARISM
The religious freedom definition of ECHR is being forgotten in Turkey as the “advanced”
democracy rhetoric is intensified; since the freedom of religion is being reduced to being a member of
Sunnism.
With the violation of Article 24 of the Constitution, the drawbacks caused by “religion being
used as an instrument for politics” are stirring Turkey since 17th December 2013.
Regarding religious pluralism, the shattering of Sunni block based on “imam preachercongregation axis” –despite the 12 year old “secret alliance” being replaced by “open warfare” in
2014- in the name of democracy –to the extent of the ability to establish the rule of law from now onshould be considered positively.
These recent events, in the same time, have proven the necessity of the coupling of democracysecularism and freedom of religion.
Democracy and secularism meets in wordliness. The religion of freedom becomes meaningful
in this situation and environment. In that sense, in Article 24/last of the Constitution, the prohibition of
basing the fundamental, social, economic, political, and legal order of the State on religious tenets, has
became tested in the definition of “a democratic and secular Republic, respecting human rights”.
In conclusion, it was confirmed that in the relationship of religion-human rights, the legal order
must be sustained in the light of not the obligations of religion, but those of human rights. Regardless,
the 19th National Education Council (MEŞ), let alone distancing from freedom of religion and
secularism, reflects the will of “zeroing” the rights gained in Turkey since Tanzimat19.
18
See Üniversite Öğrencilerinin İfade Özgürlüğünü Toplu Kullanımı(Collective Exercise of the Freedom of
Expression by the University Students) (Öğrenci Raporu, 20.09.2011).
19
The main suggestions that were accepted in the 19th general assembly of MEŞ (2-6 December 2014) and
expected to be implemented in the next 4 years by MEB (Ministry of National Education) are as follows:
•A “values education” is to be given in kindergarten. In that regard, children of 36 to 72 months of age will be
made to develop “concept of Allah and love of Allah”, “concepts of heaven and hell” will be taught.
• Single shift education will be implemented in pre-school.
• In the texts used as educational tools in early child education and elementary education, place will be allocated
to tales, stories and poems belonging to the Anatolian and Islamic culture.
• The compulsory Religious Culture and Ethics class, which currently begins in the 4th grade, will also be given
in first, second and third grades.
17
V.“A TRULY DEMOCRATIC REGIME” AND “THE SUPERIORITY OF
LAW”: WHERE DOES TURKEY STAND?
The relationship of law and democracy, when examined in regards to the constitutional brake
and balance mechanism; both the balance and supervision methods inside the powers, and the
balancing mechanisms valid in the center-periphery relationship, have either been removed
progressively; or been made dysfunctional.
For instance, the government who criticizes the opposition party due to its application to AYM,
can also direct the question “why did you set it aside?” to the Constitutional Court.
- After TRT, the Universities have been transformed into units that pay homage to the political
power. Independent administrative authorities, on the other hand, have mostly been placed into the
hierarchical order of the executive branch.
- In the area of rights and freedoms, new institutions and means of application have been
provided. Those have been accepted as long as they did not irritate the political majority. Thus, in the
dilemma of power and law, the reinforcement of freedoms remained improvised; what has been
reinforced has become the political power.
- The centralizing regulations have been taken so far that, for example, with the MİT Bill, on
one hand, an extralegal and extrajudicial area has been formed; on the other hand, “the consolidation
of authority in the political executive branchpivoting around one person” have been achieved.
With the constitutional balance and supervision mechanisms having made dysfunctional in this
manner, Turkey became estranged to the both of the two technically and ethically complementary
European dimensions of democracy.
With this reason, “The Action Plan on Prevention of ECHR Violations”(March 2014) drafted by
the Ministry of Justice falls short of putting enough emphasis on the responsibility of public
institutions. The ombudsman, regarding the May 1 memorial day, instead of inviting the Governorship
of İstanbul to honor the Constitution and ECHR judgments, invited the workers to abide by the
• The Holy Birth Week and Aşure Day will be added to the Important Days and Weeks; they will become
compulsory to be celebrated in schools. However, despite being in the proposal, the Moharram month which is
considered holy by Alevis have been taken out of the list.
• The exemption right from schools to middle school students who want to memorize the Koran (become a
Hafız), which was given with the 4+4+4 system, will be increased from 1 year to 2 years.
• The 2 hours per week class in 4th grade called Human Rights, Citizenship and Democracy will be eliminated.
• The curriculum of the Turkish Republic History of Revolutions and Ataturkism class being taught on middle
schools will be reviewed and rewritten in light of recent methods and perceptions.
• From the curriculum and class schedule of Anatolian Hotel and Tourism Vocational High Schools, the class
“preparing alcoholic drinks and cocktails” will be removed. Students will be prohibited from doing their
internships in the parts of facilities where alcoholic drinks are prepared or served.
• In high schools, the weekly hours of the compulsory Religious Culture and Ethics class will be increased from
1 to 2.
•In high schools, the health and traffic class will be eliminated.(…)
18
governorship’s decision20.
To the extent of the decontamination from the “holy” adjective of “The will of the nation” and
“national sovereignty”, in light of the European Law on Human Rights and the International Law on
Human Rights, the minimum requirements for a “democratic society” can be fulfilled and met.The
“omnibus bill”s and “omnibus” KHKs in addition to the deception or fetishism of “the will of the
nation”, severely harms the principle and concept of the supremacy of law. In other words, as long as
the vote percentage is considered as the criteria for rightfulness, it is not possible to provide the
supremacy of law.
Thus, the Gezi Legal Monitoring Group Report, examines and describes the shape of the
relationship between the pair or trio of “law/state and society” it took in 2013-14 from yesterday until
today, and points out the measures that should be taken in order to shed light into tomorrow.
19
20
T.C. Kamu Denetçiliği Kurumu (The Ombudsman Institution), 30.4.2014, 1 Mayıs Emek ve Dayanışma Günü
Kutlamaları Konusunda Kamu Başdenetçisi tarafından önerilen uzlaşma esasları (The terms of agreement
recommended by the Ombudsman regarding the celebrations of May 1 Labor and Solidarity Day).
CHAPTER ONE
THE PROCESS THAT FED THE SOCIAL OPPOSITION WHICH
EMBRACED GEZİ PARK
Attempting to consider Gezi events as a movement that began and continued in the last days of
May 2013, will be inadequate in order to understanding Gezi and the social opposition that fed it. We
may list the reasons behind defending the last few trees remaining in Taksim Square and the passive
resistance shown for that purpose as follows:
- The legitimate legal battles that were fought, which have been progressively increasingin the
last few years and aim to protect areas of living, environmental and urban values,
- With those experienced in those struggles being first and foremost, the excessive security force
violence (police-gendermarie-private security) experienced especially in the exercise of freedom and
collective use of rights, and
- The interferences being made to the private lives and lifestyles of individuals, which are
tightly attached to their personalities,
20
I.POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATIONS DAMAGING LIFE AND ITS
ELEMENTS
A) Constitutional rights and obligations
The environmental and urban rights are bases for many rights and freedoms, with the right to
life being the first and foremost; and give the right and obligation of active citizenship in a
Constitutional level to the individuals, and make collective struggle a necessity:
“Everyone has the right to live in a healthy and balanced environment. It is the duty of the State
and citizens to improve the natural environment, to protect the environmental health and to prevent
environmental pollution. (Article 56, Constitution).
“Sound and orderly urbanization” (Article 23) and “a plan that takes into account the
characteristics of cities and environmental conditions” (Article 57), constitute, on one hand,
obligations for the state; on the other hand, the limits of the freedom of residence and right to housing
for the individuals.:
The Right and Duty of Active citizenship has been assured by the Environment Law as well:

The right to participate: “In the formation of environmental policies, the right to
participate is fundamental. Ministries and local administrations are obliged to create the medium for
participation where professional chambers, unions, non-governmental organizations and citizens will
exercise their right to environment.” (Environment Law, Article 3/e)

The Right to Information and Application: “Çevreyi kirleten veya bozan bir faaliyetten
zarar gören veya haberdar olan herkes ilgili mercilere başvurarak faaliyetle ilgili gerekli önlemlerin
alınmasını veya faaliyetin durdurulmasını isteyebilir Everyone who is harmed by or became aware of
an activity which pollutes or harms the environment may, by appealing to related authorities, demand
that necessary precautions about the activity to be taken or the activity is suspended.” (Environment
Law, Article 30)
Persons have the right to prefer, create, improve and protect areas of living, in which they can
exercise their economic-social-cultural rights. Kişisel özgürlük ve gelişimle sıkı sıkıya bağlı olan ve
çevresel - kentsel değerlerin temel taşını oluşturduğu bu yaşam alanlarının korunmasınıgüvence altına
alan maddi ve manevi varlığı geliştirme hakkı: The right to improve corporeal and spiritual existence,
the cornerstone of which are the urban and environmental values and which is also tightly connected
to personal freedom and development,
“Everyone has the right to life and the right to protect and improve his/her corporeal and
spiritual existence.” (Article 17, Constitution)
The constitution imposed the duty to the State for working to provide the conditions required for
the development of the individual’s material and spiritual existence:

Fundamental aims and duties of the State:“ (…),to ensure the welfare, peace, and
happiness of the individual and society; to strive for the removal of political, economic, and social
obstacles which restrict the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual in a manner
incompatible with the principles of justice and of the social state governed by rule of law; and to
provide the conditions required for the development of the individual’s material and spiritual
existence.” (Article 5, Constitution)

The Constitution, by incorporating specific regulations that include those considered
among environmental and urban elements; namely coasts (Article 43), land (Article 44), historical,
cultural and natural assets (Article 63), natural resources (Article 168) and forests (169), has further
emphasized the obligation of the State to protect such areas.

In order to express regarding the specific case of the Gezi Events, “The State shall
ensure the protection of the historical, cultural and natural assets and wealth, and shall take
supportive and promotive measures towards that end.” (Article 63, Constitution)
The actions and transactions of the directors in environmental and urban areas are resulting in
direct consequences regarding the health, the material and spiritual existences and integrities and the
socio-cultural and financial lives of the individuals. Bu nedenle anayasal ve yasal düzenlemeler, temel
hak ve hürriyetlerin varlığı ve etkinliğini sağlıklı ve dengeli kentsel ve kırsal yaşam alanlarının
varlığına ve bu alanların oluşmasında-biçimlenmesinde-yeniden yaratılmasında tüm bireylerin, birlikte
şekillendirici katkısının gerekliliğini öngörmekte, bu açıdan devlete bir takım yükümlülükler
21
yüklemektedir.In that regard, Article 56 of the Constitution has explicitly stated everyone directly has
a right to the environment, and indirectly a right to the city; and imposes the duty to protect-developprevent the pollution and detoriation of environmental and urban assets. The Constitution indirectly
including a right to the city is a natural outcome of the fact that today, the majority of the population in
Turkey is residing in cities.
The applicability of environmental and urban rights depends on the fulfillment of the active and
passive rights and obligations imposed by the Constitution on both the State and the citizen. In that
framework, the Constitution imposes a shared responsibility to both the State and the citizens.
Passive duties:Not polluting, and for that purpose, obeying the rules, standards and prohibitions
that are envisionedetc.
Active duties:The implementation of the procedural environmental and urban rights, and the
provision and assurement of their applicability by the State.In other words, by the public: the access to
information, active and effective participation in the decision making processes, the right to appeal to
administrative-legal authorities, and by the State: the establishment of the required mechanisms for
this regard etc.
Gezi Parkı olaylarında çevresel ve kentsel hakların iki fonksiyonundan bahsedebiliriz: In Gezi
Park events, we may speak of two functions of the environmental and urban rights:
- The protection of Gezi Park is a constitutional right and duty
-An element of the social opposition that formed and fed Gezi is the struggle for the
environmental and urban rights.
B) As a part of the Beyoğlu Urban Conservation Site, the protection of Gezi Park is a
constitutional right and duty
1.Developments regarding the Beyoğlu Urban Conservation Site
 Being regarded as one of the most notable green spaces in İstanbul and included in the
Beyoğlu Urban Conservation Site since 1993, the Gezi Park enjoys a holistic planning and protection
along with the Taksim Square and Atatürk Cultural Center21.
 The “Taksim Military Barracks” (Taksim Topçu Kışlası), of which there is not even a remnant
left today, was registered in February 2011 as an “immovable cultural property to be protected”22.
 In the succeeding months, in line with the projects of “Pedestranisation of Taksim Square” and
“Taksim Military Barracks” being voiced by the prime minister of the time, altetarions to the 1/5000
and 1/1000 scaled conservation plans of the Beyoğlu Urban Conservation Area have been made.23
21
Judgments of İstanbul Council for the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Property No 1 dated 7 July 1993,
No 4720 and 6 January 1999, No 10521.
22
Judgment of İstanbul No. 2 Council for the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Property No 2 dated 9
February 2011, No 4225.
23
Decision of İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality dated 16 September 2011, No 2111.
22
 The Regional Council for the Conservation of Cultural Property has approved the relevant
alterations to the plans on 4 January 2012.24
 However, in regards to the Gezi Park,as it will be affected by the projects planned to be
executed by the plan alterations, due to theexistence of landscaping and a layer of grown trees on it, it
was decided that the opinion of the Regional Council for the Conservation of Natural Property,
whichwas incorporated into the organization of the Ministry of Environment and Urban Development
by the Decree-Law No. 648, should be requested.25
 Drafted by the Metropolitan Municipality without requesting the opinion of the Regional
Council for the Conservation of Natural Property, and by settling only with plan alteration approvals,
the preliminary projects for restitution and new usage, in addition to the preliminary projects for urban
design and landscape architecture regarding Taksim Military Barracks,have been unanimously rejected
by the No.2 Council for Conservation. According to the Council, compared to the request to rebuild a
structure which does not exist in present day with not enough data available regarding the objects
constituting its unique architecture, considering the city’s history, it was stated that with its value for
use for 60-70 years,Taksim Gezi Park is an asset which acts as a testament to history and has a place
in the collective memory of the Citizens of İstanbul.26
 The Prime Minister of the time, who declared that he is “rejecting the decision to reject”,
dismissed the Minister of Culture and Tourism, and the Superior Council for the Conservation of
Cultural and Natural Property, which is consisting only of appointed bureaucrats, without presenting
any grounds, approved the project which was rejected unanimously by the Regional Council for
Conservation.27
 Against this decision by the Superior Council allowing the construction of “a mall disguised as
Taksim Barracks28”,a lawsuit has been brought demanding a stay of execution and a motion to set
aside by the Taksim Gezi Park Preservation and Beautification Foundation. 6. Administrative Court
granted a stay of execution on 31 May 2013. However, the construction works, despite the court
decision, have continued in a manner harming the trust in the law and contradicting the principle of
superiority of law.29
 The night watch that began on 27 May and the attempts to prevent the tree removals by the
citizens, the unwarranted use of violence by the police and municipal police (incarceration of nightwatch tents on dawn, battery against citizens, exposure to tear gas at close range) and the unlawful
continuation of demolition works caused a massive reaction after May 31. The Gezi Park protests have
been shaped around these demands connected with environmental and urban rights30:

24
The conservation of Gezi Park and the trees,
Judgment of İstanbul Council for the Conservation of Cultural Property No 2 dated 4 February 2012, No 165.
Judgment of İstanbul Council for the Conservation of Cultural Property No 2 dated 10 October 2012, No 758.
26
Judgment of İstanbul Council for the Conservation of Cultural Property No 2 dated 11 December 2012, No
883.
27
Judgment of the Superior Council for the Conservation of Cultural Property dated 27 February 2013, No 139.
28
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/24067224.asp
29
Judgment of İstanbul Administrative Court No 6 granting a stay of execution Dated: 31.05.2013, No:2013/956.
30
For the list of demands by the Taksim Solidaritysee. http://taksimdayanisma.org/page/6?lang=en
25
23

Taksim Square not being closed for assemblies and demonstration marches,

When decisions concerning the city are being made, the opinion of professional
chambers, non-governmental organizations and citizens shall be requested.
 In the lawsuit brought by Professional Chambers against the development plan alterations
paving the way for the Pedestrianisation and Taksim Barracks projects, İstanbul 1. Administrative
Court, by stating that they are not in accordance with urban development principles, the conservation
board’s decision’s principles and fundamentals of planning, have set aside the relevant alterations.31
The process shows that the “Pedestrianisation” and “Taksim Barracks” projects, that are
proposing Gezi to stop being a park, turn it into concrete and a shopping mall (AVM), have been,
without the knowledge of the citizens of İstanbul, imposed on by the Central Administration and
embodied by the Local Administration. This situation, clearly in contradiction with what was stated as
the reason for existence of local administrations in the Constitution as the authority and duty “to
determine and meet the common local needs”, also includes violations of some of fundamental rights,
namely environmental and urban rights:
-The related Projects, have caused qualitative and quantative loss(A 750 square-meter field from
Gezi Park, as a part of the Pedestrianisation Project, have been turned into concrete in an unlawful
manner)to Gezi Park (which is regarded as a part of natural and cultural heritage, therefore it has been
registered as an immovable natural property and consequently enjoys a higher level of legal
protection) and the monument trees inside, without the consent of the authorized organization
(Regional Council for the Conservation of Natural Property32)and will continue to do so. This
situation cleary contradicts the duty of conservation to natural and cultural heritage, as well as
securing the access of future generations to it, as an important element of environmental rights.
- Even if the “Taksim Military Barracks”, despite not existing today and being stated by the
Council for Conservation as having been divided into three different periods architecturally, have been
registered as an immovable cultural property, by the request of Central Administration; in the
specified area, the Gezi Park which was registered as a natural property and its monument trees are
continuing their existence. Because, between immovable cultural property and immovable natural
property, there exists no hierarchical relationship and superior-subordinate protection mechanism.
Second, faced with the fact that the progressive decrease of green area existence, which citizens of
İstanbul are being increasingly left longing to, as well as being an indispensable factor of a healthy and
balanced urban life; the preservation of the Park as a park is the superior public interest in a city that is
being turned into concrete in all places.
-In our day and time, in a governance process where a great many of cultural property are being
destroyed with developmentalist policies or being left alone to disappear, creating the impression that
a structure which was registered as a cultural property by the central administration must be built, is
31
Judgment of Setting Aside by İstanbul Administrative Court No 1 Dated: 06.06.2013, No: 2012/778;
Judgment: 2013/1084
32
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/113097/_Taksim_meydan_ozelligini_yitirecek_.html
24
aculture policy rhetoric that is far away from sincerity. As a matter of fact, the Barracks is being set up
to be a hotel and AVM. Even though it is being attempted to create the impression over the society
that such a set up is unrealistic, the owners of the commercial entrerprises, after observing the
demands of the public during Gezi Events, have declared that they are abandoning their commercial
projects in the Barracks33. After the events, even though the AVM project has been transformed into a
City Museum project, regarding the existence of a superior public interest, the preservation of the Park
as a park is a must.
- On the other hand, in a city such as İstanbul which hosted a number of civilizations, and proof
about being inhabited since the Neolithic Age (BC 8000-5500) exists, every place has a history and
thetrait of being a cultural property. The preservation of the historical texture being limited by the
places where it meets tourism, and on the other hand, a large part of İstanbul that is away from tourists
being organized in a mentality away from past values, respecting the heritage, as well as without the
participation of the Public, leds to the questioning of the sincerity of the “respecting history” rhetoric
behind the desire to rebuild Taksim Barracks and creates the impression of the administrators being in
an urban campaign including a battle with the past.
-Due to their standing as Urban Conservation Areas, Taksim Square, the Gezi Park and Atatürk
Cultural Center must be administered with a holistic mentality. The removal of the Gezi Park (which
enjoys a special and holistic protection since 1999) with a mentality far from holistism from the
square, and being taken away from the public via concretization and being transformed for the benefit
of third persons, is clearly against the principles of urban development, the essential goal of holistic
protection and the fundamentals of planning.
-Persons, in the scope of improving their corporeal and spiritual existence, and parallel to that,
in the scope of the right to being an urban resident, have the authority to determine and shape their
economical-social-culturel environments. The policies of transforming the outdoor public areas (which
are tightly connected to personal development, as well as being an indispensable factor of social and
cultural life, also making the city environment inhibitable) into AVMs and presenting AVMs as the
new public areas, are directly influencing the quality of life of the citizens. Due to their urban rights
which have collective trait, citizens of İstanbul have the right to collectively criticize the public area
policies set forth by the administrators, and freely express their opinion. In that regard, the assembly of
the citizens for the purpose of expressing their thoughts, making calls to assemble, being able to nonviolently march or demonstrate using other methods, and freely determining the places where this
fundamental right which have been accepted since the 19th century and constitutionally secured (the
issue of Taksim Square being closed to assembly and demonstrations) are also natural extensions of
being a citizen in an urban environment.
33
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/boyner-den-gezi-parki-na-destek/ekonomi/detay/1716769/default.htm;
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/ekonomi/23407298.asp
25
- Fighting the necessary battles for both the protection of the park and its trees(being an element
of both a healthy and a balanced life in the areas of living, and a cultural heritage due to having a
monument quality) and the Park not losing its feature of being a common, public area of living are not
only the duty of the citizens, but of the administration that is acting against this duty as well.
2.Evaluation of the actions of the administration on Gezi Park in regards to environmental
and procedural urban rights
 “The right to be informed” of İstanbul citizens about those projects that will cause
transformations in an urban and public area, has been reduced to political rhetorics and propaganda
voiced publicly on election time, meanwhile, “the right to participate” has been attempted to be
confined into ballot box democracy. Regarding environmental and urban rights, the definition of the
right to effectively participate inboth international law, as well as the EU law (for which we are
making efforts for accession), are not in agreement with the “election propaganda”, “ballot box” and
“the will of the nation” rhetorics.With a mechanism to appeal to an administrative authority in which
demands are being disregarded, the right to “apply to the authorized office” which holds an important
place in the operability of the principle of the state of law, especially faced with administrative
approach which transforms into policies of not complying with court decisions (in particular the
judgments granting a stay of execution) that became continuous, became a right with questioned
effectiveness.
 In order to be able to talk about a right to access environmental and urban information in the
true sense of the word, the related action, including all effects and consequences, should be shared
with the publicat a moment where all alternatives are clear and applicable. The effective participation
of the public to the decision-making process can only be implemented after such a phase of becoming
acquainted with the issue, by the provision and operation of participation mechanisms featuring the
ability to influence the decisions of decision-makers. In Turkey, the phase of informing is being
implemented towards the end of the process, free of elaboration, as the announcement of an alreadymade decision, and participation is being limited to the results of local and general elections.
 As a matter of fact, the suggested formula for participation is an attempt to not present the
opportunity of sizing the effects and consequences of the project (which has been boiled down to a
visual), imposing the project to the related public and legitimase it in this manner. As long as the
interpretation of the right to access environmental and urban information, which are constituting the
basis of procedural rights, remain as it is, the suggestions of “plebiscite” that came into question
during and after the Gezi Park protests are not going to be able to actualize the right to participate.
As the information not being shared in a timely and accurate manner is decreasing the public
confidence in administrations, this classical mentality of public management that is far from
transparency, closed, avoiding accountability is also causing the legitimaticy of urban policies in the
eyes of citizens.
26
-Of the citizens’ struggle regarding their environmental and urban rights and the demands being
voiced by İstanbul Citizens during Gezi Events, their rightfulness, lawfulness and therefore
legitimacy, have been, unlike the attitude of the administrators, accepted by the judiciary authorities.
The Administrative Court that, after careful evaluation, set aside the alterations to 1/5000 and
1/1000 scaled Conservation Plans which also include the propositions of the administration towards
Gezi Park; firstly, established the link between the right to being a citizen and the conservation plan
along with the proposed alterations to the plan. The Court, after stating “Development Plans are
altered in order to find the best methods for solutions within the scale of the existing or providable
capabilities among urban functions, and to provide a good order of life and good conditions to the
inhabitants.Development Plans are prepared considering the unique way of life of the city, style of life
and character, population plan and structural relationships, the connection of the area with both its
periphery and various zones, the social and cultural needs of the public, and issues regarding its
security and health; and they may be altered in forms and moments when conditions necessitate, with
the methods prescribed in the regulation.”, found the alterations to the development plan for Beyoğlu
are are not in accordance with urban development principles, the fundamentals of conservation and
planning and the principle of public interest.
In that regard, on the condition of non-violence, carrying out an assembly and demonstration
march freely in public areas or demanding to carry out such events, performing actions that express the
significance and value of the park as an area of living, attempting to be a part of the decision making
processes, and making an effort to infulance the implementation phase of the decisions that are made
without participation, are the positive duties of the citizen in the scope of his/her environmental and
urban rights. The establishment of the tools and mechanisms that allow the fulfillment of these
positive-natured duties, as well as not preventing them, are the most fundamental duty of the State. In
that regard, the Administration, which tunes out a constitutional demand and oppresses it with
violence, should question the lawfulness and legitimacy of its actions interfering with environmental
and urban rights. On the other hand, the administrators who establish environmental and urban policies
while ignoring those justified and legitimate demands of the citizens, are the primary reasons of the
formation of the social opposition that is feeding those events, with Gezi events being the first and
foremost. Just like the attitude of the Üsküdar Municipality (that are trying to introduce concreteinto
Validebağ Grove) causing the social opposition over there to surface… “Protection of public interest”
may be considered as the common ground for the opposing grounds.
C)One element of the social opposition that fed Gezi is the struggle for environmental and
urban rights
The struggles for ecology/environmental opposition that are making their presence felt since
1990s, with the Bergama Movement, have escalated while gaining strength, against the environmental,
urban and developmental policies claimed to be “sustainable”, going on in all parts of Turkey, without
differing between rural-urban areas.
27
-A part of these struggles encompass the opposition against the activities in which the policies
disregarding the ecosystem, the environmental, urban and cultural values are becoming concrete; as
well as the legal battleswhose effectiveness became questionable:
 The struggles against both the run-of-the-river type and the dam type hydroelectric plants;
which includes the right to water that is closely and directly related to the vital existence of humans;
 The legal battles against the mining, quarry, energy plant and tourism activities:the majority of
which are being conducted in special conservation areas such as national parks etc. and/or in
woodlands, by violation of or bending the rules of the law and therefore, in a narrow sense, reaching to
the extent of violating the right to live in a healthy and balanced environment as an obligation of the
constitutional right to environment of people, in a broader sense; reaching to the extent of violating the
right to life of all beings; and being carried out without considering their irreversible effects on the
ecosystem as well as disregarding the cumulative issues caused by those;
The legal battles against: The progressive restriction of the scope of the Environmental Impact
Assesment (ÇED) mechanism which is the tool for the implementation of the preventation principle
(that is constituting the main philosopy of environmental law and policy), the decision of ÇED is Not
Required given continuously in a manner that allows partial exemption for a lot of fields with energy
being the first and foremost, making the ÇED process obsolete by the directly provisioned exemptions,
and the practices that are contradicting even the “sustainability” concept on which the environmental
policy in Turkey is based.
 The struggles against the third bridge-third airport-highway projects and similar crazy projects
etc. that are being conducted in the Northern Forests; which are, in regards to İstanbul, the lungs of the
city, providing the need for clean air in a city that is subject to pollution at a large scale, thus having a
primary significance for the health of beings; and with the biological diversity it contains, also having
a significant part in the protection of the balance of nature; as well as and causing approximately 2
million trees being cut up to date, meanwhile causing the detriment of forests and drainage basins.
- Another part of those struggles are being fought against the commoditization of the urban site
and/or the imposing of conservative ideology over the urban site.34
 The struggles against the urban renewal practices that lead the way to the commoditization and
gentrification of a very wide geographical area, without regards to natural-artificial environment, with
the Law No 6306 on Restructring of Areas under Risk of Natural Disasters that disregards cultural
identities, habits of living and constructed with a mentality that transforms the ownership, which went
in effect on 2012;
34
Tarık ŞENGÜLER, see: http://haber.sol.org.tr/devlet-ve-siyaset/direnisin-ardindan-gezi-parki-baskaldirisiertesinde-kent-ve-siyaset-haberi-77713; Nilüfer GÖLE, “Gezi: Bir Kamusal Meydan Hareketinin Anatomisi”
(Gezi: The Anatomy of a Public Square Movement), 6 June 2013, See: http://t24.com.tr/yazi/gezi-bir-kamusalmeydan-hareketinin-anatomisi/6824
28
 The struggles against: instead of improving and keeping the functions of structures that have
historical and cultural texture, such as Emek Theatre, Haydarpaşa Train Station;privatization of the
public features of those places for the sake of development or tourism and therefore, just as in the Gezi
Park events, the neoliberal transformation of common public areas;
 The criticism of the imposing of the provisioned conservative ideology over the urban site via
the projects for places of worship in strategical places, such as the Çamlıca Hill, Taksim Square; and
the prohibitions on alcohol consumption in public areas etc. (Despite the reaction in Gezi events, a
similar project of threat and conservationism for the Validebağ Grove, which has been registered as
the first grove of İstanbul, is on the agenda)
By the political majority, who do not reflect a transparent, accountable, participatory democracy
and public administrationapproach, the policies, plans and projects which qualitatevly damage the
environmental assets and quantitavely diminish them, while provising significant changes on the areas
of living in which we improve our economical-social-cultural existence, are being carried out hidden
from us who use those areas, and without clearly presenting their effects and consequences.The
criticisms brought towards and the struggles being fought against the practices provisioned by this
classical democracy and public administration mentality, are also deprived of an effective legal
remedy. As a matter of fact, even though the struggles end in a legal victory in most cases, the present
group in power, by not fulfilling the obligations of those decisions, are clearly harming the principle of
the state of law principle and the confidence in law.
29
The ecological and urban opposition created by the “wild and unfettered” neoliberal policies
which disregard the protection of ecosystem, the environmental, urban and cultural values, are
intersecting with the Gezi Park protest in two points:

The struggles that are being fought in various places of Turkey, protecting the areas of
living and being fought in the name of all beings, along with the struggles for environmental and urban
rights in cities, have had a nourishing effect for the commencement of the Gezi Park events.

Those local conservation movements, by getting together with the Gezi Park Protests,
have reached a nationalscale.
The struggles for environmental and urban rights, which are in the foundation of the Gezi Park
events as well, and have nourished them, are based on the shortcomings of the environment regulation
about procedural rights (with the mechanisms of participation being the first and foremost), and the
criticism of classical democracy and the mentality of classical public administration. For this reason,
Taksim Gezi Park is not an issue of a few trees. As a matter of fact, the representatives of ecological
and urban struggles from all around Turkey, have taken place in the Gezi Park protests with their
statements and banners. Therefore, the struggle of the Gezi Park protests that began with the right to
use an urban area, have been enriched by the struggles for the right to environment, right to water,
right to housing, right to life, and evolved to the protection of the areas of living of the right to life,
and defending the rights of nature. In other words, against the government which perceives the
transformation of the square into a “holy market place” that was purged from all forms of threats, via
the demolution of the park; defending the park remaining a park, is the concretization of the public
area as the public opposition against the neoliberal-Islamist transformation.
In the spread of the protests that are preventing the destruction of the park for the AVM that was
being desired to constructed in Taksim Gezi Park, to the whole country, in fact lays the existence of
the attempts to implement policies against the environment in many parts of the country and those
attempts facing preventative struggles of the local people. At first, public protests against the mineral
exploration and operation works in Bergama have been observed, followed by, after the
commencement of intensive HES (hydroelectric plant) construction works in Black Sea, the
development of the opposition by the local people in every place where HES constructions were being
attempted. Moreover, the ÇED (Environmental Impact Assesment) meetings that were made
mandatory, have been unable to be held due to the opposition, and a lot of HES constructions were
prevented.
II.THE CONTINUOUSLY INCREASING INTERFERENCES ON THE RIGHTS
AND FREEDOMS OF INDIVIDUALS
In constitutional democracies, the limit of political power is defined by individual rights and
freedoms. The extending life of AKP’s single party rule, have caused the abandonment of its
conservative-democrat approach which was formed on the basis of the freedom of religion and
conscience, while parting with the promise of democratization; and the prevailement of conservative
policies reaching to the extent of interfering with private lives and lifestyles. The direct and indirect
interferences which reach to the extent of violation of constitutional rights and freedoms such as the
privacy of private life and the inviolability of the domicile, which picked up speed with the “mastery
period” of AKP rule, are of unacceptable nature in a democratic society. Those interferences, which
are being attempted to be justified in the name of majority and based on the perspective of a certain
sect, and the impositions about how individuals will live their private lives, have caused reactions
from the masses yearning for a democratic and pluralist society; those reactions have been reflected on
the slogans and graffiti during Gezi events.
A) The Alcoholic Beverage Regulation
One of the most widely known interferences to lifestyles by the ruling power, are the alcoholic
beverage regulations which were defended by Erdoğan, in a meeting of AKP’s expanded provincial
chairs, with the words ”We don't want a generation wandering around drinking, being high, day and
night. They will be vigilant, they will be sharp, they will be equipped with knowledge. That is the kind
of generation we want. We are taking steps to provide this.”35The interferences by the municipalities,
which took over the right to issue licences for the sale of alcoholic beverages with the changes made to
35
Milliyet,
25
May
2003,
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/erdogan-kafa-kiyak-gezennesil/siyaset/detay/1713590/default.htm (Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
30
the regional administrations law in 2005,36beginning with the attempts to gather alcohol-serving diners
and bars in areas outside the cities, have continued with prohibitions about the advertisement,
promotion, sale locations and hours of alcoholic beverages in 2013. According to these, as well as
prohibition of the advertisement and promotion of alcoholic beverages aimed at consumers, and the
retail sale of alcoholic beverages between hours 22:00 to 06:00; it was attempted to prevent the
consumption of alcoholic beverages by disallowing their sale on cafes, coffee houses, patisseries and
many similar locations.37
Since the year 2002 when AKP came to power, the regular raising of the prices of alcoholic
products and the legal restrictions placed on the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages, in
contrary to the arguments brought to defend them, have not resulted in a decrease in the nationwide
consumption of alcohol. According to the OECD report, instead of a decrease, there has been an
increase in the alcohol consumption since 2002. By the amount of alcoholic beverages consumed,
between years 2005-2010, in Turkey, there has been an increase of consumption per person from 18.3
liters to 20.5 liters. Euromonitor predicts that alcohol consumption have increased even further in 2011
and 2012 in Turkey. Despite all this, by the 2010 numbers from OECD, Eurostat and World Health
Organization, among the 30 European countries, the lowest alcohol consumption is in Turkey, and the
consumption in Turkey is far from worrying levels regarding public health. According to the numbers
published by OECD and Euromonitor in 2014, despite the prohibitions introduced to alcohol sales, the
increase in consumption is continuing.38
31
B) The Tobacco Regulation
After AKP came into power, significant restrictions regarding tobacco came into effect. With a
new regulation in 2008, the consumption of tobacco in all confined spaces except from the residences
of individuals have been prohibited.39 Between years 2002 and 2010, the cigarette prices have
increased by 142 percent, and from each cigarette, the tax rate become 78 percent.40
Despite the price increase, the stern prohibitions introduced and strict implementation, the
expected decrease in tobacco consumption have not occurred. According to the data of the Tobacco
and Alcohol Market Regulatory Authority (TAPDK), the amount of cigarettes sold in 2007 was 107
36
Hürriyet, 5 November 2005, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/3493506.asp (Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
Law No 6487 dated 11 June 2013, http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2013/06/20130611-1.htm(Retrieved:
08.12.2014).
38
The biggest attempt to prevent alcohol consumption by legal revisions is the infamous “Prohibition” that was
in effect in the US between 1919 and 1933, and yielded no results other than an increase in bootlegging.
"Teaching With Documents: The Volstead Act and Related Prohibition Documents"The NationalArchives;
Euromonitor Report 2014, http://www.euromonitor.com/alcoholic-drinks-in-turkey/report; OECD Stats,
http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=30126(Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
39
The scope of the Law No 4207 on the “Prevention and Control of Harm from Tobacco Products” dated
07.11.1996 have been changed and expanded with the Law No 5727 dated 03.05.2008, prohibiting the use of
tobacco products in all confined spaces except for the residences of individuals.
See Law No 5727 dated 03.05.2008,http://www.hukukimevzuat.com/?x=kanun&id=541&parent=(Retrieved:
08.12.2014).
40
Milliyet, 3 October 2011,
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/bir-paket-sigaranin-yuzde-78-ivergi/ekonomi/ekonomidetay/03.10.2011/1446141/default.htm (Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
37
billion 455 million, it increased to 107 billion and 859 million in 2008; in July 2009, with the smoking
ban coming into effect in cafes, coffee houses, bars and restaurants, the number decreased to 107
billion 555 million.41 In 2012, this number decreased to only 91 billion 354 million.42 The increases in
cancer cases in Turkey is ongoing. According to TÜİK (Turkish Statistical Institute) data, the cancerrelated death ratio in 2002 was 12%, this ratio increased to 21% in 2012.43
C) Three children and more
The former AKP leader, the president Erdoğan, has stated in every weddingin which he is an
official witness that he suggests having at least 3 children. This, as well as being an indication
regarding a population policy, also constitutes the prime example of the ruling power’s perception
towards women.44 Erdoğan, in a speech he made in 2009, explained the population-related aspect of
the issue with the increase of the elderly population in the world and Turkey, and emphasized the
importance of Turkey protecting its situation of having a younger population compared with
developed countries: “Which is why I, before it is too late, in order to at least maintain our current
status, regarding our position, have expressed that in every family there should be at least 3 children. I
maintain the same position. I maintain those views. According to scientific numbers, even having 2
children means a back-step. This will never maintain this stuation. And, let alone the year 2050, after
2030, we will become a Turkey that has a elderly population. Having 3 children will allow Turkey to
maintain its current status, and keep our advantageous situation”.45
The insistence directed on reproduction and fertility rate, which are one of the most distinct
areas of private life, is representating a conservative political view that places more signifigance on
family than women. The same view may also be observed in the establishment of the Ministry of
Family and Social Policy in place of the State Ministry Responsible for Women in 2011, and despite
the irrepressible increase in cases of violence against women, the entitlement of the law regarding the
issue as “The Law on the Protection of Family and the Preventation of Violence against Women”.46
41
With Article 10 of Law No 5727, the date in which the ammendments come into effect have been clarified.
According to this, “The provision of Paragraph (d), Clause 1 of Article 2 of the Law numbered 4206 as amended
by Article 3 of this Law shall enter into force 18 months after promulgation; the other provisions shall enter into
force 4 months after promulgation.” As a matter of fact, in Article 2/1-d of the aforementioned law, the diners,
coffee houses, cafes, beerhouses etc. establishmens where recreational services are provided have been included
in the scope of the prohibition. However, the smoking ban in the mentioned locations came into effect on
19.07.2009. On the other hand, the other prohibitions introduced by Law No 5727 have been in effect since
19.05.2008.
See Law No 5727 dated 03.05.2008, http://www.hukukimevzuat.com/?x=kanun&id=541&parent=(Retrieved:
08.12.2014).
42
Ntvmsnbc News, 21 January 2014, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25493680/ (Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
43
Hürriyet, 5 October 2013, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/saglik/24857530.asp (Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
44
Erdoğan increased his suggestion of 3 children during his prime ministery, to 4 after becoming president. See.
Radikal, 21 September 2014, http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/erdogandan_4_cocuk_manisi-1213960
(Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
45
Ntvmsnbc News, 10 October 2009, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25008774/#storyContinued, (Retrieved:
08.12.2014).
46
Law No 6284 Dated 08.03.2012, http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.6284.pdf (Retrieved:
08.12.2014).
32
This approach which views women solely as “mothers”, and causing reactions from women’s
organisations, have been met by Erdoğan’s explanation on year 2010: “I don’t believe in the equality
of men and women anyway. Therefore, I prefer saying equality of opportunity. Men and women are
different, they are complementing each other.”47 After the discussion regarding the issue intensified,
Erdoğan explained his opinion as: “When we bring the mother into the forefront in here, due to the
motherbeing different than the father in compassion, we are taking this step, making this choice, not
her exploitation. We talk about equality regarding rights. We are not talking about physical equality.
Physically, men and women can never be equal. This is not possible. May it be possible? Men are
men, women are women. However, they are complementing each other. When both of them are
together, they complement each other and then a family is formed.”48
D) Abortion
The conservative policies reaching to the extent of interfering with privacy regarding
reproduction, manifests itself in the issue of abortion as well. The regulations regarding the prohibition
of abortion being added to the agenda from time to time, even though remaining only as a topic of
discussion and never being implemented, nevertheless allow the public patriarchal rhetoric to remain
effective. Erdoğan, in his speeches first in the conference organized by the UN Population Fund,
followed by the AKP Women’s Branch General Assembly, claiming “Abortion is Murder”, is
different than a simple expression of opinion which may be viewed as a part of the freedom of
expression, as he was the prime minister and leader of the political rule at the time. Erdoğan, who
stated he is opposing c-sections as well as abortions, with thouse discourses, are threatening all women
who chose to have an abortion or c-section with a serious crime as murder.49
Just as having children is the own choice of individuals, deciding about her fertility is one of the
fundamental human rights of a woman. The limit of the exercise of this right is determined by looking
out for the health of the woman, and the probability of severe disability for the child to be born and
following generations. In this regard, the legal system in Turkey, while protecting the right to live of
the fetus, allowed uterine evacuation up to the 10th week of pregnancy. This is only possible with the
demand of the woman and if no medical issues regarding the woman’s health exist. After this period,
an abortion might be allowed only in vital danger and the infliction of severe disability for the future.50
47
Vatan, 20 July 2010, http://www.gazetevatan.com/-kadinla-erkek-esit-olamaz---318006-siyaset/ (Retrieved:
08.12.2014).
48
Cumhuriyet, 31 July 2010,
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/diger/167476/_Erkek_erkektir__kadin_kadin._Hicbir_zaman_esit_olamaz_
.html# (Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
49
Sabah, 26 May 2012, http://www.sabah.com.tr/gundem/2012/05/26/erdogan-sezaryenle-doguma-karsiyim,
Milliyet,
26
May
2012,
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/erdoogan-her-kurtaj-biruluderedir/siyaset/siyasetdetay/26.05.2012/1545482/default.htm (Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
50
According to Turkish Civil Code Article 28/2, “The child possesses the right of capacity at the very moment
he/she enters mother’s womb (asfoetus) provided that he/she is born alive”. In the Civil Code Article 582/1, this
status have been restated regarding inheritance law. In Turkish legal system, termination of pregnancy was
prohibited until 1965. For the first time, in the Population Planning Law (NPHK) dated 1965, this action was
allowed in the cases of “medical necessity”. The abrogative NPHK law No 2827 came into effect on 1983, and
on that law, the actions of causing consensual miscarriage and abortion have been defined. According to this, a
33
The law, first and foremost, regards the mother’s right to live. Regarding the fetus; the period in which
the development of the brain takes place is being considered. When it is clear that the human life is
that valuable, between the mother and the fetus, in a threshold where only the medical science will
decide, a political leader insistently giving collimating speeches means interfering with private life,
and even interfering with female body, therefore interfering with the right to health and the privacy of
health as well.51
E) Secret Wiretapping and Surveillence
Despite the fact that the matter that-unless there exists a decision duly given by a judge on one
or several of the grounds of protection of public health and public morals, or protection of the rights
and freedoms of others, or unless there exists a written order of an agency authorized by law in cases
where delay is prejudicial, again on the above-mentioned grounds, communication shall not be
impeded nor its privacy be violated- have been constitutionally secured, allegations of secret
wiretapping and surveillance have frequently came into question during the period of AKP rule.52
The secret wiretappings and surveillences that constitute interferences with the private life
domains of individuals or with the freedom of communication which is a vital part of their private
lives, usually emerge by the wiretapping of conversations between persons using all illegal methods
pregrancy may be terminated electively or in the case of medical necessity. Causing a miscarriage and abortion,
when done purely electively, up to ten weeks. Turkish Criminal Code Article 99/1 finds it adequate to have the
mother’s consent for pregnancies not exceeding ten months, and did not seek the condition that the termination
does not cause a medical issue for the mother. In NPHK Article 5, it was foreseen that ‘until the tenth week of
the pregnancy have lapsed, as long as there is no medical issues caused to the mother’s health, upon request,
uterine evacuation shall be conducted’, www.mevzuat.gov.tr (Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
51
Üreme sağlığı, sağlık hakkı çerçevesinde uluslararası sözleşmelerle güvence altına alınmış bir haktır.
Türkiye’nin de taraf olduğu Uluslararası Ekonomik, Sosyal ve Kültürel Haklar Sözleşmesi’nin (1966) 12.
maddesinde: “Taraf ülkeler her bireye, ulaşabilecekleri en yüksek düzeydeki fiziksel ve ruhsal sağlık
standardının sağlanmasının gerektiğini kabul eder” biçimiyle tanımlanarak hükümetlere sorumluluklar
yüklemiştir. Üreme sağlığı vatandaşlar arasında ayrım yapılmadan sunulması gereken bir hizmettir. Bu durum,
yine Türkiye’nin taraf olduğu Kadınlara Karşı Her Türlü Ayrımcılığın Önlenmesi Sözleşmesi’nin (1979) 12.
maddesinde: “Taraf devletler, aile planlaması dahil, sağlık bakım hizmetlerinden kadın ve erkeğin eşit olarak
yararlanması için, sağlık bakımında kadınlara karşı ayrımı ortadan kaldıran bütün önlemleri alacaklardır”
biçiminde belirtilmiştir. Reproductive health, is a right secured with international conventions, along the
framework of the right to health. On Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social And Cultural
Rights (1966), of which Turkey is a party, with the definition “The States Parties to the present Covenant
recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental
health”,
governments
have
been
obliged
with
those
responsibilities.See.
http://www.tbmm.gov.tr/komisyon/insanhaklari/pdf01/83-93.pdf (Retrieved: 08.12.2014). Reproductive health is
a service that must be provided indiscriminantly for the citizens. This situation, again, on Article 12 of The
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979) of which Turkey is a
party, have been stated as “States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against
women in the field of health care in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, access to health
care services, including those related to family planning.” See
http://cocukhaklari.barobirlik.org.tr/dokuman/mevzuat_uamevzuat/kadinlarakarsiherturluayrimciligin.pdf
(Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
52
For examples of news regarding those hidden surveillences and wiretappings which caused numberless
demands for the formation of investigation commissions in TBMM as well, see Milliyet, 23 June 2010,
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/chp-li-gok-un-odasinda-ilgincduzenek/siyaset/siyasetdetay/23.06.2010/1254496/default.htm (Retrieved: 08.12.2014). Milliyet, 1 June 2010
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/milliyet-in-dinlenmesi-meclis-etasindi/siyaset/siyasetdetay/01.06.2010/1245135/default.htm, Milliyet 31 May 2010,
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/turkiye-dinleme-cenneti-oldu/guncel/gundemdetay/31.05.2010/1244617/default.htm
(Retrieved: 08.12.2014).
34
provided by the technical developments in the world, such as what is known by the public as bugs,
hidden cameras or remote wiretapping systems; and occasionally the use of these wiretaps unlawfully
by the press. Whereas, secret wiretapping and surveillance as well as being a violation of
constitutional rights; they are also contradicting the international conventions on human rights (of
which Turkey is a party), and in the context of the Turkish Criminal Code, they constitute the crimes
of violation of communicational secrecy and violation of privacy.53
F) The Imposition of Moral Rules
The imposition of moral rules by the conservative political view, which became apparent after
the announcement of “Dear Passengers, please act appropriately to moral rules” in the Ankara
Kurtuluş Metro on 23 May 2013, have drawn reactions from a lot of groups.54 Those interferences
which directly affect private life and lifestyle, have continued after the Gezi Events as well, with the
discussion of separating male and female dormitories, the patriarchal point of view that centers malefemale relationships around sexuality have become one of the most significant indicators ofthe attitude
of the ruling power turning a deaf ear to criticisms and reactions.55 Thus, the legitimacy of the Gezi
protest have strengthened in the following months.
III.LAW ENFORCEMENT VIOLENCE BEFORE GEZİ
A)HES Protests and The Hopa event
The Hydoelectric Power Plants (HES), the construction of which were put on a fast track during
AKP rule, became subject to significant criticisms and struggles due to the reasons that; by their
53
Text of Turkish Criminal Code No 5237 Dated 26 September 2004,
http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.5237.pdf, 09.12.14.
54
Hürriyet, 23 May 2013, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/ankara/23342317.asp, (10.12.14)
55
The statement made by the prime minister of the time on November 2013 flamed a new controversy: “We have
not allowed girls and boys to stay together in the state’s dormitories and we are still not allowing it. In the world,
even in the education psychology, regarding efficiency, this can never be explained. We have certainly been
taking a part in this. Our efforts on the separation of girls’ dormitories from boys’ dormitories are ongoing. In
that, we have achieved up to 70 percent. In some locations, owing to the lack of dormitories, our students are
staying in houses. Intelligence is being supplied to our security forces from those locations. Based on these
intelligence, our governorships are intervening in those situations (…)Those steps, taken to communicate that the
state is there, have been taken and will continue to be taken. To those, sorry to say, as a conservative democrat
ruling power, we have the obligation of intervention. No one is to interpret this as an interference with private
life.1” The inspection of coed student houses which was defended by the Deputy Prime Minister of the time,
Bekir Bozdağ as “Article 58/2 of the Constitution impuses the duty to protect the youngsters to the state”, and
stated by the Minister of Interior of the time, Muammer Güler within the goal of counter-terrorism, have, before
long, been accepted by the provincial administrators. The Governor of Adana, Hüseyin Avni Coş, stated that the
words of the Prime Minister Erdoğan regarding the coed “student houses” are the intsructions issued to them and
said: “The protection of the youth, the protection of the youth from bad habits, are among the duties imposed by
the Constitution to the state. The necessary efforts regarding the instructions of our honorable prime minister are
of course being carried out (…) 2.”
(1. News on Zaman dated 5 November 2013, http://www.zaman.com.tr/politika_basbakandan-kizli-erkeklievler-aciklamasi_2162376.html
2. http://www.gazetevatan.com/-kizli-erkekli--evlere-58-inci-madde-denetimi--581881-gundem/).
Using the Article 58 of the Constitution as a foundation, fundamental areas of freedom may not be restricted.
The statements being made and the actions and implementations made in light of those statemens, are clearly
contradicting first and foremost the Article 13 which defines “the constitutional regime of the freedoms and
rights”, as well as Article 20 and 22 which guarantees “privacy of private life” and “inviolability of the
domicile”.
35
construction, water has been presented to the use of companies, the commercialisaton of water, taking
rivers and groundwaters away from their flow in the nature, causing the loss of the lives of all living
beings unable to maintain their access to water, destroying the subsistence life, causing loss of public
resources, the devastation of natural heritage and causing various social issues.56Despite the opposition
by the public, the related institutions and foundations against HES, and the judgments to set aside and
granting stay of executions by administrative courts, the continuation of the planning and construction
of HES plants resulted in the reaction of the public and the social demonstrations becoming
widespread in HES areas.57 Nevertheless, those reactions which are significant and necessary for the
existence of a democratic society, did not result in the government revising its energy policy, on the
contrary; the demonstrations held by the public trying to protect their areas of living from the
companies, from Gerze, to Karaca-Köknar, from Hopa, to Tortum, were mostly countered with policegendermerie violence, or in the case of those trying to preserve the Peri water, came face to face with
the security personnel of the company who were equipped with heavy weapons.
The Hopa events constitute the most significant example of the police violence encountered
during anti-HES demonstrations. The people of Hopa, who protested the rally conducted by the Prime
Minister of the time Erdoğan, on 31 May 2001 in Hopa, due to the prices for tea not being determined
and the HES being desired to be built in the area, were met with a harsh police response to the public.
During the police intervention, due to the intense gas-bombing, retired teacher Metin Lokumcu has
lost his life, and on the evening of the same day, the houses of many political party and non
governmental organization members have been raided and a great number of people were arrested.58
B) The May 1 Interventions
Squares, being the historical memory of societies, have also internalized the concept of time. In
European cities, the squares are outdoor areas which are the focus of the urban life. The squares ,
having been designed in the early periods of the Republic as an extension of a modern social life, are
today being rather usedas parks and ceremonial grounds.
Taksim Square, after the construction of the Republic Monument on 1928, became the symbol
of the new regime and hosted celebrations and holidays. As a result of the escalating struggle of the
working class, large events including the labor days have been started to be conducted in Taksim
Square in the 1970s. In year 1976, a massive May 1 celebration was made. May 1, throughtout the
entire world, have been embraced as a day of struggle in which workers, people who make a living by
their labor, the poor, women, the youth, that is to say, the people who create all the worth of a
56
İrfan Şenlik, “HES’lere Yeşil Enerji Sorgusu” (Green Energy Interrogation towards HES),
http://www.emo.org.tr/ekler/fd0636c8216400b_ek.pdf?dergi=927, 09.12.14.
57
For examples to related news see Ntvmsnbc News 15 April 2010, Ntvmsnbc News, 30 June 2010,
http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25082196http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25110600/,
Hürriyet,
5
June
2010,http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/14938441.asp, 09.12.14.
58
Radikal Gazetesi, 31 Mayıs 2011, http://www.radikal.com.tr/politika/hopada_erdogan_gerginligi_1_olu1051244, 09.12.14.
36
countrydeclare their issues, their solutions and demands to ruling powers and to the world.And Taksim
Square hasbecome the most meaningful location of this social voice.
When we look at the history of May 1 in our country, (no doubt symbolically) we see the
history of the class struggle.However, an armed attack was made to the celebrations held on
1977.Despite according to official data which states that in this massacre, 36 people have lost their
lives and 136 were injured, the existence of more deaths and injuries is clear. The exact determination
of this have still not been able to made. The 1977 May 1 which will be referred as the Bloody May 1,
defined the Taksim Square as a place of commemoration and struggle regarding working classes.
After 1977, the Taksim Square were closed to May 1 demonstrations by every rulership, and the
climate of the military coup made in 1980 facilitated this prohibition. However, in 1993, the
Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey (DİSK), have made a decision to celebrate May
1 on Taksim Square and every year since that date, police attacks were made to the people who want
to enter Taksim Square.
In year 2008, Prime Minister R. T. Erdoğan stated the Taksim prohibition is going to continue
by saying that “If the feet become the head, all hell will break loose”. However, the struggle yielded
results; on April 2008 TBMM decided May 1 to be celebrated as “Labor and Solidarity Day”. Still, the
Taksim prohibition was persistently and violently enforced. After the trade unions and the government
failing to agree on celebrating May 1 on Taksim, the unions have made the decision to march to
Taksim. Then, all of the powers of the rulership started preparations one day before, and since 6.30 in
the morning, police attacks were made in Şişli, Osmanbey, Pangaltı, Nişantaşı, Okmeydanı, Dolapdere
and Kurtuluş. The attitude of the police towards DİSK, Chamber of Mechanical Engineers İstanbul
Branch etc. non-governmental organizations and towards the building of a political party, and its
actions causing injuries to a lot of people by firing gas canisters in the entrance of the emergency room
of a hospital and Şişli courthouse have given rise to controversy. In the interventions carried out on
that day police used pepper gas, gas canisters, pressurized and dyed water. In the events in front of the
DİSK building, CHP MP Mehmet Ali Özpolat had a heart spasm due to the pepper gas that was used.
In Okmeydanı, a 19-year old teenager named Burhan Gül suffered a head injury after being shot in the
head with a plastic bullet. In year 2009, May 1 was declared an official holiday; however, in the same
year, police attacks were directed to the people who want to hold celebrations in Taksim Square. In
years 2010 and 2011, Taksim Square was filled with hundreds of thousands of people and finally, a
peaceful commemoration and celebration was held. In year 2003, however, just 4 months before May
1, under the name of Taksim Pedestrianization Project, holding May 1 celebrations in Taksim was
prohibited and despite that, thousands of people still attempted to hold celebrations in Taksim; police
attacked again and used firearms and weapons against the citizens; stopped ambulences by firing gas
canisters to hospitals. Thus, it made history as an eventful May 1 after 197759.
59
For detailed explanations seeSabahın Sahibi Var, 2004’ten 2011’e 1 Mayıs Alanı’nı Geri Alma Mücadelesi,
Genişletilmiş ve Gözden Geçirilmiş 2. Baskı, DİSK yay., January 2012.
37
The May 1 interventions have began after DİSK, due to the thirtieth anniversary of 1977 May 1
Massacre60, requesting to hold 2007 celebrations in Taksim. In response to the call for Taksim by
DİSK, which was also supported by various non-governmental organizations and political parties,
intense police violence have been inflicted on the celebrations intended to be held by the participation
of all of the elements of social opposition, despite that, three thousand people succeeded in entering
Taksim; and the continuing resistence in the two year duration until 2009 forced the AKP rule to
decide on 2009 that “ a reasonable number of crowd” may enter the square.61In May 1, 2009, a tenthousand strong crowd consisting of workers, public servants, teenagers, women and the poor, despite
all obstructions, celebrated May 1 in Taksim Square, and inyear 2010, Taksim was legally recognized
as a May 1 Area.62
This transformation, explained by Erdoğan as “We celebrated May 1 in a May 1 spirit.
Yesterday, Taksim hosted 100 thousand people. A historical day has occurred. After a 33 year break,
we are happy for providing such a platform. There is nothing anyone has taken by force from this
rulership. If they had the power to forcibly take it, where were they since 1977?”, have unfortunately,
not lasted.63In year 2013, holding celebrations in Taksim was again not allowed, the reason being
presented as “Taksim Pedestrianisation Project” which encompasses Gezi Park, and in order to prevent
the celebrations to be held in Taksim, all roads leading to the square have been blocked, and bus-ferrymetrobus services were suspended. In Şişli, in the vicinity of DİSK building and Halaskargazi Street,
in Beşiktaş, at Barbaros Avenue and around Çarşı, in Okmeydanı, Mecidiyeköy, Gayrettepe, Bomonti,
Kurtuluş, Tarlabaşı and Dolapdere, the social opposition were attempted to be suppressed by resorting
to intensive police violence directed at the demonstrators.64
C) Taksim Judgment of the European Court
As a result of the application made by DİSK and KESK against the May 1 prohibitions of 2008
to the European Court of Human Rights numbered 38676/08; with the judgement made on 22
November 2012, it was determined that Taksim is a May 1 Square; and due to the obstructions made
60
The prohibition of May 1 celebrations for long years have changed with the rise of the social opposition in the
1970s. After the celebrations held in İstanbul Tepebaşı Gazino on 1975, Taksim Square have been embarked on
1976. In year 1977, hundreds of thousands of people charged to Taksim. In a period where revolutionary
struggle was on the rise, the Counter-Guerrilla aiming to make it unable to hold May 1 celebrations by
provocation, opened fire to the people. In the incident, 36 people have lost their lives, and more than 200 people
were injured. May 1, 1977 made history as the Bloody May 1. In the following year, 1978, despite the
atmosphere of fear that was being created and the events of last year, hundreds of thousands of people were once
again at Taksim. Even though Taksim was not abandoned despite all provocations, with the martial law in 1979,
May 1 was banned in Taksim. In the 30th anniversary of the massacre, DİSK made a call to Taksim, demanding
May 1 to be declared an official holiday and the necessary actions to be taken in order to shed light to the 77
Massacre. Along with this call, tens of thousands of people resisted police attacks for 3 years in order to ‘earn’
Taksim.
61
CnnTürk News, 1 May 2009,
http://www.cnnturk.com/2009/turkiye/05/01/31.yil.sonra.taksim.coskusu/524739.0/ (10.12.14)
62
CnnTürk News, 1 May 2010,
http://www.cnnturk.com/2010/turkiye/05/01/32.yil.sonra.taksimde.1.mayis.coskusu/574334.0/ (10.12.14)
63
CnnTürk, 2 May 2010,
http://www.cnnturk.com/2010/turkiye/05/02/erdoganin.1.mayis.tepkisi/574507.0/ (10.12.14)
64
Bianet, 02 May 2013, http://www.bianet.org/bianet/yasam/146326-1-mayis-2013-kunye-ve-bilanco (10.12.14)
38
by the government on the date 1 May 2008, the“Assembly and Collective Expression of Freedom and
Freedom of Association” of the applicants have been violated. For many years, the Taksim Square in
which the laborers made theirselves heard to the government and the public, especially following the
attack made to the crowd on 1977 and the result of the loss of lives of 36 laborers, has earned a
significant place in the social memory and May 1 Labor Day have been identified with Taksim
Square. ECHR, with this judgment, clearly stated that Taksim Square has a significant place in the
social memory and for the trade unions regarding May 1 celebrations and this square should be
regarded as the area for May 1, and the distruption to urban life (traffic jams, congestion of roads) that
will be caused by the demonstrationcannot be considered as an obstacle for holding the demonstration.
ECHR determined that choosing the venue for the exercise of the freedom of expression is within the
scope of the right, and ruled that the duty of the government is to secure the exercise of this right. It
was determined that the unions have the freedom of assembly originating from the fact that they are
trade unions, and they also have the freedom to celebrate May 1. ECHR stated that in such
demonstrations, persons and institutions are a whole, and the trade unions are direct victims due to
being the organizers of the demonstration organized for commemorating the Taksim Massacre,
furthermore, they were victimized in the name of the demonstrators. Despite this legally binding
judgement, the Prime Minister of the Time, by stating “ ‘Well, I’ve held demonstrations in Taksim at
the past as well. But, perhaps, Taksim will not be a demonstration area tomorrow. You cannot say ‘I
will hold demonstrations here’ even though it is prohibited. You have to demonstrate in the place that
was shown to you, wherever that may be. This is a state-of-law.” declared that the Taksim prohibition
will continue on years 2013 and 2014.
In year 2013, the Taksim Gezi Park project which was the excuse of the prohibition of May 1
Area, transformed into the Gezi Resistance throughout the whole country. Of course, even though the
driving forces in the June events are based more on political reasons, symbolically, the projects and
practices aimed at Taksim Square which would result in environmental looting, have triggered the
movements. The open assault directed towards Taksim Square, which was continuously banned, and
persistently, by using oppression and force, the entry to which was denied, caused it to be on the main
agenda of whole of Turkey since the beginning.
IV. CHRONOLOGY OF THE GEZİ DEMONSTRATIONS
Monday, May 27
The Taksim Solidarity Platform, which is a coalition consisting of non governmental
organisations, political groups and professional groups, and actively have been campaigning against
the urban renewal plans; after the arrival of bulldozers, started gathering in Gezi Park.
Tuesday, May 28
39
A group of environmentalist demonstrators held a peaceful sit-in protest in Gezi Park. Police
used excessive force (tear gas and pepper sprays) to evacuate the park.
Wednesday, May 29
As a response to the use of excessive force on the protesters in Gezi Park, in İstanbul, the
number of demonstrators began to increase rapidly.
Thursday, May 30
In the social media and news websites, images showing the police setting fire to the tents of the
demonstrators who were camping in Gezi Park at early hours of the morning were shared. Police
resorted to pepper gas and pressurized water to disperse the demonstrators. By the evening, the
number of demonstrators significantly increased.
Friday, May 31
In the early morning, police intervened to remove the peaceful demonstrators from Gezi Park,
using excessive force including tear gas and pressurized water. The harsh intervention of the police
went on in the center of İstanbul until the evening. The mass demonstrations spread to, as well as
Ankara and İzmir, other cities such as Antakya, Eskişehir, Edirne, Bursa, Kocaeli, Samsun and Adana.
Saturday, June 1
Police withdrew from Taksim Square at around 17.00, however, police intervention went on in
other parts of the city. As the protests spread to other cities, police continued to exercise excessive
force towards peaceful protesters. Clashes between the police and protesters took place, with the
number of protesters being tens of thousands in Ankara, İzmir and Eskişehir; and thousands in other
cities such as Adana, Edirne, Samsun, Antakya, Trabzon, Bursa, Kocaeli.65
Sunday, June 2
Throughout Turkey, the excessive use of force by the police continued. Police intervened to
peaceful demonstrations using tear gas and pressurized water in Ankara and İzmir. It was reported that
in Ankara and İzmir, police have been attacking the infirmaries in which injured demonstrators were
being treated.
Muammer Güler, the Minister of Interior, stated that in the 235 protests that have been going on
in 67 cities for six days, 1,730 people were arrested.
Tuesday, June 4
Abdullah Cömert, aged 22, lost his life on June 3, due to a head injury he sustained following
the police intervention in a protest in Antakya. Eye-witnesses told that Cömert lost his life as a result
of a gas canister fired by the police hitting his head.
65
Amnesty International, October 2013, Index Number: EUR 44/022/2013, Turkey: Gezi Park Protests: Brutal
denial of the right to peaceful assembly in Turkey.
40
İn İzmir, 38 people were arrested due to sharing messages related to the protests on Twitter.
Wednesday, June 5
Turkish Medical Association reported that throughout the country, with İstanbul, Ankara, İzmir
and Eskişehir being the first and foremost, in 12 cities, 4,355 people have been injured.
Friday, June 7
Returning from a four-day trip to North Africa, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan made a
speech in İstanbul to his supporters. In his speech, the prime minister told that the protests were illegal,
with most of them being police officers, around 1,000 people were injured and the protests must come
to an end. Erdoğan also mentioned that there may be situations where the police used excessive force.
Tuesday, June 11
In the morning, police intervened to the protest in Taksim Square using tear gas and pressurized
water, ending the peaceful occupation protest that has been ongoing in Taksim Square for 11 days.
The clashes between the police and protesters went on throughout the day and night.
In the afternoon, the Governor of İstanbul Hüseyin Avni Mutlu, defended the police
intervention to Taksim Square by showing the “banners belonging to terrorist organizations” on the
memorial statue in the square and on the buildings in the vicinity as the reason. He promised that there
will be no police intervention in Gezi Park. In the evening, police intervened to the Gezi Park with tear
gas, pressurized water and plastic bullets.
45 lawyers, who were protesting the arrest of a group of lawyers while giving a press statement
in İstanbul Çağlayan Courthouse condemning the police violence in Gezi Park protests, were
arrested.66
Wednesday, June 12
The Prime Minister announced that he was giving “a last warning” for the demonstrators to
evacuate Gezi Park. In the early hours of the morning, police intervened to the Taksim Gezi Park
infirmary and its vicinity with tear gas.
Friday, June 14
Ethem Sarısülük, who was shot in the head by a bullet fired by a police officer on the protests of
June 1 in Ankara, lost his life.
Saturday, June 15
Police dispersed the demonstrators that were holding a peaceful occupation protest in Gezi park
by using tear gas, pressurized water and plastic bullets. The demonstrators were prevented from
66
Amnesty International, October 2013, Index Number: EUR 44/022/2013, Turkey: Gezi Park Protests: Brutal
denial of the right to peaceful assembly in Turkey.
41
reentering the park. Police used pressurized water and tear gas in front of the Divan Hotel, and filled
the lobby of the hotel that was used as an infirmary to treat the injured demonstrators, with tear gas.
Sunday, June 16
Police intervened the funeral march of Ethem Sarısülük in Ankara using excessive force.
In the evening, around the Taksim area, police used acidic pressurized water. The
demonstrators, having had their bodies burned, rushed to the infirmaries.
Monday, June 17
In the evening hours, the “standing man” protest, which was an act of silently standing, began
and immediately, a lot of people joined the protest. At least 16 people who were performing the
standing protest in Taksim Square were arrested, and released about eight hours later.
Turkish Medical Association reported that throughout the country, with İstanbul, Ankara, İzmir
and Eskişehir being the first and foremost, in 12 cities, 7,478 people have been injured.
Saturday, June 22
Police fired tear gas inside the infirmary in the Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and
Architects, and around its vicinity.
Sunday, June 23
The Ministry of Interior reported that in the 79 of 81 provinces in Turkey, 2.5 million people
participated in the protests. During this period, around 4,900 people were detained for different
durations67.
Monday, June 24
The Prime Minister, in his speech at the graduation ceremony of a police academy, celebrated
the police by saying that they have shown a brave, heroic attitude during the Gezi Protests.
According to Turkish Medical Association statistics, since the beginning of the protests, in 13
cities 8,038 peope have been injured.
Monday, July 8
After the Gezi Park being opened to the public by the Governor of İstanbul Hüseyin Avni
Mutlu, the demonstrators and other persons from the public filled the park. However, two hours later,
police warned them to leave the park and intervened using thear gas and plastic bullets. The police
operation, spreading to the places in the vicinity of the park, went on until the early hours of the
morning.
67
Amnesty International, October 2013, Index Number: EUR 44/022/2013, Turkey: Gezi Park Protests: Brutal
denial of the right to peaceful assembly in Turkey.
42
50 people, who attempted to enter the Gezi Park in a peaceful manner, including the
representatives of the Taksim Solidarity, were arrested.
Wednesday, July 10
Ali İsmail Korkmaz, aged 19, who was mercilessly beaten by persons in plain clothing as he
was running away after police intervened to a protest in Eskişehir on June 3, lost his life. Murder
charges were brought against the five people who were captured, with one of them being a police
officer.
Friday, July 12
All of the representatives of Taksim Solidarity who were detained on July 8 were released.
Monday, July 22
The Sevgi Park in Antakya, in which peaceful demonstrators were holding an occupation protest
was evacuated in the early morning by the police. Police used excessive violence towards the
protestors in Taksim Square.
Friday, July 26
The prosecutors completed the first indictment against the Gezi Park protests in Ankara.
Lawsuits were brought against 73 people for participating in the funeral march of Ethem Sarısülük,
who was killed after being shot by the police.
Thursday, August 1
Columnist Can Dündar was dismissed from his job in Milliyet newspaper due to the articles he
wrote regarding the Gezi Park protests. The Journalists Union of Turkey reported that 81 journalists
were dismissed due to the news they made regarding the Gezi Park protests.68
Saturday, August 3
Police intervened to the people who attempted to hold a demonstration inside and in the vicinity
of Gezi Park using tear gas, pressurized water and plastic bullets. The police intervention resumed
throughout the night.
Monday, August 19
In Antakya, police used tear gas and pressurized water on protesters who wanted to
commemorate Ali İsmail Korkmaz on the 40th day of his death.
Tuesday, August 20
Police intervened to the group of four people who were walking from Antalya to İstanbul on the
“Walk to Justice”in order to draw attention to the seeking of justice by the victims of the police
68
Amnesty International, October 2013, Index Number: EUR 44/022/2013, Turkey: Gezi Park Protests: Brutal
denial of the right to peaceful assembly in Turkey.
43
violence endured during the Gezi Park protests, and their supporters, using tear gas and excessive
violence.69
44
69
Amnesty International, October 2013, Index Number: EUR 44/022/2013, Turkey: Gezi Park Protests: Brutal
denial of the right to peaceful assembly in Turkey.
CHAPTER TWO
THE PRIME SOCIAL LAYERS THAT EMBRACED THE GEZI PARK
The individuals and groups who took action to keep the Gezi Park untouched, have had diversity that
reflects the pluralistic structure of the society. Along with that, the concept of “marginalized groups” is
constituting the common denominator of the “Gezi Resistence”. The Gezi movement brought different
opposing groups, parties, non governmental organisations and individuals together, and transformed them into
a mass social opposition. Really, the groups, students, workers, civil servants, trade unions, political parties,
environmental organisations, neighbourhood associations, football fan groups, women’s organisations, artists,
journalists, doctors, lawyers, non governmental organisations and individuals such as LGBT members who
oppose choices made by the AKP rule in a lot of subjects, came together in Gezi.
Those may be grouped in two groups:
-Platforms and Social Categories
-Social media
I.PLATFORMS AND SOCIAL CATEGORIES
A) Taksim Solidarity
Taksim Solidarity emerged as, in short, an element in which tens of non governmental organisations
came together. Even though Taksim Solidarity commenced as beginning from the year 2010, the coming
together of non-governmental organistations that oppose the Taksim Project which was desired to be carried
out in Beyoğlu; it became the voice of the resistors with the Gezi events.It managed to bring together the
people with differing political opinions that joined the social movement, for certain purposes. When we
examine its components, we may actually see how this was possible as well. The solidarity, which was the
labor-orieted subject of the movement, during the Gezi process, being the voice of all participants conveyed
the following demands to the rulership:
- Gezi Park, will remain as a park. Taksim Gezi Park will not be re-developed under the name of
Artillery Barracks or any other project; an official statement on the cancellation of the current project is made;
- The attempts to demolish Ataturk Cultural Centre stop,
- Every responsible agent for the thousands of injured people and the deaths of our two citizens named
Mehmet Ayvalıtaş and Abdullah Cömert, starting with the Governors and the Police Chiefs of Istanbul,
Ankara and Hatay and everyone who prevented the use of the most basic democratic rights of the people
starting with the resistance against the demolution in Taksim Gezi Park; who gave orders for violent
repression, enforced or implemented these orders are dismissed from their posts,
- The use of tear gas bombs and other similar materials is prohibited,
- Detained citizens who attended the resistance across the country are immediately released and an
official statement which declares that there will not be any investigation about them,
- Starting with the May 1 Area Taksim and Kizilay squares, all the meeting and demonstration bans
effecting all of our squares and public areas and all the de facto blockings are abolished and stopped and
barriers to freedom of expression are removed, are what WE DEMAND.
When we take a look at those demands of the Taksim Solidarity today, we are able to see how justified
these demands were. All of the citizens who participated in the Gezi process were in agreement with these
demands.
The members, and especially the spokepersons of the Taksim Solidarity, who became the target of the
rulership after the process as well, attempted to go to the park following the statement of the Governor of
İstanbul ‘we are inviting the public to the Gezi Park’; but were arrested in Taksim Square.70Later, after the
developments that occurred with a total ‘legal scandal’, they were released, and all of the unlawful decisions
made about them including the warrant for their ‘arrest’ issued by the prosecution office, were overturned by
the court. Political authorities attempted to proclaim Taksim Solidarity as a criminal organization, and the
spokesmen of the solidarity were charged with ‘establishing a crime syndiate’ by the prosecution, however,
the legitimacy of the solidarity found place in the judgments of the court as well. Taksim Solidarity has been
still resuming its operation in the aftermath of Gezi.71
In İstanbul 33. Criminal Court of First Instance, with no 2014/88, for charges of forming organized
groups with the intention of committing crime (Criminal Code Article 220) and violation of Law no 2911,
trials are in progress.72
B) Women
The misogynistic policies of the AKP rule that were observed in the last 10 years had its marks on Gezi
as well. When we take a look at the subjects that became symbolized in the Gezi process, we encounter
symbols such as ‘the woman in red’, ‘the woman in black’. The femicides, sexual harassments, the policies of
the rulership that ignore women, which all have increased in the last years; found its place in those symbols.
The protests that sparked against the attempts to make new regulations regarding abortion were passed to the
courts. Lawsuits were brought against a group of women who protested in Dolmabahçe, however, those
70
http://www.sendika.org/2013/07/gezi-parki-kapatildi-polis-saldiriyor-halk-direniyor-dakika-dakika/ ;
http://taksimdayanisma.org/basin-toplantisina-cagri-gozaltina-alinan-taksim-dayanisma-uyeleri-derhal-serbestbirakilmalidir ;
http://www.gazetevatan.com/taksim-dayanisma-uyeleri-gozaltinda--552395-gundem/ ;
http://www.istabip.org.tr/index.php/haber-arsivi/3008-taksim-dayanmas-akln-hukukun-vicdann-demokrasinin-bittiiyerdeyiz.html
71
http://taksimdayanisma.org ; https://tr-tr.facebook.com/TaksimDayanismasi
72
http://www.sendika.org/2013/07/gezi-parki-kapatildi-polis-saldiriyor-halk-direniyor-dakika-dakika/ ;
http://taksimdayanisma.org/basin-toplantisina-cagri-gozaltina-alinan-taksim-dayanisma-uyeleri-derhal-serbestbirakilmalidir ;
http://www.gazetevatan.com/taksim-dayanisma-uyeleri-gozaltinda--552395-gundem/ ;
http://www.istabip.org.tr/index.php/haber-arsivi/3008-taksim-dayanmas-akln-hukukun-vicdann-demokrasinin-bittiiyerdeyiz.html
46
individuals were acquitted.73 The efforts to criminalize the protests which were completely in the scope of the
freedom of expression turned out as far-fetched and ridiculous allegations were made. For example, in the
lawsuit brought after the Mayor of Ankara, Melih Gökçek lodged a complaint against the women who
protested him by throwing eggs, the charges were specified as “damaging property”.74
Even on the first days of the protests, yhe intervention to the woman who spread her arms in front of a
TOMA, with pressurized water, the pepper-spraying of Ceyda Sungur’s face in Gezi Park were perceived as
situations that hurt the conscience of the society. These summarized words of Ceyda Sungur demonstrate that
women are emerging as one of the main actors in the Gezi movement:
“Unfortunately, when Ethem Sarisuluk was shot in the head by a police bullet, when Abdullah Comert
was hit in the head by a gas canister, when Mehmet Ayvalitas was run over while attending the
demonstrations, when Irfan Tuna was gassed while working, when Medeni Yildirim was protesting the
construction of a military post at Lice, when Selim Onder was visiting his daughter, when Zeynep Eryasar
joined a protest march in solidarity with her children at the Gezi Park, when Ahmet Atakan demanded the
killers to be brought to justice, when Ali Ismail Korkmaz was beaten to death and when Serdar Kadakal was
sitting at the street across from his workplace; none of them were wearing a red dress. Berkin Elvan, our now
15-year-old brother with his beautiful eyes, committed no greater crime than going to the grocery store to buy
bread. The fact that these people were not photographed by chance cannot be an excuse for the parties
responsible for what happened to them not to be tried and punished.”75
47
C) Football Fan Groups: ‘İstanbul United’
These words of the former head of state Salazar who has ruled Portekiz with a dictatorship regime for
years and who comes to mind with the infamous 3 F rule, are just like he is describing the people dressed in
the jerseys of the teams they support and participate in the Gezi Park protests: “I would not have been to rule
the country for even half an hour, if it weren’t for football.”
Football, in our country, usually used to come up in the agenda with the violence erupting between
supporters. However, with Gezi, the rule that football is the opium of the masses have been reversed like a
boomerang and ‘supportership’ became an ‘identity for a dissenter’ in the Gezi protests. The well-known fan
group of Beşiktaş, Çarşı, which became a symbol in the Gezi process, kept the agenda of the country busy for
days, with its chasing after of a TOMA vehicle using an excavator captured by the demonstrators76.
The fans of Beşiktaş-Galatasaray-Fenerbahçe, who used to be at daggers drawn with each other until
the Gezi events, were nicknamed ‘İstanbul United’ due to being side-by-side during the demonstrations. In
June 2013, at one of the nights in which the Gezi Park protests were ongoing in a very violent manner, as it
73
http://www.halkevleri.org.tr/guncel/kurtaj-hakki-eylemine-beraat
74
http://www.sendika.org/2014/10/gokceki-yumurtalayan-kadinlara-mala-zarardan-500er-lira-ceza
75
http://www.worldcrunch.com/default/istanbul-039-s-039-woman-in-red-039-breaks-her-silence/woman-in-red-gezitrial-police/c0s14755/#.VPENAvmUdTE
76
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/ve-poma-olumsuzlesti-/gundem/detay/1814893/default.htm
was approaching 3 a.m., a rumour started to spread. The fan group of Beşiktaş, Çarşı, came to support the
protesters and entered the Gezi park which was shut down by the police. These news reached the fans of other
teams in a short while. At that hour of the night, the Fenerbahçe fans, in the Anatolian side became organized
to reinforce Çarşı (who were location-wise closest to Gezi Park), and began crossing the Bosphorus Bridge
with their jerseys on. From the Mecidiyeköy side, Galatasaray fans were advancing. On the next morning, the
fans of those three teams who used to be at daggers drawn with each other for years, linked arms and the fans
who came together named themselves as İstanbul United. While just a few weeks ago, Fenerbahçe fan Burak
Yıldırım was stabbed to death by a Galatasaray fan. When the passion of rivalry have been that peaked, the
standing shoulder to shoulder of the fans in an instant, was the very thing for all of the directors seeking a
story. In summer 2013, the news thata movie called İstanbul United began shooting arrived.77
Just as every other subject of the Gezi movement, after a while, the Çarşı group became the target of the
rulership. The group which shook the earth chanting the slogan ‘sık bakalım! (shoot it at me)’78 on the
squares, suffered an operation just like Taksim Solidarity, and the members of the group were arrested.
However, again, just like Taksim Solidarity, almost all of them were released.79 The trial is still in progress.
We may state that the Beşiktaş neighbourhood has became used to live with pepper gas even before
Gezi as well. Towards the people who gathered in Beşiktaş after DİSK stated that they will celebrate May 1 of
2013 in Taksim, an intense pepper gas intervention, just like in Gezi, took place. Later, once again during the
month of May, before the match on the day of the match between Beşiktaş and Gençlerbirliği which is to be
played due to the demolition of the İnönü Stadium, Beşiktaş was flooded with pepper gas by the law
enforcement. The incident began with the Yunus (Dolphin) Police squads firing bullets in the air. The Çarşı
group have had ‘practice’ about pepper gas and pressurized water before the Gezi protests.80
In short, football which was used as ‘opium’ by the rulerships for the public in the world, became a
common unitary ground for the demonstrators in the Gezi process.
After the Gezi demonstrations, protests with slogans went on in football matches as well. The
enforcement of the Passolig practice, which allows for the blacklisting of fans in order to prevent participation
in those protests, and in the same time, provides unlawful profits to the clubs and the federations, commenced.
Thispractice named Passolig, which by ammenments made to the law no 6222 (law against violence in sports)
made the electronic ticket application mandatory for every supporter, as well as imposing that every supporter
pay a yearly subscription fee to the bank called AKTİFBANK and submit his/her photograph, have not been
able to achieve the desired success. The association of supporter rights brought a lawsuit against this practice,
and the district court, alleging unconstitutionality, referred the case to the Constitutional Court. The
Constitutional Court judged that the case will be tried on the merits.81
77
http://www.bbc.co.uk/turkce/spor/2014/05/140529_istanbul_united ; https://www.facebook.com/istanbulunitedfc
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkish-pepper-gas-march.aspx?pageID=449&nID=48709&NewsCatID=409
79
http://www.bianet.org/bianet/insan-haklari/147761-carsi-lilara-poma-dan-tutuklama-istendi ;
http://www.cnnturk.com/haber/turkiye/carsinin-darbe-davasi-basladi
80
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/carsi-nin-1-mayis-slogani-gune-besiktas-1701752-skorerhaber/
81
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/spor/futbol/27604666.asp
78
48
D)LGBTI
Another subject of the Gezi process was the LGBT individuals who are ‘in the alterity situation’ of the
society. The LGBT march that was made every year, made history as perhaps the most crowded pride march
in the history of Turkey. The LGBT march dated 30 June 2013 coinciding with the Gezi Park protests, along
with adding color to the movement, also became a day where the ‘alterity’ that always had a distance with the
society, mingled with the public.
The LGBT individuals, not unlike the other subjects of Gezi, with this resistance and the march they
made, shown just how massive they are in reality. The other 50% (referred as such by the rulership’s rhetoric)
included the LGBT block as well. The LGBT that usually came up on the agenda with Trans murders until the
resistance, now were able to be together with other groups with the purpose of defending the issues regarding
all of the society.82
E) University and High-school students
The university and high school students, which is to say, the young part of our population, was one of
the leading actors in this process. In fact, the student youth began the opposition in streets much earlier.
Protests against YÖK decisions, university tuitions commenced well in advance, and students were faced with
illegal police violence. Furthermore, the students suffered criminal lawsuits, trials in the duration of which
they were kept detained, and suspensions from schools. This group which was sensitive to social
developments, in fact turned out to be those who determined the shape of the Gezi’s unique and directly
developing movement and reaction style. The fact that they use the social media better allowed the young 49
people to give faster and reflexive reactions and the movement to influence the society. While the mainstream
media was busy showing penguins, the young people destroyed this wall which we may indeed call as a
broadcasting ban, with the social media. The uniqueness of the graffiti caused the birth of an unpredecented
style of protest in our country.
In order to comprehend that the high school and university students are the locomotive of this
movement, taking a look at our citizens who lost their lives in Gezi alone will be sufficient. When attention is
paid to the ages of Ali İsmail Korkmaz, Abdullah Cömert, Mehmet Ayvalıtaş, Hasan Ferit Gedik, Ahmet
Atakan, Ethem Sarısülük, Berkin Elvan and Medeni Yıldırım, the role of the young people in this movement
becomes more clear.
G) REDHACK
In a situation where social media determined the shape of the process, a group self-described as
‘revolutionary hackers’ was one of the subjects of Gezi. Redhack which followed the motto ‘Hak yiyen hack
yer (Those who are unjust shall be hacked)’ reached to tens of thousands of people via Twitter and hacked
symbol websites belonging to public institutions. Its hacking of the official website of Beyoğlu District Police
Directorate on the beginning days of the Gezi protest and placing the words ‘to those who prefer the green of
82
lgbti.org
dollars to the green of the nature… #ResistGeziPark’ made into the agenda of the public. It emphasized that
opposition can also be done in a virtual medium, not only in the streets.83
H) Doctors-Lawyers-Journalists-Public Servants-White Collar Workers
On the Gezi days, the plaza workers who were compensated with salaries above the average financial
income were also involved. The embracement of the Gezi Park by this group was marked with the slogan ‘at
work during the day, at the resistance during the night’. Just like every other subject of the process, this group
was also exposed to the attacks of the political rulership. While the doctors, in the infirmaries they opened,
were treating the injured who were exposed to police attacks by abiding by their Hippocratic oath, became the
target of the rulership. In the lawsuits that were brought, many doctors took their places as defendants.
Lawyers took place in the Gezi Park by establishing counsel tables in Gezi Park and providing legal
services during arrests. In the following days of the protests, tens of lawyers became subject to police attacks
inside the courthouse, and were forcibly arrested. In the next day of the arrests, as a reaction, thousands of
lawyers gathered in the courthouse and protested the assault of the political rulership. 84
The University lecturers and laborers were among the groups who were in Gezi Park. University, with
all of its elements, became subject to the oppression of the rulership, thus lecturers, students and laborists have
been in solidarity. The lecturers who were side by side with their students in the protests, gave lectures in the
entrance of the school for their students who were suspended from school.
I) Children
50
‘Berkin Elvan’, who became a symbol for the embracement of Gezi Park, caused the children in Gezi
to get on the agenda. When the prime minister of the time was forming the sentence ‘he did not go to buy
bread’, tens of thousands of people have been gathered in İstanbul for Berkin Elvan’s funeral.
The street children were always beside the protesters who went ot Gezi Park and after the police
withdrew from the park, constructed library and dining areas all free of charge. The street kids who sniff paint
thinners and are confined to live on the streets, are the most frequent visitors of the resistance area. In the
following days of Gezi, the ones who were most happy about the free food distribution organized by the
protesters collectively.
J) Trade Unions
One of the subjects of Gezi Park was, with their statements made during the resistance and
accompanying the demonstrators in squares, DİSK and KESK. In early June, the marches they made in all
around the country and the following ‘caution to the government’ strike was on the agenda of the resistance.
The ongoing campaign of the DİSK confederation, ‘Direnİşçi’ (a synonymous word meaning both ‘resisters’
and ‘resist, worker!’) seems to have gotten its inspiration from the Gezi resistance. These two trade unions in
which the laborist groups are organized, have always been in the front lines during the process. The fact that
the representatives of these unions were among the delegation who went to meet with the prime minister, and
83
84
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/23402170.asp
http://gundem.bugun.com.tr/kocasakal-asla-kabul-edilemez-haberi/661138
the designation of these people as the people who will be the voice of the Gezi Park opposition, is an
indication that the protests were seeking resolutions for labor-based issues. Unemployment, low wages,
precarious employement and worker deaths put the responsibilities of the unions forward. The worker deaths
that were encountered before and in the aftermath of Gezi protests reached to the highest number in the history
of the work life of the country, and sparked massive protests of the policies of the rulership in the area.
K) Leftist Groups
For the leftist and socialist groups, who were already used to take on the streets, it was not difficult to
take place in the Gezi process. During Gezi, those who were in the foremost line of the barricades have always
been socialist revolutionary. The leftist groups who were not a stranger to such movements, also became
guides to people who may very well be participating in a social demonstration for the first time, and coming
face-to-face with the police for the first time as well. The citizens who thought that the word ‘marginal’ being
used by the rulership for years only referred to violent groups and criminals, after being branded themselves
by the same way, realized that the word marginal actually was used for everyone who oppose the policies of
the rulership. The word Çapulcu (marauder) got a new meaning.85
L) Mothers
Even though it was not a familiar sight to see mothers in social demonstrations, mothers were also
present in the Gezi park embracement. That is to say, mothers did not leave their children alone in this tough
process. Following the statement of Governor of İstanbul, Hüseyin Avni Mutlu ‘mothers, fathers, come get
your children from Gezi Park’, the response of the mothers to the governor was not in the way the governor 51
would’ve liked. The mothers who joined hands, formed almost a shield over the Gezi Park, and took their
place in this movement next to their children. Their slogan got on the agenda of the country: ‘Her yer anne,
her yer direniş. (Mothers are everywhere, resistance everywhere)’.86
M) Artists
The approach of the rulership towards arts, as well as the rulership’s progression in an oppressive and
destructive direction sparked a massive reaction from both the public and the artists.İstanbul’daki Muhsin
Ertuğrul Tiyatrosu’nun yıkılarak yeniden inşa edileceği kararı ile başlayan tedirginlik Beyoğlu tarihi Emek
Sineması’nın yıkılarak yerine AVM yapılması kararı protestolarla karşılanmıştı.87However, the regulations
made by the rulership that disregard the reactions; the changes being attempted to made regarding State
Theatres; the locations of theatres being demolished following the transfer of theater management to
bureucrats; the ripping away of the trees on their gardens increased the distance between the rulership and
art.88
85
http://www.radikal.com.tr/politika/basbakan_erdogan_biz_birkac_capulcunun_yaptiklarini_yapmayiz-1136875
http://www.sondakika.com/haber/haber-gezi-parki-icin-anne-zinciri-4728937/
87
http://www.medyatava.com/haber/taksim-de-binlerce-insan-emek-sinemasi-nin-kapatilmasini-protesto-etti_87963
88
http://www.zaman.com.tr/magazin_devlet-tiyatrolarini-kapatma-sureci-basladi_2192546.html ;
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/kultur-sanat/haber/23367051.asp
86
In the Haziran movements in which a large part of the public was present, artists also took their place in
squares, the artists who were supporting the protests were also sprayed with gas and pressurized water along
with the public. In the meeting of Taksim Solidarity with the prime minister of the time, the artists who
supported the process were also present. The image of Mehmet Ali Alabora and Halit Ergenç being among the
protesters in a demonstration, made the support given to this movement by artists visible. In the same time, the
artists who supported Gezi became targets by media organs close to the rulership during the process.
N) The Handicapped
Another smybol of Gezi are the handicapped. From the indiscriminate attacks made by the police
towards all citizens, the handicapped also got their share. If need be, they laid down in front of TOMA, if need
be, they became subjected to pressurized water. During the attacks of the law enforcement, the group that did
not give up or run away even under the most intense interventions were the handicapped. They become one of
the subjects of the process that became a symbol. The reason for their reaction was that they were being
ignored by the political rulership. Especially unemployement, the fact that cities were organized without
taking the needs of the handicapped into account, their health issues not being resolved, formed the foundation
of them gathering together in Gezi Park.89
O) The Standing Man Protest
The standing man protest, which was, from a legal perspective, an instance of a ‘passive resistance’,
began in Taksim Square as a reaction to the intervention made to Gezi Park and the violence exercised on the
demonstrators and spread throughout many places over the country in a very short time. The persons who 52
gathered around him to support the Standing Man and simply “stood” were arrested by the police. As a
retaliation to the standing man protest, the protests of “the standing man standing against the standing man”
and “the turning man” were made.90
P) Piano in Gezi Park
Davide Martello, who went on the road with his piano loaded in his truck, from Sicily, after wandering
around different countries in Europe, and staying in Bulgaria for 10 days, arrived to İstanbul. He gave a piano
recital in Taksim Square. This, in fact, constituted a great example of the peaceful nature of the park
protests.91
R) Park Forums
After the dispersion of Gezi Park with police invervention on the day June 16, 2013, the Gezi protesters
formed park forums in neighbourhoods and social opposition was continued by the way of those forums.92
89
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.692839150731018.1073741828.692320020782931&type=3
http://www.bbc.co.uk/turkce/haberler/2013/06/130618_duranadam_kim
91
http://www.gazetevatan.com/gezi-parki-nda-piyano-sesleri--545587-gundem/
92
http://www.bbc.co.uk/turkce/haberler/2013/06/130625_gezi_forum
90
Those who live in different districts of the city such as Beşiktaş, Kadıköy, Beyoğlu, Üsküdar, Fatih,
Eyüp, come together in the evenings and begin discussing what should be the path to follow after the Gezi
protests.
In the forums, those who want to talk write their names on a list, then they have to summarize their
opinion in two minutes. If they do not conform, they receive reactions either vocally or by the hand signals
meaning “wrap it up”.
In the forums, every subject is open to discussion, and calls for protests are being made.
Having an unassociated, unplanned, leaderless and multi-identitied nature, the Gezi movement is
continuing to seek its direction. The forums, as well as existing individually, have also began coming together
to form solidarities. The solidarity of forums, the defence of the city are platforms that sprung from those
forums.
S) Platforms for Supervision of Elections
The steepness of the 10% threshold being implemented in the country prevented a great number of
social opposition groups from being represented in the parliament, and the resulting picture in the parliament
could not be able to constitute the counterpart of the votes given.
Obstructions for the reflection of the will of the Electorate to the Ballot Box – Discussions
Regarding the Legitimacy of the Rulership
“It does not matter who votes, what matters is who counts the votes”.
Especially the election law, election threshold, the issues with lists of eligible electorates, the votes
discovered in trash bins after general elections, the blackouts during the vote counts have increased concerns
about the elections being fixed and the results of elections are not reflective of the public’s will.
Sensitive citizens, by both becoming observers for the ballot boxes as individuals, and by joining
institutional structures, attempted to provide the security of elections, and obtain the actual will of the people,
or the actual vote percentages of the political parties.
The voluntary societies that appeared after Gezi gained popular interest and attracted a great number of
participants in a brief period.
Seeking Security in Elections: The formation of Oy ve Ötesi (Voting and Beyond) 93
The volunteers that form the structure describe themselves as: “As Oy ve Ötesi, we began our journey
as a completely voluntary, independent, young group of eight people. When we created our projects, we
always have been independent of political parties and impartial.. We want the self-awareness for a transparent
and democratic election to be established.”
93
http://www.oyveotesi.org, http://thebobs.com/english/2014/www-oyveotesi-org/
53
Being an independent and widespread movement increased interest in Oy ve Ötesi and in just 4 months,
the movement reached 30.000 volunteers. In the local elections of 30 March 2014, there were observers in
every ballot box in İstanbul, and the records of the vote counts have been collected.
In the repeated local elections of Yalova on 1 June 2014, with over 300 volunteers, they have been
observers in the Yalova ballot-boxes.
As of 24 April 2014, they have been incorporated into the Oy ve Ötesi Derneği (Association), and their
goals were declared as:
1.In order for a democratic and transparent election environment, leading the way for citizens to
become ballot-box observes which is their constitutional right, and making the necessary arrangements.
2. By expressing the importance of civilian supervision in local administrations, supporting the citizens
to have a say in their areas of residence for issues regarding their quality of life.
3.In the legal regulations regarding elections, by determining the definitions and implementations that
may cause ambiguity, organizing campaigns to raise self-awareness in order to provide their clarification.
“Temiz Seçim Platformu” (gerçek demokrasi için temiz ve dürüst seçim) (“The Clean Election
Platform” – For true democracy, clean and honest elections)
In the 20-month period between the 2007 and 2009 elections, 7.694.809 electorates have been added
into ballot-box electorate lists. However, the average increase of electorates throughout Turkey is around
950.000 per annum, and the number of electorates to be added should have been around 1.590.000 (79.500 x 54
20 months). In this case, to the ballot-box electorate lists, 6.104.809 (7.694.809 - 1.590.000 = 6.104.809) extra
electorates have been added. When, according to TÜİK, the national population is increasing 4%, how is the
number of electorates able to increase 16% should be questioned. As TÜİK states the population of Turkey as
of the end of year 2012 as 74.724.269, credible academic resources state that it is in excess of 81 million. The
approximately 5 million difference between the population numbers is unaccounted for. The number of
electorates who have had their names removed from the Electorate Registry, without their knowledge, are
reaching hundreds of thousands. A lot of electorates realized that they are ineligible to vote when either their
electorate information cards did not arrive or when they went to the ballot box. According to article 79 of the
Constitution, the electorate registries are regulated by the Supreme Board of Election (YSK). However, the
law no 5749 which went into effect in 2008; delegated the duty of regulating electorate registries to, instead of
YSK, the General Directorate of Civil Registration and Nationality operating under the Ministry of the
Interior. The duty of YSK have been limited with “announcement” only. Should the regulation of the
electorate registries be done by an institution operating under the government, being the executive organ; or
by the independent YSK? As a matter of fact, the unconstituonality of this implementation is also subject to
discussion.The finger-painting application was also discontinued. For that reason, it is commonly suspected
that millions of carouselvoting incidents have occurred. Even the vice president of TÜİK himself, Ömer
Toprak, in his statement on 5 December 2008, said “at the risk of punishment, by having two Turkish Identity
Numbers (one being fake), it may be possible to vote multiple times.”
It is public knowledge that just like the case of Afghan citizens being made to cast votes in Tokat in the
last election,a great number of votes in the name of non-electorates, deceased people, people who are abroad,
and the imaginary voters manufactured have been casted.
However, a very significant issue compromising the truthfulness of the elections is the electronic
election system (SEÇSİS) which is globally regarded as being open for manipulation. The system uses TÜrk
Telekom infrastructure, which as a high number of security flaws and a major foreign partner. It is completely
open to outside interference.
A system similar to SEÇSİS have been used in the USA elections as well and it was determined that
manipulations have been made in certain districts.
The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany banned the use of computerized systems in elections due
to them being open to rigging and outside interferences. Wİth similar reasons, Greece did not allow
computerized elections as well.
The prosecution office filed a lawsuit against a poll clerk for charges of ‘forgery’ in favor of AKP in
İstanbul Kağıthane, asking for jail sentence up to 10 years.
The vote theft made in March 30 elections surfaced. In just one of the suspect ballot boxes in İstanbul
Kağıthane, 80 CHP votes were disregarded, and instead, those 80 votes were given to AKP. The prosecution
filed a lawsuit to the poll clerk on the charge of “changing vote results” asking for 10 years of prison sentence.
According to the documents accessed by Aysun Yazıcı from Taraf, the prosecution brought action 55
against the poll clerk S.Y. for the charges of “forgery” in vote count of ballot box number 1396 in Kağıthane.
It is stated on the indictment that in the ballot box numbered 1369, which is just one of the 35 suspected
ballot boxes, the number of CHP votes were recorded as 112 even though they were 192, and the number of
AKP votes were recorded as 149 whereas they were actually 69.
The progress leading to the lawsuit which may lead to the election being repeated in Kağıthane
developed as:30 Mart 2014 yerel seçimlerinin ardından, CHP’nin Kâğıthane’deki sandıkların yeniden
sayılmasına yönündeki itirazı üzerine Kâğıthane İlçe Seçim Kurulu’na şikâyette bulundu(itiraz oylar yeniden
sayılsın diye mi, sayılmasın diye mi).The board, taking the petition into consideration, determined
falsifications on 36 separate ballot boxes. The board determined a vast number of irregularities in the
recording of votes.
Hundreds of Votes were Recorded Erroneusly
According to the findings of the Election Board, in ballot box no 1033, the number of votes for AKP in
district municipality parliament election, despite being recorded in the counting table as 91, have been
reflected on the combination record as 191; in the same ballot box, the number of votes for AKP in
metropolitan municipality mayor election was counted as 100 but transferred to the combination record as
155. In ballot box 1057, it was determined that the number of votes for CHP in municipality parliament
election a was 84 but reflected on the combination record as 4, and the 141 votes received by AKP have been
transferred as 221. The board demanded that CHP votes in this ballot be corrected as 84. 35 different ballot
boxes were detected in this manner, whereas it has been stated that no mistakes have been found in 20 ballot
boxes.
An Investigation for One of the 35 Ballot Boxes
The prosecution examined one of the ballot boxes and informed that a separate investigation shall be
conducted for the remaining 35 ballot boxes. According to the indictment, when the votes were being
recorded, tampering on the numbers obtained after counting of the ballot boxes took place by scribbling over
and adding on the numbers.
Punishment for the crime of “Manipulation of Election Results”
After this, the prosecution, regarding the report of the Kağıthane District Board of Election and the
expert as evidence, prepared an indictment against the Presiding Officer of the ballot. In the indictment, it was
demaded that the defendant be punished for the crimes of “Manipulating the election results”, “forging the
election records” and “Misconduct in office” up to 10 years.
The Uncertainity regarding at which stage those were done
The Chairmanship of Kağıthane District Board of Election, regarding the tampering of votes, judged
that the errors be corrected on the menu in the SEÇSİS program, and the Chairmanship of the Supreme Board
of Election be informed about the correction procedures that are done. The Board also judged that in order for
the manipulation to be investigated, a criminal complaint to be filed to the prosecutor’s office. The board, by
stating “The errors made in 36 ballot boxes are made using pens, corrections on both numbers and text are 56
done, however in order to determine at which stage and by whom these transfers are made, a criminal
complaint will be filed with the İstanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s office”, initiated legal action.
The Expert: Results were tampered with
The Prosecutor’s Office had the table of records, which was registered with the İstanbul Property and
Evidence Unit, examined by the experts as well. In the expert report which states that the numbers were
manipulated by the way of scribbling over them and addition,stated that “On the record subject to
investigation, it was determined that in the part of number of votes for mayor election, in the AKP row, on the
legible number (169) addition of number (1) in front of the preexisting number (69), and the transformation of
number (6) on the digit of tens to (4) by writing over it, and in the text area, the text (onehundredandfortynine)
was formed by scribbling over the preexisting text (sixtynine)… It has informed that due to the reasons of the
tampering being limited, and made by the method of addition and writing over, it is concluded that that it is
not technically possible to determine by whom it was made…”94
II.THE SOCIAL MEDIA
94
Odatv.com (2 September 2014).
The most important media platform of the Gezi protests was the social media. In fact, faced with the
mainstream and terrestrial broadcasting media ignoring, not reflecting and turning a blind eye on the social
opposition in Gezi protests, Gezi created its own media platforms. Social media became the most important
source for communication, calls, information, and warnings were delivered via this channel.
A)The First Tweet
“Kepçeler ve dozerler Gezi Parkı’nı yıkmak üzere Divan Oteli tarafından girmeye çalışıyor. Herkesi
yıkıma karşı durmaya bekliyoruz.”
@ahmetsaymadi , 27.05.2013-23:47 (“The diggers and dozers are
attempting to enter from the Divan Hotel side to demolish Gezi Park. We invite everyone to stand against the
demolution”)
On the date 27 May 2013, a construction machine, by demolishing the walls, entered the park and
ripped apart five trees. Taksim Solidarity, which was following the transformation in the Taksim area since
2011, intervened in the incident. In 28 May 2013, tents were erected in the park by citizens and guard duties
began. On 29 May 2013, by batons and pepper gas, a violent intervention took place against the tent-erecters
and other citizens in the area. The intense interventions that include the incarceration of the tents created
massive reactions in the social media.
The crowd, which consisted of only a few people in the beginning, started to increase as time went by.
İstanbul MP Sırrı Süreyya Önder, along with physically intervening to the case, by tweeting from his personal
account on 29.05.2013 “gezi parkındayım nefes hakkını koruyanlar buraya” (I’m at Gezi Park, everyone who
defend the right to breathe, come here), made a call to every sensitive person in order to protect the park. The 57
crowd stationed in Gezi Park started the day with an intense police intervention on the early hours of the
morning of 31 May 2013. A part of the people trying to get away from this intervention, when trying to jump
over the wall around the perimeter of the park, were injured after the wall collapsed. All of these events were
verbally and visually broadcasted over the social media.
In order to condemn the events that unfolded on the morning hours of 31 May 2013, Taksim Solidarity
made an announcement over the social media for a press statement. The press statement was not allowed to be
made by the police. The individuals who attempted to participate in the press release and became subject to an
intense police intervention, again, conveyed the situation over social media.
Actor Mehmet Ali Alabora, from his Twitter account, shared "Mesele sadece Gezi Parkı değil arkadaş,
sen hala anlamadın mı? Hadi gel" (The issue is not only Gezi Park, didn’t you get it yet? Come on, come).
Columnist Ümit Alan, on 31.05.2013, from his Twitter account, shared the message “kahrolası kibrinizle
insanların gururunu incittiniz herşeyden önce. İstediğiniz kadar gizleyin korku duvarı aşıldı. Bu iş çok
uzayacak” (with your damned arrogance, you hurt people’s pride, before anything else. Hide it as much as you
want, the wall of fear has been overcome. This thing will drag on)
B)The Attitude of the Mainstream Media Regarding the Events, theAttitude of the Society Towards
Mainstream Media and the Rise of Social Media
Since 27 May 2013 to the day 31 May 2013 when events started to escalate, the mainstream media,
with national news channels such as CNN Türk, NTV being the first and foremost, continued with their
regular broadcasting, either totally ignoring the events or manipulating them, which led to the loss of trust
towards media by the people living the events.
On June 1, due to them not paying attention to the events, the live broadcasting vehicles of NTV and
FOX TV were made completely unusable.95
On the day 4 June 2013, when one of the most intense clashes in İstanbul was in progress, while the
international channel of CNN was broadcasting live, CNN TÜRK broadcasted the documentary “Penguins:
Spy in the Huddle”. The fact that CNN emerged around the globe as free press, and its network in Turkey,
instead of live broadcasting the events on the agenda of the country, pretending that they did not happen at all,
may be regarded as one of the most significant events in the loss of confidence to the mainstream media.
Again,afterone of the news networks in Turkey that was regarded as reputable and being trusted, NTV,
ignored the processes taking place just like CNNTÜRK did, and even if it reported them, put its signature
under news far away from the reality of the events; on 03.06.2013 around 12:30 in the noon, hundreds of
people marched to in front of NTV which is placed in the Doğuş Center building, protesting the broadcasting
policy of the channel. The mainstream media was unable to ignore those protests any longer and NTV
broadcasted the protests live.96
On the evening of the same day and on the following days, protests were periodically held in front of
channels such as Habertürk, NTV.
C)The Alternative Media and the Birth of Çapul TV
As a response to the partial and dismissive attitude of the networks described as main stream media,
channels on satellite broadcast such as Halk TV, Ulusal TV, İMÇ TV, Hayat TV, Cem TV, by continuously
making live broadcasts in an attempt to convey the events impartially to the best of their abilities, again, a
media organ trying to broadcast live the entire process until its last moment by a single camera and
internetconnection (ÇAPUL TV), began live broadcasting from inside Gezi Park over the internet.
Çapul TV
The Gezi Park protests, setting aside the fact that in Turkey, the dominant media has its content
determined by the ruling group and the political or structural partiality of its content, unveiled the fact thatit
(the dominant media) became unable to serve its most fundamental purpose for years and lost its legitimacy,
as a reality accepted by all segments of the society. This reality, also announced that the right to communicate
of the people are being seized for years, and people were being deprived of the information they need in the
95
http://www.medyatava.com/haber/gostericiler-kizginliklarini-canli-yayin-araclarindan-cikartti-araclar-bu-halegeldi_90673
96
http://video.ntvmsnbc.com/medyaya-gezi-parki-protestosu-3.html
58
process of comprehending and making sense of the daily life they live. Çapul TV, in such an environment, in
order to witness the Gezi Process and allow others to witness it, to be able to see the feelings, opinions and
experiences of the direct subjects of the resistance, began its live broadcast in the park on 6 June 2013 at time
16.00, which is the 10th day of the Gezi Park demonstrations.
Çapul TV attempts to build its broadcast with opposing the commercialization of the communication
field, demanding the public sharing of information to have effective channels independent of the rulershipcapital supervision and everyone be provided with equal access to those channels, defending that the present
social communication environment be purified from all of its sexist, reactionistic, racist characteristics and
operating as a struggle for the right to association of the media workers, conveying the information of social
events and social groups in its most ‘from inside’ and least constructed way, and by taking into consideration
the purpose of exceeding the given media language and its style of news reporting.
The broadcasting policy of Çapul TV is as follows:97
Supporting the social opposition and movements, and the struggle for a more equalitarian and
democractic social structuring;
Contributing the production of information about every subject regarding human life, which is
intentionally disregarded by information monopolies, and providing a suitable platform for the presentation
and circulation of this type of information;
Opposing hierarchical structure in the information production process and not making a distinction
between professional-amateur;
Never having any ties with commercial activities and covering its own expenses;
Fighting against the commercialization of both the communication process and the information
produced as its result;
D)The Calls to Assembly Made in Social Media
Following the photos, videos and messages broadcasted on social media, with İstanbul, İzmir, Ankara,
Eskişehir, Antakya being the first and foremost, all around the country, decisions to gather for the purpose of
protesting the events are made and these decisions also were broadcasted via social media. In 31 May 2013 at
19:00 in the evening, in all cities of the nation young, senior, student, plaza worker, unemployed, religious,
atheist, gay citizens, football fan groups etc. anyone that could come into mind, who believe their rights are
under thread, began flooding into the streets.
Again, in areas where a vast number of plazas are placed, the employees on lunch break voiced their
reaction by going to malls and chanting slogans protesting the media and their broadcast policies, and returned
to their jobs afterwards.98
97
http://capul.tv/hakkimizda/
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/protesto-avm-ye-sicradi-kanyon/gundem/detay/1718044/default.htm
http://www.haber24.com/fotogaleri/index.php?git=galeri&id=65764&page=1
98
59
E)Reporting in Social Media
In a general perspective, with the intensive live broadcasts made by people participating in the protests
the most using their cell phones through the internet, the broadcasts of the videos and photographs taken by
them, their personal tweets; in an environment where the national news networks being the first and foremost,
the pro-rulership attitude of the mainstream media is paramount where they either report completely
manipulated news or show total disregard to the events, social media became a real news channel.
F) The Tweets for Exposure and Helping Each Other in Social Media
The people who participated in the protests during the Gezi process, from their Twitter and Facebook
accounts, tweeted for helping each other about places where police interventions take place and infirmaries
can be found, lists of required items such as “water, talcid, garbage bag.. etc”, first aid suggestions, legal
rights and contact information for lawyers when necessary, wifi passwords etc.
In addition, from their Twitter and Facebook accounts, the protesters exposed the individuals and
institutions, shops, hotels that by acting in a partial manner helped the brutal violence of the police.
“Gezi Parkına acil olarak yüz maskesi ve sedye gerekmektedir. #direngezi #direntürkiye” (There is
urgent need for face masks and gourneys in Gezi Park) @taksimdayanisma ; 11.06.2013
“Bekar Sokak revirine doktor gerekmektedir” (Doctors are needed in the Bekar Sokak infirmary)
@taksimdayanisma ; 11.06.2013
“12 Haziran Beyoğlu nöbetçi eczaneler, Tünel 293 07 14 Meşrutiyet Cd 78 Beyoğlu” (12 June night- 60
pharmacies, Tünel 293 07 14 Meşrutiyet Av. 78 Beyoğlu) @ist_eczaodasi ; 12.12.2013
“Günlük İhtiyaç Listesi : -korunaklı gaz maskesi, -kova, -yanmaz eldiven, -yağmurluk, -yedek giysi, battaniye, -kütüphaneye kitap” (List of Needed Items for today: -protective gas mask, -bucket, -fireproof
gloves, -extra clothing, -blanket, -books for the library) @taksimdayanisma ; 13.06.2013
“Ankara'da polisin Kennedy caddesinde toplanan gruba saldırdığı haberi geldi #direnankara
#direngeziparkı #occupytürkiye” (Reports of police attacking the group gathered in Kennedy Street in
Ankara) @taksimdayanisma ; 13.06.2013
“Gözaltı tutanağı saatini doğru işletin; yoksa tutanağı imzalamayın. Savcılık izni olmadan parmak izi
vermeyin. #direnankara” (Make sure the time of arrest is correctly written on the arrest record; otherwise do
not sign the record. Do not give fingerprints without permission from the prosecutor’s office)
G)SHARING OF WIFI PASSWORDS
In the period when life in Gezi Park was continuing, the workplaces, restaurants, cafes backed the
sustainment of internet communication by sharing their wifi passwords with the protesters. Those passwords,
from the Facebook and Twitter accounts of Taksim Solidarity, were shared with the protesters.
H) Traps Set Up Against the Demonstrators in Social Media
Observing the functionality of social media among protesters, the police and opposing groups, used this
platform contrariwise and broadcasted misleading notifications, and by issuing fake calls for help, attempted
to trap the demonstrators. Ocassionally, owing to a lack of time for verifying these calls, when demonstators
tried to reach the emergency call, they have been either detained by the police or have been subject to violence
from opposing groups.
I) Twitter Investigations
The social media, along with being a news channel, became indispensable due to its functions of
assembling the society, helping each other, showing solidarity, collecting evidence against the crimes of law
enforcement and civilian individuals and conveying vital information such as health, legal assistance to those
who need it.
This situation, especially by the government authority, was perceived as a threat. In order to prevent
this threat on the table, total restriction of access and to force the users to auto-censorship, intimidation
operations were attempted to be conducted.
For that reason, in İzmir and Adana, tens of Twitter and Facebook users were arrested on charges of
“provoking riots”99. Lawsuits were brought against these individuals.
Furthermore, due to his tweet, even though a number of investigations were launched against actor
Mehmet Ali Alabora on the charges of “openly provoking commission of an offense”, in the following days, 61
the investigations about the actorwere concluded with dismissal of charges. Regarding the issue, actor
Mehmet Ali Alabora stated:
“In Gezi Park, May 30, after the incarceration of the tents in the morning, with the feeling of being
treated unfairly and the intense emotional effect of the event, I tweeted a tweet. In the tweet in question, when
I said the issue is not “just” Gezi Park, I also expressed in the press conference I held on 10 June 2013 that for
me, the issue is about as much as Gezi Park as it is about the destruction of Emek Movie Theatre, the
ammendments in the regulations of Şehir Tiyatroları (City Theaters), the state of imminent shutdown of State
Theaters, the Kuşdili Çayırı in Kadıköy, Haydarpaşa Train Station. Once again, I would like to state that my
tweet is not made in a purpose beyond reflecting my emotions at the time, for a political goal”.
Due to content they shared on Facebook and Twitter, for indimidation purposes, administrative
investigations were launched against a vast number of public servants (academicians, courthouse personnel,
doctors, teachers etc.)
J)Tweets of Administrators
Tweets of the Governor of İstanbul
99
1. Sulh Ceza Mah. 2013 / 1206.
The Governor of İstanbul, Hüseyin Avni Mutlu, during the Gezi Park protests and afterwards, used his
personal twitter account strictly as a tool for issuing orders to the police. In the immediate aftermath of his
tweets, intense police attacks have been made.
Mutlu, regarding Gezi Park, first used the words "İki saat uyudum ve uyuyamadım. Sıcak yatakları
yerine Gezi Parkı'nda yatan bu ülkenin gençlerine selam vermek için ayaktayım" (I slept for two hours and
could not sleep any more. I’m awake to salute the young people of this country, who, instead of their warm
beds, are sleeping in Gezi Park).
Following his tweets such as “Gençler Gezi parkında kuş sesleri, ıhlamur kokusu ve arı vızıltısıyla
huzurlu bir sabah varmış doğru mu? Aranızda olmak isterdim.” (Young people, is it true that in Gezi Park
there is a peaceful morning with birds singing, smell of linden and bees bumbling? I would’ve liked to be
among you.) and “hala anlamayıp soranlar var müdahaleye hazırlık var mı yok mu açık yaz diyorlar. Yok
diyorum yok anlaşıldı mı acaba? İyi geceler......” (there are those who still do not understand and keep asking,
is there a preparation for intervention, write clearly. I’m saying there is not, there is not, is it understood I
wonder? Good night…..) police interventions to the crowd taken place.
In the same manner, after his tweet “Berkin ELVAN toprağa verildi. Büyük bir katılımla gerçekleşen
törende şu ana kadar özen gösteren herkese ve emniyete teşekkür ederim. @valimutlu” (Berkin ELVAN have
been buried. In the ceremony taking place with massive participation, I thank every solicitous person and the
police), a heavy police assault to the crowd participating in the funeral took place.
Ankara Metropolitan Municipality Mayor, Melih Gökçek, filed criminal complainst about 600 people 62
due to the content they shared on Twitter, and unlawfully exposed these people using social media. He is
continuing to use this situation as an anti-propaganda tool against freedom of expression in the Gezi process
and its aftermath.
“Emrah orman mühendisisin değil mi? Aracının plakası 61 TD ...mi? Savcılığa veriyorum da, yanlişlik
olmasin...@e........” @06melihgokcek (Emrah, you are a foresty engineer, aren’t you? Is your vehicle’s licence
plate 61 TD….? I’m submitting your name to the prosecutor, just want to make sure.. @e…)
“Bu yaşta baban yaşında ki insana küfretmeye utanmıyor musun? Yarin Robert Kolej müdürüne ve
babana ne diyeceksin @ea......” @06melihgokcek (At your age, are you not ashamed to curse a man old
enough to be your father? What will you say to the Robert College principal and your father tomorrow
@ea…)
“tamammı ayyaş kızı çapulcu @.............” @06melihgokcek (got it, daughter of a drunk, çapulcu
(marauder) @....)
K) May 30-June 18 Twitter Statistics100
By the most general evaluation, the number of active Twitter users on the date when events began, May
29, was 1.8 million. By June 10, this number reached 10 million.
The number of Tweets made on the night of first intervention May 29 was 7 million, in May 31, it
became 15 million and by June 1, it reached 18 million.
Of the Tweets made between May 31-June 18, the total number of just those related to Gezi Park is 22
million 375 thousand 123.
Sorting the most actively used hashtags; #occupygezi, #occupygeziparki, #direngeziparkı
(resistgezipark), #direnankara (resistankara), #direngaziparki (resistgazipark – Translator’s Note: misspelled
version
of
the
actual
tag),
#direnizmir
(resistizmir),
#tayyipistifa
(resigntayyip),
#sesvertürkiyebuülkesahipsizdeğil (make some sound turkey, this country is not unprotected) , #tayipistifa
(resigntayip – TN: another typo), #direnbesiktas (resistbesiktas), #direntaksim (resisttaksim), #wearegezi,
#durankadin (the standing woman), #direnduranadam (resist standing man),#cevapver (answer), #eylemvakti
(time to protest), #24saatiçindeistifaet (resign in 24 hours), #bizdeğilpolisevedönsün (the police should return
home, not us), #direngezi (resistgezi), #duranadam (the standing). The number these hashtags are used as
messages is 23.9 million.
• #occupygezi, #direngeziparkı, #direnankara, #direngaziparki, #sesvertürkiyebuülkesahipsizdeğil,
#direngezi, #duranadam are distinguished as those exceeding the one million threshold.
• By usage,#direngeziparki, #direnankara, #occupygezi are constituting 57.96% of the hashtags with
13.9 million.
The biggest number of tweets with #direngezi hashtags were made on May 31, Friday between 22-23.
Under the #direngezi hashtag, a total of 10 million 134 thousand 510 (May 30-June 18), under the hashtag
#duranadam, 1,600,623 (June 17-June 18) tweets are made. Under the hashtag #direngezi, the total number of
tweets made from İstanbul, Ankara and İzmir is 8.587.691 (May 31-June 18)
The distribution of those tweets in three cities is:
Ankara: 1,696,650 (May 31-June 18)
İstanbul: 5,933,393 (May 31-June 18)
İzmir: 957,648 (May 31-June 18)
Regarding time of day, the intervals in which hashtags reached the most number of shares:
5 June 2013 between 19:00 20:00 127,138 #direngezi
4 June 2013 between 20:00 21:00 94,276 #direnturkiye
100
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/teknoloji/23573072.asp?noMobile=true
http://onedio.com/haber/twitter-dan-istatistiklerle-gezi-parki-eylemi-117447
http://insanhaber.com/insan-ozel/gezide-sosyal-medya-istatistikleri-h19098.html
63
8 June 2013 between 20:00 21:00 52,839 #direnankara
2 June 2013 between 22:00 23:00 57,001 #occupygezi
L)The Twitter Judgment of the Constitutional Court
Twitter’ın, ana akım meydaya tamamen güvenin kaybolmasından sonra haber alma aracı olarak
kullanımının artması, Gezi ve 17 Aralık süreci ve davamında aktif olarak bilgi edinme aracı olarak
kullanılması nedeniyle, Twitter’a erişim tüm Türkiye için engellendi. After the total loss of confidence in the
mainstream media, due to the use of Twitter as a tool for getting news, and its use of an active tool of getting
information during the Gezi and 17 December process and their aftermath, access to Twitter was banned for
entire Turkey.
After deliberating on the individual applications regarding the Twitter ban, the Constitutional Court
stated that; “There is no legal basis for the procedure provising the total restriction of access to the website,
and it is clear that banning with a decision that has undetermined boundaries is a serious interference to the
freedom of expression which is one of the most fundamental values of democratic societies” and unanimously
ruled to lifting the access restrictions and therefore removed the restriction.101
64
101
http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2014/04/20140403-18.pdf
CHAPTER THREE
POLICE VIOLENCE AND THE RESULTING INVESTIGATIONS
REGARDING ITS CONSEQUENCES
The violence exercised by the law enforcement resulted in many deaths and injuries. The deaths and
injuries, were not confined to subjects of Gezi, but also encompassed law enforcement personnel.While the
investigations launched against “unlawful orders” or crimes committed as a result of stepping outside the
boundaries set by PVSK (law regarding the duties and powers of the police) are still ongoing, political and
administrative authorities conducted an investigation campaign against the participants as well.
These topics will be grouped under three titles:
- Deaths,
- Injuries,
- Investigations.
I. DEATHS
A) The First Death Before June
The use of illegal police violence and seriously injuring vehicles, chemical gasses, in order to suppress
the social opposition in every part of the country, this time, revealed issues andanimosities caused by the
preventation of the demonstrations. As a result of the increasingly intensifiying demonstration
preventation/hostility, the first killing took place.
In Hopa, due to the use of pepper gas against the public, rights defender Metin Lokumcu lost his life.
Hopa, against the police terror directly motivated by the guards of Prime Minister Erdoğan, has been one of
the biggest defiences in the last years. Hopa citizens were characterized as eşkıya (bandits) by the Prime
Minister, and them, just like ‘çapulcu’s(marauders), embraced this as a dignified identity against the
oppressive administration (later on, in June, those who hold mass demonstrations in the parks would be
characterized as “çapulcu” (marauder) by the Prime Minister, and they would embrace this identity which will
name the resistence media as “Çapul TV”).
B) Gezi Deaths
Deaths caused due to violence exercised by the law enforcemend and police, arising from weapons, tear
gas canisters, beatings and intense gas.
1. Those who lost their lives during Gezi protests due to police violence
Ethem Sarısülük
65
On 12.06.2013, in Ankara, during a demonstration, he lost his life with a police bullet.
Despite the footage showing the moment when Ethem Sarısülük was shot, the identity of police
officer Ahmen Şahbaz was kept hidden for a long time.Emniyet Müdürlüğü, görev yerini değiştirdiği
Şahbaz’ın ismini, ölümün silahla olduğunun kesinleşmesi ve raporların incelenmesinin ardından bir kez daha
gelen talep üzerine 18 Haziran 2013′de savcılıkla paylaştı. (talep mi inceleme sonrası geldi, emniyet mi
inceleme sonrası iletti? Belirsiz)
The police officer who shot Sarısülük, Ahmet Şahbaz, gave a statement to Public Prosecutor Veli
Dalgalı on 24 June 2013. After his statement, Şahbaz, who was sent to the court for remanding in custody,
after his interrogation in the Ankara No 13 Magistrate’s Court on duty, was released by reason of “self
defence”.
As a part of the investigation, the indictment prepared against Ahmet Şahbaz was submitted to Ankara
No 6 Assize Court on 12 July 2013. In the 15-page indictmend prepared by Ankara Public Prosecutor Veli
Dalgalı, the murder suspect Ahmet Şahbaz was charged pursuant to Turkish Criminal Code (Türk Ceza
Kanunu-TCK) Articles 81 and 27/1 with “manslaughter by way of unintentionally exceeding the limits of selfdefence” and a jail sentence from one year four months up to five years was demanded. The accused police
officer Ahmet Şahbaz was sentenced to 7 years 9 months and 10 days of jail. Şahbaz, in accordance with law
on the execution of penalties and provisions regarding controlled freedom, will remain in jail for only 4 years
and 10 days .102 (Ankara No 6 Assize Court 2013/349)
Abdullah Cömert
Lost his life on 03.06.2013. Abdullah Cömert, aged 22, lost his life as a result of the tear gas canister
shot from an Akrep (Shorland armoured car) during the protests held in Antakya on June 3. Despite an
investigation regarding the event was launched (Investigation No: 2013/7518), the case commenced only after
one year and one month after his death, on 4 June 2013. As a part of the investigation, statements were taken
from police officers responsible for firing teargas in three different shorland vehicles present on the scene
during the event. The accused police officers did not accept the charges. However, it was determined, by the
report prepared by Forensic Medicine Association First Specialization Department, that a gas canister caused
the death of Abdullah Cömert. Ahmet Kuş, whose statement was taken after this development, in his
statement, he argued that he was trained for firing gas canisters and therefore did not fire directly on the
crowds, but towards the area behind them.D.D., one of the witnesses whose testimony was included in the
indictment, told that on the night of the incident, he was together with Abdullah Cömert, a gas canister was
fired from a police vehicle which arrived to the entrance of the street they were escaping towards, and when
he turned his head, he saw Cömert falling to the ground. A.K., who took Cömert to the hospital with his own
vehicle, said that he saw an Akrep police vehicle on the street’s entrance, and the vehicle moved after Cömert
has been shot.
102
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/ethem-sarisuluk-davasi-nda-sanik-gundem-1934892/)
66
The lawsuit which was to be tried on Hatay No 2 Assize Court, was transferred to Balıkesir No 2 Assize
Court, citing security reasons. For the accused police officer Ahmet Kuş who was not placed under
detainment, on the lawsuit brought for charges “homicide with eventual intent” (TCK 81/1, 21/2), jail
sentence between 20 to 25 years is being demanded. The motion broughttodetain thesuspected police officer
Ahmet Kuş brought by Abdullah Cömert’s attorney Hatice Can was denied (Balıkesir No 2 Assize Court
2014/250)
Medeni Yıldırım
On 28.06.2013, in the demonstration held against the construction attempt of a Kalekol (TN: a fortified
military outpost, the word is formed by combining fortress and outpost) on the Lice district of Diyarbakır, lost
his life after being shot as a result of the gendermarie opening fire on the demonstrators. The investigation
regarding the death of Medeni Yıldırım is still ongoing.
In the report submitted by the Ministry of Interior to the Prime Ministry Inspection board on 2 August
2013, it is stated that “in the footage no 20130628-160808 which was recording during the incident, on the
40th second of the 1st minute, the sound ‘get out of there, I’m opening fire’ is heard, on the seconds 49-51 of
the same footage, it is heard that a person is yelling ‘aaaah’ for two times”.
In the footage coded MVI_7259, it is stated that “in the footage, sounds and displays of intensive rockthrowing, as well as sounds about opening fire with automatic weapons are heard”. In second 16 of the
footage coded MVI_7260, it is written that“a barrel belonging to a long barreled weapon is seen inside the
watchtower, and by the movement of the weapon mechanism and the barrel, it is seen that shots are fired from 67
this weapon.”
The Inspectors include in the report that in the interviews they conducted with the soldiers, the soldiers
stated that 40 gas bombs have been used; however, it surfaced that in the investigation conducted in the crime
scene, 24 gas canisters have been located. On the other hand, call records of 112 Emergency were not
submitted to the file.
It was stated that on the crime scene, 317 empty casings, 24 gas canisters and 2 unexploded bombs were
found. A lawsuit is yet to be filed.103
Ahmet Atakan
In the protest held in Antakya, Armutlu on 09.09.2013, in order to show solidarity with the protests
about the road construction in Ankara which will destroy the METU Forest and the project of Mosque-Cemevi
in Tuzluçayır, he lost his life. Later, footage claiming he fell from a roof were broadcasted. The prosecutor’s
office launched an investigation regarding the matter. All of the eye-witnesses who saw the incident stated
that Ahmet Atakan did not fall from a rooftop and they saw that he was on the ground during the incident. One
day after the incident, on the sewage hatch at the place Ahmet Atakan had been, a tear gas canister with a red
stain and strings of human hair. On the investigation of the matter, a report was prepared stating that it has not
been possible to determine the nature of the red stain. The investigation is still ongoing (2013/12336 Hz.)
103
http://vivahiba.com/article/show/medeni-yildirimin-olum-raporu-hedef-gozetilerek-vu/
Ali İsmail Korkmaz
Ali İsmail Korkmaz, on the night between 2 June and 3 June, on a side street, was brutally clobbered by
police officers and civilians. Ali İsmail, after spending around one and a half month in intensive care, lost his
live on July 10.
In the investigation that was launched, it was unveiled that the footage of the bakery shop camera
looking at the plave where Ali İsmail was beaten have been erasesd. Investigations against the police officers
who took the footage as well as the experts have been also launched. Serkan Kavak, the first suspect captured
regarding Ali İsmail’s murder, was released after the recovery of the lost footage showing the moment when
Ali İsmail was beaten by the Ankara Gendermarie Criminal Labaratory. Later on, charges against Serkan
Kavak was dropped and he testified during the trial phase as a witness.
From the footage, it was determined that among those who brutally beat Korkmaz were police officers,
the bakery shop’s owner as well as civilian individuals such as his relatives. All five of them have been
detained.It was judged that a group of the police officers present at the scene will be tried without being
detained. Those defendants, are being charged in the main lawsuit with TCK 81/1, which is ‘voluntary
manslaughter’. Furthermore, a lawsuit for charges of ‘misconduct in office’ has been brought against the
police officer in the hospital, who did not take Ali İsmail Korkmaz’s statement in the hospital but instead
referred him to the police station. Regarding the doctor on duty in the hospital, after the Forensic Medicine
Association issued a report stating he was not at fault, the charges were dismissed.
After the Governorship and Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office expressed that the case being tried in 68
Eskişehir will be “risky in a security viewpoint”, the main case had a change of venue to Kayseri. It was
judged that the witnesses will testify in Eskişehir and Ankara, and the Korkmaz family in Hatay. Thus, the
case has been divided into four cities (Kayseri Assize Court No 3 2013/212)
Mehmet Ayvalıtaş
On June 2, by the vehicles trying to pass through those who participating in the Gezi protests, he was
run over and killed. The mobese (city surveillance cameras) footage regarding the death (which was recorded
as a traffic accident) have at first, not been submitted to the file, then, following the investigations of the
lawyers on the crime scene, have been submitted (regarding the police officers, after the 4th hearing of the
court, an investigation has been launched). The driver who hit Ayvalıtaş, after his statement was taken in the
prosecutor’s office, was released.
In the investigation file, the records of traffic accident and crime scene investigations made by the
police was included. The İstanbul Public Prosecutor Müfit Büyükçolpan who is in charge of the investigation,
did not examine the crime scene. He denied the demand of the lawyers for the witness testimonies to be taken.
In the indictment, the mobese footage was not included as well.
In the lawsuit no 2013/257 on Anadolu No 8 Assize Court, for the undetained defendants Mehmet
Görkem Demirbaş and Cengiz Aktaş, on charges of “causing death and injury by negligence”, a jail sentence
up to 15 years is being asked.
As the trial was progressing, Fadime Ayvalıtaş, unable to bear the pain of her son’s death, lost her life.
Elif Çermik
On the İstanbul City Rally held on 22 December 2013, after law enforcement attacked on the crowd
demanding “a stop to the looting of the city” with tear inducing chemicals, Elif Çermik has fallen ill, she
suffered a cardiac arrest on the scene, and even though her heart was restarted in the ambulance, her brain
functions did not recover. Çermik, diagnosed with coronary heart disease, was hospitalized. Elif Çermik, who
was in intensive care for 159 days, fighting for her life, died on 30 May 2014.
Berkin Elvan
Elvan, aged 14, who was heavily injured with the tear gas canister fired by the riot police (çevik kuvvet)
on the night of 16 June 2013, in Okmeydanı, after spending 269 days in intensive care, lost his life on 11
March 2014.
The attorney of the Elvan family, by filing a petition with the prosecutor’s office on 1 November 2013,
demanded the identification of the police officers who were on duty on Mahmut Şevket Paşa Neighbourhood
and Mithatpaşa Street on 16 June between hours 07.00-08.00 and used gas bombs, and the footage taken in the
same hours by the Photo Film Branch to be submitted. The prosecutor in charge of the investigation referred
both these demands to the police department. In the response given by the Security Office Directorship
(Güvenlik Büro Amirliği), it was stated “the footage in question is not within the records of the
department”.Çevik Kuvvet Şube Müdürlüğü ise, yazıya rağmen, 16 Haziran saat 08.00’le 17 Haziran saat
08.00 arasında görev yapan polislerin listesini gönderdi. (hangi yazı? Savcılığın yazısı mı güv. Şb. Cevabı mı)
The 7 police officers who gave statements to the prosecutor, stated that they had in-service training
regarding the use of tear gas, 5 officers stated that they did not use tear gas during the events, and 2 officers
argued they did use tear gas but did not cause Berkin Elvan to be injured.
Police officers M.C., O.Ş. and H.B., who gave statements to the Chief Public Prosecutor on 30 January
2014, refused the charges, saying “we were working quite intensively: I’ve been trained for the use of tear gas.
However, during the Gezi events in which we were on duty, I did not in any way use tear gas.”
R.Ç., who stated that he was constantly on duty during the Gezi events, told that “the orders of duty
assignment were coming by phone. On those phone orders, we would report to our duty area. I did not injure
Berkin Elvan by the way of shooting with the tear gas rifle. In the Gezi events during which I intervened, I did
not, in any way, use tear gas. I was holding the shield. I do not accept the charges.”
Ö.K., arguing that he did not cause injury to Berkin Elvan by shooting with a tear gas rifle, said “we
worked very intensively during the Gezi events and our areas of duty were not constant. In the situations
where we intervened during the Gezi events, I used the gas rifle. However, in the event where Berkin Elvan
was injured, I absolutely did not use the gas rifle. In fact, I do not remember neither this event not this
person.”
69
Statements of 5 more police officers who are thought to possibly have used the gas canister causing
Berkin’s death have been taken on 3 May 2014.
Lawsuits regarding those responsible are yet to be brought. However, against those who protested
Berkin’s death, lawsuits have been brought and even sentences have been given.
Zeynep Eryaşar
On June 15, in Avcılar, caused by the intense use of pepper gas, Zeynep Eryaşar suffered a heart attack
and lost her life.
Selim Önder
On June 15, in Gümüşsuyu, caused by the intense use of pepper gas, Selim Önder suffered a heart
attack and lost his life. His relatives believe that the gas triggered the heart failure.104
Serdal Kalakal
In Kadıköy, where he had been residing and working, after the intense and widespread use of pepper
gas by the law enforcement, he suffered a heart attack and died.
Hasan Ferit Gedik
29.09.2013, after the gangs trading drugs in Gülsuyu neighbourhood attacked using firearms on those
demonstrating against drugs, Hasan Ferit Gedik lost his life.
The indictment was accepted by Anadolu No 10 Assize Court. In the indictment, it was stated that 70
Hasan Ferit Gedik was heavily injured by 3 bullet wounds suffered on the left shoulder, throat and head, and
consequently he lost his life. In the indictment, with charges of “felonious injury, forming organized groups
with the intention of committing crime and becoming members of such groups, qualified plunder, attempted
voluntary manslaughter”, 35 people are indicted and jail sentences of between 11 years and 269 years, as well
as life imprisonment will be asked for in the trials. (Anadolu No 10 Assize Court 2014/242 E)
Mehmet İstif
Helost his life on 13.05.2014. İstif participated in the demonstration for supporting Gezi, which took
place prior to the opening ceremony of the 17th Mersin Mediterranean Games, in the Gazi Mustafa Kemal
Avenue.
The police intervened to the protesters with pepper gas, and İstif, having pepper gas sprayed onto his
face from close range, had also been affected. On the next day, he went to the Toros Public Hospital due to the
rashes and swelling formed in his mouth.
As the sores on Mehmet İstif’s mouth detoriated, he underwent surgery on 24 July. The mucosa formed
on İstif’s mouth have been cleaned with the operation. Following this surgery, İstif started having difficulties
in talking and eating. It was determined that the sore in his tongue transformed into cancer on the base of his
tongue. İstif, having a part of his tongue removed due to the cancer, lost his life.
104
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/23578024.asp
Even though it cannot be conclusively proven from the existing medical documents that the cancer in
the mouth was caused directly by pepper gas; it is clear that the irritant effect of the pepper gas sprayed at
close range and towards the face in a way that also encompasses the inside of the mouth, has had an
aggravating, accelerating effect.
İstif decribes the incident as: “At that moment, we became face to face with the police officer who has
been following me and carrying a gas tube on his back. From a distance of about 40 centimeters, he pulled the
trigger in a high pressure manner, I did not have time to shut my mouth. With the pain of the gas filling in my
mouth and throat, I started screaming. I thought that other people suffered the same pain and throuat burn I
suffered and due to fear of being arrested, I did not go to a hospital at that moment.”
İrfan Tuna
On June 5, due to intense use of gas in Kızılay, he suffered a heart attack and lost his life. The Forensic
Medicine Association Ankara Group Chairmanship, on its autopsy report dated 25 November 2013,
determined that the active agent of pepper gas is present on his stomach and there exists edema on his lungs.
However, it left the determination of whether the incident was triggered by pepper gas or not to İstanbul
Forensic Medicine Group Chairmanship. As İstanbul Forensic Medicine Association, without evaluating the
relationship between pepper gas use and heart attacks, declared the incident as a heart attack, the Prosecutor’s
Office dropped the charges.17 Nisan 2014 itibariyle takipsizlik kararına yapılan itiraz hakkında henüz
herhangi bir karar verilmemiştir. (17 Nisanda itiraz mı yapıldı, 17 nisan itibarıyla (as of 17 april) önceden
yapılan itiraza ilişkin karar mı yok?)
2. Those who lost their life while intervening in Gezi protests by executing unlawful orders
Mustafa Sarı
Police Commissioner Mustafa Sarı, while chasing the demonstrators during the intervention on Gezi
Park protesters in Adana, was heavily injured after falling down from the 5 meters high underpass bridge that
was under construction. Commissioner Sarı, despite the best efforts in the hospital, did not recover and lost his
life on June 6.105
Ahmet Küçüktağ
In Tunceli, the groups attemting to protest Berkin Elvan’s death clashed with the police. Police officer
Ahmet Küçüktağ, after being affected by the gas bombs being used by the police, suffered a heart attack.
Police officer Ahmet Küçüktağ, along with 4 protesters affected by the gas bombs have been hospitalized in
Tunceli Public Hospital. Among those who were hospitalized, it was determined that the police officer
Küçüktağ suffered a heart attack and it was stated that despite best efforts, he lost his life.106
II. INJURIES
105
106
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/23443652.asp
http://sozcu.com.tr/2014/gundem/tuncelide-polis-gazdan-etkilendi-hastaneye-kaldirildi-469720/
71
Just as in the cases of deaths, during Gezi protests, there are those who sustained injuries, being
predominantly Gezi protesters, however, among them were are also civilians who were injured while acting in
cooperation with the police officers implementing unlawful orders. Injuries with tear gas canisters, beatings,
throwing into fire, effect of tear gas have happened in great numbers during the Gezi events, nevertheless, not
all information regarding these have been included; only about incidents of losing an eye and publicly known
injuries.
A) Those who sustained injures during Gezi protests due to police violence
Lobna Al Lami
In May 31, as a result of police intervention to the protesters, Allami, aged 34, a Turkish citizen of
Palestinian origin, were heavily injured on the head; and as a result of the gas rifle which police used with
targeting her, underwent 2 brain surgeries. Allami, being a METU (Middle East Technical University)
alumnus, forget the English language in which she had been very fluent. She is attempting to learn to read,
write, and to talk just like a new born baby. Allami, who was residing in Denmark, on the anniversary of Gezi,
said ‘If I were to do it all over again, I would still participate in the Gezi Protests. I used to be a woman who
writes a lot, since I was little. I used to have a blog but at this moment, I’m unable to write anything. I keep
books, magazines, newspapers. One day, I will read them, but when? I finished two universities, and graduate
school in METU.. But they are not there anymore… They are gone… It is not easy to come to terms with it.”
No investigation has been launched for those on duty on the day Lobna Al Lami has been injured.107
72
Dilan Dursun
In Kızılay, where she came to attend Ethem Sarısülük’s funeral, having a gas canister hit her head with
police intervention, Dilan Dursun, who struggled for her life for a long time, gave her statement to the
prosecutor. Dursun told that in the location where she had been shot, the police was not intervening to anyone;
after seeing the TOMA and akrep (shorland) vehicle, she turned around and walked by itself, and said that this
canister was shot deliberately targeting her head.108
Umur Can Erşahin
On May 30, in Gümüşsuyu Street, the tear gas canister fired by the police at close range, after hitting
the person in front of him, deflected and injured Umur Can Erşahin from his leg.109
Hakan Yaman
Hakan Yaman, who was beaten by the police on June 3, in his statement “I saw the riot police a few
hundred meters away. At first, they sprayed pressurized water, next, I’ve been hit by a pepper gas canister on
my belly but I did not fall down. About 5 police officers came and started hitting me. One of them inserted
107
http://www.sendika.org/2013/11/lobna-allami-35tim-5-yasima-dondum-artik-turkiyeyi-istemiyorum-ayse-armanhurriyet/
108
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/dilan_dursun_kafama_nisan_aldilar-1141573
109
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 32
something into my eye and pulled it out. Meanwhile, I’ve been laying on the floor motionlessly. I heard one of
them say “he is a goner, let’s finish him off completely”. They dragged me around 10-20 meters and threw me
on the fire, then left. I got out of the fire by crawling. Later on I was hospitalized”.
According to the Forensic Medicine report, Yaman was seriously injured from his head and face due to
the police attack. He suffered fractures to his nose, cheekbone and jaw. There was a single fracture extending
from his skull to his jaw, and due to being thrown in fire, there were second degree burns on his back. He
completely lost one eye and on his other eye, he suffered a vision loss of 80%. An eye witness recorded the
attack with his mobile phone.Bu videoda iki çevik kuvvet polisi TOMA’nın yakınlarından 4 polistebir kişiyi
ateşten sürüklerken görülüyor. (kaç polis ne yapıyor..)
Yaman filed a legal complaint for charges of attempted murder, however, no noteworthy progress have
been made in the investigation.
Amnesty International calls upon the Ministry of Justice for the conduction of an effective,
independent, impartial investigation regarding the police officers who attacked Hakan Yaman.110
B) Incidents of Losing an Eye
As a consequence of the tear gas canisters fired being aimed at heads and especially eyes, many
incidents of losing an eye have occurred. It has been observed that firing tear gas canisters aimed towards eyes
is a characterstic form of assault in those protests, and the high number of the cases of eye-losses verify the
widespread nature of this form of attack.
Muharrem Dalsüren
On June 3, due to a pepper gas canister, lost his eye. In the investigation, it was understood that the
Police Department did not submit a certain part of the MOBESE (city surveillance cameras) footage, and it is
being awaited that the footage (which was demanded again) to be sent to the prosecutor’s office.
Sarper Gürcan
On June 3, he was shot with a pepper gas canister and lost his eye. The Police Department is not
submitting footage to the investigation file.
Davut Yıldız
Lost 80% of his ability to see due to a gas canister. The list of gas-deploying personnel at the scene and
mobese footage, as a part of the investigation, are still being awaited to be sent.
Murat Özdemir
On May 31, lost his eye due to a gas canister. In the investigation, it has been unable to identify the
police officer.
Mehmet Murat Aslan
110
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 32
73
Mehmet Murat Aslan, aged 25, on June 5 in Antakya, Armutlu, during the protests, owing to the gas
canister fired by the police, lost his left eye. One of those present in the scene stated that the incident occurred
due to the gas canister fired by the police. The preliminary investigation is still ongoing. The prosecutor’s
office, due to the fact that the law enforcement on duty on the day of the event did not have helmet numbers,
asked for the mobese footage and inspecting them. Other than that, there is no development. His lawyer, Cihat
Açıkalın, applied to the Ministery of Interior for the compensation of damages to Mehmet Murat Aslan, but
stated that he has not received a response since. Mehmet’s treatment is ongoing.
Vedat Oğuz
In Antalya, on 1 June 2013, Vedat Oğuz, to whom the gas canister shot by the police hit, lost his right
eye. No investigation regarding the matter has been launched.
Çağdaş Küçükbattal
On the day of 31 May 2013, while walking in Tarlabaşı Boulevard towards Taksim Square, as a result
of the pepper-gas-weapon-using police officers coming out of their hiding point and shooting with aiming
deliberately, was shot from his right eye by a gas canister. His right eye has no vision. The treatment progress
is ongoing. He filed a legal complaint about the police officers, however, no developments have been made
regarding the investigation.111
Ersin Malkoç
On 17 December 2013, as he was at the entrance of İstanbul Beyoğlu Sadri Alışık Street, Ersin Malkoç, 74
who joined the demonstrations protesting corruption, as a result of the plastic bullets used by the police aimed
on his eye on purpose, he was injured from his eye. Despite filing a criminal complaint to the prosecutor’s
office, no action was taken. At the same time, despite applying to the administration and demanding his
pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages to be compensated, his demand has been rejected. Then, a full remedy
action has been brought.112
Burak Ünveren ve Selim Polat
According to the Gezi Parkı Direnişi ve Sonrasında Yaşananlara İlişkin Değerlendirme Raporu
(Evaluation Report regarding the Gezi Park Resistance and Later Developments) by İHD (İnsan Hakları
Derneği – Human Rights Association), among the 6 people who lost their eye in İstanbul, one of them is
Burak Ünveren. On 2 June 2013, during the protests held in İstanbul, Burak Ünveren, a research assistant in
Yıldız Technical University Faculty of Economics and Selim Polat, student in the same school,başlarına isabet
eden gaz bombası fişeği ve plastik mermiyle gözlerinin görme yetisini yitirdi. (anlaşılmıyor)113
Hülya Arslan
According to the report prepared on 2013 by Amnesty International regarding Gezi Park Protests, Hülya
Arslan, a recently-graduated university student, on the day of 11 June when the intervention to the park took
111
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 31
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 32
113
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 33
112
place, while was with her mother on Gezi Park, during the police intervention as a result of the violence she
suffered, lost her right eye.114
Volkan Kesanbilici
On the day of May 31, on Tarlabaşı Avenue, has been shot from his eye with a plastic bullet and lost his
left eye. The information repeatedly requested by the prosecutor’s office from the police department were not
submitted for 13 months. The Prosecutor’s Office, on 27 May 2014, demanded for the fourth time that the
clear identities of the police officer on duty at the crime scene to be submitted and the camera footage to be
sent, however, the Police Directorate left those questions unanswered. The investigation is still in progress,
however, it was discovered that the prosecutor in charge of the investigation was transferred to Antalya.115
Mehmet Reha Baran
Fashion Designer Mehmet Reha Baran, in İstanbul, during Gezi Park Protests, as a result of the gas
canister fired by the police, lost his right eye. In Mehmet Reha Baran’s lawsuit, a scandalous defence was
made by the Ministry of Interior. The Ministry, in its defence, stating that the police attacks made by
pressurized water and pepper gas are legal, found that Baran to be made blind is lawful. Furthermore, despite
the fact that Baran became blind as a result of the gas canister has been established by hospital reports, it said
that “It is not known whether the plaintiff has really became blind from a tear gas canister or not”.116
Alihan Alhan
On 16 June 2013, due to the stun grenade launched by the police on Taksim Square exploding next to 75
him, Alihan Alhan’s left eye sustained a permanent loss of vision.117
III. INVESTIGATIONS / LAWSUITS AND ARRESTS
Gezi katılımcılarına karşı soruşturma ve dava açılan sosyo-mesleki kategoriler yelpazesi oldukça
geniştir. (wat?)A massive practice of arrests have been implemented. On the other hand, the number of
investigations and lawsuits launched against the law enforcement officers committing misconduct in office
and crimes as a result of unlawful orders have been very limited. The successively launched investigations
may be viewed as a way of preventing the exercise of rights. The addressees may be grouped as professional
organisations, members of press and individuals.
A) Investigations/Lawsuits
Lawsuits breaching collective exercise of freedom of expression
The May 1 Cases: Lawsuits filed against trade union executives and the organization committee
114
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 33
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 33
116
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 33
117
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 34
115
Since the year 2007, the decisions of the trade unions to celebrate May 1 in Taksim Square, despite
being a constitutional right, have been attempted to be prevented by the rulership with the desire of not
rendering social opposition visible. The precautions taken to accomplish this included violence as well, and by
violating international regulations and the Constitution, the demonstrations were not allowed to be held. In
fact, investigations were launched against the organization committee alleging that they committed crimes,
those investigations for the most part ended with dismissal of charges, and even though sometimes lawsuits
have been brought, those concluded with judgments of acquittal.
With the investigations, it was aimed to discredit the executives in the eyes of the society and the
members of their organisations, as well as pointing them as targets, and the investigations have been attempted
to be used as a threat.
Beyoğlu Magistrate’s Court 2007/729 E, İstanbul Public Prosecutor’s Office 2007/21214 Hz.Beyoğlu
Public Prosecutor’s Office 2008/9241 Hz., Şişli Public Prosecutor’s Office 2007/5890 Hz., , İstanbul Public
Prosecutor’s Office 2013/64789 Hz., İstanbul No 28 Criminal Court of First Instance 2014/339 E
Taksim Square: “The freedom of and right to choose the venue of freedom of expression” (DİSK –
KESK ECHR Judgment)
The Gezi Park, after which the Gezi protests have been named, after the intervention to the park, due to
being adjacent to Taksim Square, swiftly became the place of opposition in terms of venue. The place of
Taksim Square in the country’s politic life, between the rulership and social opposition as a venue to hold
assemblies and demonstrations, has been a topic of discussion which has always been on the agenda.
The prohibition of Taksim Square to social opposition, especially on the day of May 1 Labor and
Solidarity day; with the application 38676/08 by DİSK and KESK, have also been discussed in the European
Court of Human Rights level, and it was determined that the national laws, regulations etc. legislations and the
applications of prohibition are against international conventions and human rights values, and it has been
stated that “in the collective exercise of freedom of expression, the choice of venue is part of the freedom of
expression”, and henceforth Turkeyhas been convicted of violating the freedom of expression.
This judgment, as per Article 90 of the Constitution, become a part of the law of which its application is
mandatory, therefore the prohibitions and obstructions brought on collective exercise of freedom of expression
turned into unlawful orders and practices.
However, despite all that, public authorities persistently breached the collective exercise of freedom of
expression, and the Gezi protests became a point of origin in the exercise of this very freedom.
Buna göre; Gezi protestoları ile ilgili olarak, hak ihlalleri şu şekilde adlandırılabilir. (devamı yok?
Tercümesi Accordingly; regarding the Gezi protests, the violations of rights may be referred as such.)
The Taksim Solidarity Case
On 8 July 2013, the day in which the Governor of İstanbul Hüseyin Avni Mutlu, along with the Chief of
Police of the Province, declared on a press conference that Gezi Park is “open for public service once again”,
76
Taksim Solidarity members made a call to go to the park, however, they were arrested on their way from
İstiklal Street to the park. They were charged with forming organized groups with intention of committing
crime, unarmed participation into unlawful assemblies and marches, failing to voluntarily disperse after being
warned to do so, inciting the public for unlawful assemblies and demonstration marches, and resisting in order
for the prevention of performance of duties. Their houses have been searched, their computers and cell
phones have been seized, their properties were taken and they were unlawfully kept under arrest. As a result of
the objections made by the lawyers, all of the actions of the prosecutor’s office, the captures, arrests, house
searches, seizure of computers have been rescinded.
It was said that those who participated in the meetings representing Taksim Platform; Ali Çerkezoğlu,
the Secretary of İstanbul Chamber of Medicine, Mücella Yapıcı, the Second Chairwoman of the
Environmental Impact Evaluation Board of the Chamber of Architects, Beyza Metin the Chairwoman of
İstanbul Branch of Chamber of Electrical Engineers, Ender İmrek, an executive of the İstanbul Branch of
Chamber of Architecs and Haluk Ağabeyoğlu, member of Gezi protests platform, “due to them planning the
events and directing them for a long while, have took form of an organized criminal organization and acted
accordingly” and for planning the events and directing them for a long while, it was asked that Article 220/1
of the TCK to be applied.
On 28.02.2014, a second indictment by the İstanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office has been drafted
and lawsuits were brought against 26 persons. The search warrants which were rescinded by legal judgments
are still present in the case file.118
For five persons, sentencing due to Article 220/1 of the Criminal Code and Article 34/1 of the
Demonstrations Law, and for one person, Article 33/1 of the Law on Demonstrations and Public Meetings,
and for the others, Article 32/1 of the Law on Demonstrations and Public Meetings have been demanded,
separately (İstanbul No 33 Criminal Court of First Instance 2014/88)
Gezi Lawsuits against Groups of People
Violation of Law Number 2911
- In the lawsuit still in progress in İstanbul No 55 Criminal Court of First Instance (2013/427) , 255
defendants, with charges of “Violation of Law No 2911, resisting a police officer on duty, resisting for
prevention of performance of duties, damaging public property, improper assumption of public duty, improper
use of special clothing, supporting an offender, damaging worship places by the way of dirtying and theft” are
being prosecuted and demanded to be sentenced to jail between 1 to 11 years. The physicians who attempted
to treat the citizens who took shelter in the Dolmabahçe Bezmi Alem Valide Sultan Mosque, in this lawsuit,
being prosecuted for the charges of breaching the Articles 153/2-3 and 283/1 of the Criminal Code.
- Against a large number of citizens who attended protests in Kırklareli, investigations alleging
violations of Law No 2911 have been launched. In total, at least 1094 citizens are under investigation. A large
part of the lawsuits brought have ended in acquittal.119
118
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 26-28
77
- In Kayseri No 8 Criminal Court of First Instance, regarding the day June 1, 161 people are being tried
for participating in the Gezi Protests and charged with “Violating Law No 2911, resisting for prevention of
performance of duties, defamation, damaging public property, damaging property, defamation via a voice,
written or video message”. In the indictment, the “public finance” is indicated as the victim (Investigation
Number: 2013/23375)
- In the case being tried on Kocaeli No 4 Criminal Court of First Instance, with the charges of “violation
of law 2911, damaging public property, resisting for prevention of performance of duties”, 238 people are on
trial.
- In the case no 2013/655 in Manisa No 3 Criminal Court of First Instance, due to joining the protests
held on different dates between 1 – 20 June with charges of “violating law no 2911”, lawsuits were brought
against 183 persons. In this lawsuit, the plaintiff is the Prime Minister at the time.
- In Muğla, as a part of the police report drafted on September, statements were taken from around 200
people.
- In the case number 2014/30 of Bodrum No 3 Criminal Court of First Instance, with charges of
“violating law no 2911”, 20 people have been sued.
- In Samsun No 7 Criminal Court of First Instance, for charges of “violating law 2911 and damaging
public property”, lawsuits were brought against 109 people.
- In Isparta, against 60 people who participated in Gezi on dates 1-2 June, investigations were launched 78
charging “violating law no 2911,resisting for prevention of performance of duties and damaging public
property”. However, the Public Prosecutor decided to drop the charges (Investigation No: 2013/5748 –
Decision No:2013/3335)
- In the lawsuit being tried on Bodrum No 2 Criminal Court of First Instance, lawsuits against 55 people
were brought for charges of “violating law no 2911 and resisting for prevention of performance of duties”
(Case No 2014/34).
- In the lawsuit being tried on Bodrum No 4 Criminal Court of First Instance, lawsuits against 2 people
were brought for charges of “violating law no 2911 and resisting for prevention of performance of duties”
(Case No 2013/539).
- In Anadolu No 27 Criminal Court of First Instance, on the case involving charges of violating law no
2911, on 29 February 2014, for 7 people, judgments of acquittal were given for lack of criminal intent.
- On Anadolu No 16 Criminal Court of First Instance, with charges of violating law no 2911, 13 people
are on trial (Case No 2013/608). For that case, 13 people were arrested on 11-12 September 2013 in Kadıköy.
- In the case before Anadolu No 27 Criminal Court of First Instance with charges of violation of law no
2911, on 27 February 2014, 7 persons were acquitted due to lack of criminal intent (Case No 2013/427).
119
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 37
- In the case before İstanbul No 43 Criminal Court of First Instance, 1 person was acquitted. According
to the judgment, this person having participated in the demonstration and carrying a dust mask cannot be
considered as adequate evidence (Case No 2013/245)
- In the case before İstanbul No 49 Criminal Court of First Instance, 12 people were acquitted.
Regarding the sentence given to 1 person, deferment of the announcement of the verdict for 5 years has been
decided.(Case No 2014/89).
- In the case before İstanbul No 48 Criminal Court of First Instance, 4 people were given judgments of
acquittal (Case No 2013/314).
- In the case before İstanbul No 50 Criminal Court of First Instance, judgments of acquittals were given
before the commencement of trials for 23 people (Case No 2013/460)
- In İzmir No 5 Criminal Court of First Instance, 6 people are being tried for charges of “violation of
law no 2911 and resisting officer on duty”.
- In the case brought before Kırşehir No 2 Criminal Court of First Instance Case No 2014/26 against 35
people for charges of “violation of law no 2911”, on 2 Feburary 2014, taking under advisement that holding
assemblies and demonstrations is a freedom of expression with collective quality, the judgments given by the
Court of Cassation and ECHR case-law, stating that it is not necessary even to perform an arraignment for
those persons, pursuant to CMK (Code of Criminal Procedure) Article 223/2-a, judgments of acquittal were
granted.
- In Kocaeli No 6 Criminal Court of First Instance, against 10 people who joined the protests on June
16, with charges of “violation of law no 2911, felonious injury, damaging property, resisting for preventing
performance of duties, damaging places of worship and mezatlıklara” and additionally for 3 defendants
“provoking commission of offence”, lawsuits were brought (Case No 2013/42). 2 persons being tried in this
case were held under detainment between 20 June – 14 August.
- For 3 persons tried for charges of “violation of law no 2911” in Kocaeli No 4 Criminal Court of First
Instance, judgments of acquittal were granted.
- Manisa Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor launched an investigation regarding a total of 39 people
who actively directed and provoked the demonstrations. For 17 people who were being investigated due to
chanting ‘ Tayyip Tayyip Baksana, AVM AVM alsana’ (TN: Means something like “Tayyip, Tayyip, hey
look, here is an AVM (mall), here is an AVM, take it”), the charges were dropped.
- In Mersin, following the complaints filed by Mersin Provincial Security Directorate and Mersin
Yenişehir Municipality, against 54 persons, for charges of violation of law no 2911, an indictment was drafted
on 8 October 2013. Regarding this indictment 27 persons, and on June 2, 4 persons were arrested and detained
for 1 day each. In the second trial of the case before Mersin No 9 Criminal Court of First Instance, for 51 of
the 54 people who were being tried without being detained, judgments of acquittal were granted. The court,
due to “joining the protests while armed, having rocks in their possession and throwing rocks at the police”,
sentenced 3 persons to 6 month jail sentences, but those sentences were suspended.
79
- In Mersin No 8 Criminal Court of First Instance, 52 people are on trial for charges of “violation of law
no 2911”. There was a motion to consolidate this case with the 54-defendants case but this was denied.
- In Marmaris, regarding the Gezi Protests, in the No 2 Criminal Court of First Instance, 2 other cases
are being heard. (Case No 2013/318 and 2013/328)
- In Muğla, Marmaris, in the investigation launched against 9 people for participating the June 1
protests and violation of law no 2911, the charges were dropped.
- In the case being heard by the Safranbolu Criminal Court of First Instance, due to their participation in
protests between 31 May – 7 June and charges of “violation of law no 2911”, lawsuits were brought against 28
people. (Case No 2014/154)
- In Sakarya No 4 Criminal Court of First Instance, due to joining the protests on 1-2 June and charges
of “violation of law no 2911”, lawsuits were brought against 24 people (Investigation No: 2013/11527,
2013/443)
- In Sakarya No 2 Criminal Court of First Instance, in the case brought against 46 people for joining the
protests on 18 December, resisting a public officer and “violation of law no 2911”, judgments of acquittal
were granted. (Case No 2013/455)
- In Samsun No 4 Criminal Court of First Instance, following the June 1 protests, for charges of
“violation of law no 2911, organizing the protests, guiding the groups, resisting a police officer and damaging
public property”, 39 people are on trial. In Samsun No 5 Criminal Court of First Instance, for charges of 80
“violation of law no 2911, resistance and damaging public property”, lawsuits were brought agains 33 people
(Case No 2014/187, Investigation No: 2013/19973)
- In Tekirdağ No 3 Criminal Court of First Instance, in the case where 8 people were on trial, by the
reason of “the action not constituting a crime, remaining within democratic reaction boundaries”, judgments
of acquittal were granted (Case No 2013/366).
- In the case before Tokat No 1 Criminal Court of First Instance, Tokat İl Müdür-lüğü, Governor of
Tokat Mustafa Taşkesen and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was indicated as victims and 138 people are on trial.
- In Uşak No 3 Criminal Court of First Instance, against 3 persons, for charges of “violation of law no
2911, resisting an officer on duty and insulting” lawsuits were brought. After the case has been heard,
judgments of acquittal were granted.
- In Şarköy Criminal Court of First Instance, against 4 persons, for charges of joining the Gezi protests
on 17 and 19 June and “violation of law no 2911”, lawsuits were brought. 2 persons were also sued for the
same charges. (Case No 2014/69)
Cases Against Physicians
Against the administration of İstanbul Medical Chambers, for charges of “unlawfully, providing
unauthorized and unsupervised health services called infirmaries and performing acts outside their functions”,
a lawsuit was filed on January 2014.
In the case before İstanbul No 55 Criminal Court of First Instance (Case No 2013/512), the citizens who
took shelter in the Dolmabahçe Bezmi-Âlem Valide Sultan Mosque, as well as the physicians who strived to
treat them are on trial.
Regarding the 3 executive board members who are serving in healdh institutions under the Ministry of
Health, due to “the İstanbul Medical Chamber, under the name of voluntary infirmary, establishing three
infirmaries in İstanbul Taksim Gezi Park, and organizing the treatment of patients at these locations” an
investigation has been launched.
Cases Against Lawyers
Members of İstanbul Bar Association and Progressive Lawyers Association (Çağdaş Hukukçular
Derneği), on June 11, as a response to the police violence in Gezi protests, held a protest in Çağlayan
Courthouse. Tens of lawyers were arrested, brutally, even being dragged on the floor. The Prosecutor’s Office,
on the other hand, launched investigations against the 44 lawyers who were subjected to violence (İstanbul
Public Prosecutor’s Office 2013/84674).
In Anadolu No 15 Criminal Court of First Instance, on the case being heard regarding 2 lawyers,
judgments of acquittal were granted (Case No 2014/15).
İstanbul’da avukatların gözaltına alınmasını protesto eden 17’si avukat toplam 18 kişi hakkında Bursa
Savcılığınca takipsizlik kararı verildi.(kim nerede protesto etmiş? Anlaşılmıyor)
Cases against social media and members of press
a) Facebook-Twitter soruşturmaları kapsamında, Gezi olayları sırasında facebook ve twitter üzerinden
paylaşımda bulundukları varsayılan ve bu nedenle açılan bir davaya Recep Tayyip Erdoğan katılmayı talep
etmiştir (Ankara 20. Sulh CM, 2013/481). (bozuk cümle)
Facebook
For charges of instulting the Prime Minister, in the lawsuit brought against K.K.T where a jail sentence
from 4 month to 2 years 8 months are asked for, judgment of acquittal was granted. The Court, in its judgment
told that “the concrete event occurred in 15 June 2013, which is a period when nationwide and heavy
criticisms were made against the administration in both the press and on the streets, and the defendant’s words
which are the subject of the crime, it is viewed that they were said in such an environment as a rude political
criticism, therefore regarding the crime of insult, due to its elements not being formed, it became necessary to
grant a judgment of acquittal.”. In the judgment, mentioning the case-law of Article 10 of ECHR, the
statements “the acceptable limits of critique towards a politician is wider than they are for a private individual.
A politician, unlike a private individual, knowingly and inevitably submits his every word and action for close
inspection by the journalists and the public; which is why he must show higher tolerance.” were included.
Twitter
The case known as the Twitter Case was brought on İzmir No 1 Magistrate’s Court, after the official
report (without any order from the Public Prosecutor) made by the superintendent and police officers (Case
81
No 2013/1206). In the lawsuit, the Prime Minister was indicated as the victim. In the scope of the
investigation launched against 38 people on 9 December 2013, charges were dropped for 9 people; however,
lawsuits were brought against 29 people. For those persons, jail sentences up to 3 years are being asked. For
the 38 people against whom operations were carried out and held under arrest for 35 hours, the İzmir Bar
Association, regarding the police officers and prosecutors who took the action, filed a criminal complaint for
charges of “misconduct in office, unlawful seizure of data, defamation, preventing the exercise of the freedom
of belief, thought and opinion”.
b) REDHACK (T. K.): For charges of committing cyber-criminal acts related to Gezi protests and
leading the Turkey branch of RedHack, he was arrested and jailed. Kulaçoğlu was later released pending trial.
c) The Sol Newspaper Case: After the death of Ahmet Atakan who lost his life during the
demonstrations held in solidarity for ODTÜ resistance, due to the headline news including photos of the
young persons killed during Gezi Protests and titled “Sorumlusu Erdoğan (Erdoğan is the one responsible)”,
and the news dated September 12 titled “Gazcı Bakan Halkı Suçladı (The tear-gasser Minister accused the
public)”, the lawsuit brought for charges of “provoking people not to obey the laws, openly provoking
commission of offense, praising the offense and the offender, provoking people to be rancorous and hostile”
are still being heard before İstanbul Anadolu No 2 Criminal Court of First Instance.
d) İsmail Saymaz: A reporter for the newspaper Radikal, İsmail Saymaz, from an e-mail he received
from the Governor of Eskişehir, Azim Tuna, was threatened to be punished unless he halts his inquiries
regarding the death of Ali İsmail Korkmaz. In the e-mail, the governor is said to have told “(Regarding the 82
punishment of the suspect) Even a life sentence will not be enough for you. If you ever discuss this issue with
commenting in the same manner, you are a turd and ignoble. Do not forget that there is a place six feet under
as well, we shall eventually meet there.” The Minister of Interior at the time, Muammer Güler, even though
stated that they will launch an investigation against the comments of the governor, no information was
released to the public about whether an administrative action was taken regarding the issue. Saymaz filed a
legal complaint against the Governor Azim Tuna for being threatened. The case is still ongoing.
e) Gökhan Biçici: Journalist Gökhan Biçici, while shooting footage for a network during a Gezi Park
protest in İstanbul, was beaten by the police and held under unofficial custody for hours. The administrative
investigation launched for the beating of Gökhan Biçici, despite the existence of many video footage
regarding the event, was closed on November 2013.
f) Halk TV, Ulusal TV and Cem TV: Investigations were launched by RTÜK (The Radio and
Television Supreme Council), for charges of “provocation of violence, breaching the principles of
broadcasting via programmes including content harming the mental, moral and physical development of
children and the youth”, due to informing about and broadcasting the events. RTÜK issued heavy fines against
Halk TV, Ulusal TV and Cem TV. For instance, Halk TV was fined 146 thousand TL.
According to the statement made by Reporters Without Borders on 3 June 2014120;
120
http://en.rsf.org/turquie-more-police-attacks-on-media-12-03-06-2014,46381.html
There were at last seven cases of violence against journalists in Istanbul on 31 May. Berna Sahin,
Gökhan Biçici of the Dokuz8Haber news website , Zeynep Kuray of the pro-Kurdish news agency ANF and a
Halk TV cameraman were attacked by police while covering the protests.
Elif Akgül, a woman reporter for the Bianet news website, was injured by a rubber bullet. Pepper spray
was sprayed in the face of Erdal Imrek, a reporter for the left-wing daily Günlük Evrensel, at close range. His
colleague, Duygu Ayber, was attacked by police after showing his press card. Police officers insulted Ekin
Karaca of Bianet and Sinem Ugurlu of Günlük Evrensel.
In Ankara, a teargas canister struck freelancer Piero Castellano in the chest, causing injuries that needed
emergency treatment but were not life-threatening. Four other journalists were beaten with batons while
covering clashes between protesters and police.
The Lawsuits brought for charges of defamation
- Until 27 July 2013, in different dates, 715 people were arrested. By the investigating prosecutors, 179
people have been demanded to be detained pending trial and among them, 41 were detained. Of those who
were detained, 10 people were released after objections. Due to broadcasts made in press and media which
may constitute the crime of defamation or of similar nature, 110 investigations have been launched, and most
of them are investigations conducted for charges of defamation of high-level government officers.
- According to the press release on 12 December 2013, regarding the Gezi protests, “40 separate
indictments were lodged, criminal cases were filed against 308 suspects, and 36 separate investigations are
still in process. In the Law on Fight Against Terrorism Investigation Bureu, due to crimes in the scope of the
Law on Fight Against Terrorism and violation of law no 2911, 6 separate investigations are ongoing. These
investigations were partially launched earlier, but include the Gezi Park protests as well as acts conducted on
different locations and times.” 121
- In the case before Aydın No 2 Magistrate’s Court, due to chanting “Murderer Erdoğan”, for charges of
defamation of a public officer, 2 persons were sued (Case No 2013/1617). By the court, a fine of 7.080 TL
was issued. It was judged that the announcement of the verdict to be deferred. An appeal application was
made against the judgment of deferment of the announcement of the verdict, with a motion for a judgment of
acquittal.
- In the case before Aydın No 1 Magistrate’s Court, due to chanting “Murderer Erdoğan”, for charges of
defamation of a public officer, 2 persons were sued (Case No 2014/265). Due to a lack of intent and
negligence, per CMK article 223/2-c, a judgment for acquittal was granted.
- In Manisa, in the investigation launched for open defamation of a public officer due to his duties in his
absence, for 1 person, on 26 Februrary 2014, a decision to not to prosecute was given.(Investigation No
2013/9934).
121
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 28
83
- In Gaziantep No 19 Criminal Court of First Instance, against 16 people who were arrested in Antep
during Gezi protests for “resisting an officer on duty and defamation of statesmen”, a lawsuit has been filed.
- In Adana No 10 Assize Court, in the scope of TMK (Law for Fight on Terrorism) and charges of
“violation of law no 2911”, 7 people were sued.
- In the indictment before Çerkezköy Magistrate’s Court, for charges of “defamation of Recep Tayyip
Erdoğan” who was indicated as the victim, the case of the investigation launched against 7 people will be
before the court (Indictment No 2013/4207).
- In Anadolu No 16 Criminal Court of First Instance, 13 people are on trial for charges of violating law
no 2911 (Case No 2013/608). In this case, 13 people were arrested on 11-12 September 2013 in Kadıköy.
- In the lawsuit before İstanbul No 43 Criminal Court of First Instance, for 1 person, a judgment for
acquittal was granted. According to the judgment, this person having participated in the protest and carrying a
dust mask cannot be considered as adequate evidence (Case No 2013/245).
- In the case before İstanbul No 49 Criminal Court of First Instance, judgments of acquittal were
granted for 12 people. The sentence given for 1 person was judged that the announcement of the verdict to be
deferred for 5 years (2014/89).
- In the case before İstanbul No 48 Criminal Court of First Instance, 4 people were granted judgments
of acquittal (Case No 2013/314).
- In İzmir No 5 Criminal Court of First Instance, 6 people are on trial for charges of “violation of law no 84
2911 and resisting an officer on duty”122
Cases Against Children
- In İstanbul No 7 Juvenile Court, on 3 different lawsuits, a total of 21 children are on trial (Case
number for the case in which 13 children are on trial: 2013/51, for the case with 7 children: 2013/801, for the
case with 1 child: 2014/121)
- In the case before Aydın Juvenile Court, due to chanting “Murderer Erdoğan”, a lawsuit for chargers
of defamation of a public officer, a lawsuit was brought for 1 child (Case No: 2014/118)
- In Manisa, in the investigation conducted for allegations of using words and text constituting
defamation, a decision to not to prosecute was given.
- In Sakarya Juvenile Court, against 2 children, for joining the protests on 3-4-5-6 June and charges of
“violation of law no 2911”, a lawsuit has been filed (Investigation No: 2013/11640 and Case No: 2013/745)
- In Samsun Juvenile Court, 27 children are on trial.
- In Konya, the 16 year old high school student who was arrested and detained pending trial for charges
of defamation of the President, was not released despite the objection; after being held in detainment for two
122
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 37
days, has been released only after the reactions sparked from the public. High school student M.E.A. will be
tried without detainment.123
- In İzmir, on 1 June 2013, following a Gezi Park demonstration, 24 children were arrested. Against
these children, on İzmir No 5 Juvenile Court, for charges of Violation of Law No 2911 on Demonstrations and
Public Meetings, damaging public property and resisting for prevention of performance of duty, lawsuits have
been filed. After the proceedings concluded, 23 children were acquitted of all charges, only one child was
sentenced for damaging property for five months and 16 days jail time, and this sentence was suspended. The
reasoned verdict of the court is as follows:
“Regarding the children, it is stated by Articles 26 and 34 of the Constitution that everyone has the
right to express and disseminate his/her thoughts and opinions by speech, in writing or in pictures or through
other media, individually or collectively, andthe right to hold unarmed and peaceful meetings and
demonstration marches without prior permission; taking into account that these rights have also been secured
by ECHR judgments, even in the case of accepting that these children have participated in the meeting and
demonstration stated in the indictment, this action would be in the scope of the fundamental rights and
freedoms secured by both the Constitution and the judgments of ECHR, this would require judgments for
acquittal to be granted…”124
- In year 2013, especially in the graduation ceremonies of universities and high schools, demonstrations
with chanting, posters, banners are held, and valedictorians included Gezi events in their speeches. However,
later on, investigations against them have been launched, and their valedictorianships have been revoked. In 85
İzmit, regarding I. Ö., who graduated from Gazi Anadolu High School at the top of his class, but had his
valedictorianship revoked by the decision of disciplinary board for mentioning the Gezi Park protests in his
speech he made in the graduation ceremony, Kocaeli No 2 Administrative Court granted a stay of execution.
Cases Against Professors
- July 2013, an investigation against Uludağ University Faculty of Law Professor Asst. Prof. Dr.
Timuçin Köprülü was launched, for attending and making a speech in the graduation ceremony of the Faculty
of Law with a t-shirt that says “Resist”. The petition launched by the faculty of Ankara University was signed
by 702 professors.
- By the rectorship of Abant İzzet Baysal university, investigations were launched against 140
university students for joining the Gezi Protests. By the Marmara University Faculty of Communication
Dean’s Office, investigations were launched against 10 research assistants for abiding by the strike decision of
the union they are affiliated with (5 June Gezi Strike of Eğitim-Sen). By the Tunceli University Rectorship,
investigations were launched against 2 academic personnel for participating in a press statement, and against 4
academic personnel for abiding by the strike decision of the union they are affiliated with.
123
124
http://www.bbc.co.uk/turkce/haberler/2014/12/141226_mea_tahliye
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/izmir_cocuk_mahkemesi_gezi_parki_yuruyusu_suc_degil_haktir-1204059
- N.G, who works as a Research Assistant in Eskişehir Osmangazi University Faculty of Arts and
Sciences Department of Comparative Literature, as a result of various investigations launched against him/her
(supporting the METU protests and joining the demonstrations protesting 12 September Coup d’état), in 2013,
was imposed with a penalty of suspension of rank advancement for the duration of one year. In year 2014, for
charges of participating in the protest of the killing of Berkin Elvan by police, a further penalty of suspension
of rank advancement for two more years have been imposed.
Against Asst. Prof. Dr. E.K., a lawsuit was filed for commiting defamation of the prime minister of the
time while attending a memorial event for Berkin Elvan, and a jail sentence of 11 months and 20 days was
imposed. This sentence was suspended.125
Against the Machete-yielding Protester
- S.Ç., known as the Machete-yielding man, on 6 July 2013, attacked those who joined the protests with
a machete on his hand and no action was taken against him by the law enforcement. S.Ç., after his statement,
was sent to the court demanding his arrest pending trial, however, was released by the court. After objections,
an arrest warrant against him was issued, but in the meantime, the machete-wielder fleed to Morocco. A
lawsuit against him was filed demanding 27 years of jail sentence. S.Ç., on 29 August 2013, was apprehended
while entering Turkey. However, the court, yet again, released him after taking his statement. S.Ç. is on trial
before İstanbul No 53 Criminal Court of First Instance.
Damaging Public Property
Naim Doğan, who, during the Gezi protests, in Kaleiçi, on the wall of Fine Arts Gallery, wrote ‘Ahmet
Atakan is Immortal’, was sentenced to 1 year of jail by Antalya No 5 Criminal Court of First Instance for
damaging public property. The jail sentence of Doğan, who earlier paid 150 TL of expenses to cover the
removal of the writing to the Culture and Tourism Provincial Directorate, was later converted into a 6000 TL
fine.
The Consideration of Wearing a Red Scarf as a crime
A.D.K., who is known to the public as the girl in the red scarf, a jail sentence from 24 years to 98 years,
for S., from 26 years to 95 years 6 months, for Yılmaz, from 16 years to 55 years 4 months, for K., from 11
years to 26 years and for N., from 13 years to 38 years is being demanded. In the indictment, the red scarf
being worn symbolizing socialism or the EGO public transport card found during body search are among the
evidences of crime. Against the girl in the red scarf, for her action subject to the case before Antalya No 6
Assize Court, another lawsuit has been filed and a jail sentence up to five years are being asked. In the lawsuit
before Antalya No 5 Criminal Court of First Instance, Karacagil, due to protesting Ahmet Atakan’s death, is
on trial for charges of “violation of law no 2911 and damaging property”. A.D.K., who was facing a jail
sentence up to 98 years in total, following the events she endured during the Gezi process, left for the
mountains to join PKK, leaving a letter behind.
Other situations encountered in the investigations and lawsuits regarding the Gezi protests
125
http://www.bianet.org/bianet/insan-haklari/160951-berkin-elvan-anmasina-katilan-akademisyene-hapis-cezasi
86
Files in which Recep Tayyip Erdoğan directly filed complaints:
- In case number 2013/655 of Manisa No 3 Criminal Court of First Instance, against 183 people, for
joining the protests between different dates in 1 – 20 June and “violating law no 2911”, lawsuits were filed. In
this lawsuit, the plaintiff is Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The Court, for each of all of those persons, “due to
separate lacks of criminal elements” granted judgments of acquittal (2014/192).
- In the case before Manisa No 2 Criminal Court of Peace against 22 people for charges of defamation,
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan made a request to participate (Case No 2014/167).
- In Sinop, the Prime Minister, alleging that he was insulted, filed a complaint on 13 June against 7
people. Sinop Criminal Court of Peace, after the proceedings, with its judgment given on 14 February 2014,
convicted the unionized educators for charges of insulting and fined them separately for the amount of 7080
TL each (Case No 2013/495, Judgment No 2014/71).
The Unfounded and Provocative Statements of Politicians
During the Gezi protests period, politicians, with unfounded statements, attempted to provoke the
society against the protesters. The Prime Minister at the time, in a TV speech, claimed that the Gezi protesters
attacked and sexually harassed a woman who was wearing a head-scarf, and he further alleged that the Gezi
protesters consumed alcoholic beverages in a mosque. These allegations were supported by the mainstream
media, and some journalists, claiming that they have watched footage related to the incident and offered
testimonials. However, later on, it became clear that both of those allegations were untrue.126
Breach of the principle of publicity in the cases, decisions of restriction
The granting of decisions of restriction and secrecy for the case files, which began to be implemented
before Gezi, and clearly constitute a breach of the right to just trial, was turned into a very widespread
application. The decisions of secrecy given in year 2007 for the Hrant Dink murder case and Ergenekon and
Balyoz cases are the most significant examples. In the case before Bodrum No 2 Criminal Court of First
Instance (Case No 2014/34), due to the decision of restriction on the case, in the period until the report of
preliminary proceedings was written, the requests for accessing documents in the file was repeatedly denied
by the prosecutor’s office. However, the decision of restriction in question was never served to the party. The
statements taken as a second interrogation was prepared by the police with changing from person to person
and drafted in violation of the relevant CMK (law on Criminal Proceedings) provisions.
The pot-pan protests
In the lawsuit filed in Mersin No 6 Criminal Court of Peace, for allegations of banging pots and pans
while chanting slogans during Gezi protests, Eğitim Sen members Yakup T. and his wife Hanım T.,
complaints were filed by their neighbours. The prosecutor’s office, for charges of “making noises, threats and
126
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/video/video/40965/Kabatas_ta_dovuldugu_iddia_edilen_kadin_goruntuleri_de_yalan_c
ikti.html# ; http://haber.sol.org.tr/devlet-ve-siyaset/kabatas-goruntuleri-yayinlandi-iste-buyuk-yalan-haberi-87773 ;
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/balcicek_ilterden_kabatastaki_kadin_aciklamasi-1176722 ;
87
insults with the intention of deteriorating the peace and order of persons”, asked for jail sentences of up to 3
years 6 months for Yakup T., and up to 5 years 6 months for Hanım T.
Investigations within the scope of the Law on Fight Against Terror (TMK)
- In the case before İstanbul No 2 Assize Court, 36 people are considered within TMK (Case No
2014/121).127
- On 17 June 2013,of the 64 people who were arrested as a part of the investigation conducted by the
İstanbul Deputy Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office authorized per TMK Article 10, 34 were detained pending
trial for charges of “being a member of an armed terrorist organization”.128
- On 16 June 2013, as a part of a raid conducted by prosecutors authorized per TMK Article 10, for
charges of “Provoking the public to riot, attacking law enforcement forces and their vehicles, suspicion of
partaking in actions of damaging public and private property”, arrest and house search warrants were issued
against 56 people. 30 people were arrested.
- İzmir Bar Association provided legal assistance in the first three days for 498 people. Furthermore, in
İzmir, raids regarding TMK were made in an almost weekly basis, and in those cases followed by İzmir ÇHD,
65 persons in total are on trial.129
- In Kocaeli, of the 18 people who participated in protest marches and arrested in a raid within the scope
of TMK, conducted at dawn in their houses, 4 of them were jailed pending trial by the court.
- In Malatya No 3 Assize Court, against 4 persons, for charges within the scope of TMK Article 10 88
“forming or directing a terrorist organization, being a member of an armed terrorist organization and carrying
out propaganda of a terrorist organization”, lawsuits were brought.
B) Arrests and Detainments Pending Trial
- On 8 July 2013, Taksim Solidarity, following the opening of Gezi Park to the public, while attempting
to enter the Park, those who joined the meetings representing Taksim Platform; about İstanbul Medical
Chamber secretary Ali Çerkezoğlu, Chamber of Architects Environmental Impact Evaluation Board deputy
chairwoman Ayşe Mücella Yapıcı, Chamber of Electrical Engineers İstanbul Branch chairwoman Beyza
Metin, Chamber of Architects İstanbul Branch executive Ender İmrek and member of Gezi events platform
Haluk Ağabeyoğlu, it was stated that “due to them directing the events for a long duration and planning the
events, it was determined that they took the form of an organized criminal organization and acted in that
capacity” and due to them directing the events for a long duration and planning the events, it was asked that
Article 220/1 of TCK to be applied.
- 28.02.2014 tarihinde İstanbul Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı tarafından ikinci bir iddianame daha
hazırlanmış ve 26 kişi hakkında dava açılmıştır. Yargı kararları ile kaldırılmış arama kararları ise hala dosyada
bulunmaktadır (Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu syf. 26-28)
127
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 28
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 28
129
Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 36
128
- For five persons, sentencing per Turkish Criminal Code Article 220/1, per Law on Meetings and
Demonstration Marches Article 34/1, for one person, sentencing per Law on Meetings and Demonstration
Marches Article 33/1, and for the others, sentencing per Law on Meetings and Demonstration Marches Article
32/1 has been asked for, separately.
- As stated by ÇHD İstanbul Branch, in İstanbul, between the dates 31 May-1 September, 1250 people
have been arrested.
- On 11 June 2014, during Gezi protests, in the operation made within the scope of the prosecutors
authorized by TMK Article 10, 59 people were arrested. Following the interrogation process conducted in the
prosecutor’s office, of the 59 people who has been arrested, 28 were released.
- On 16 June 2013, as a part of a raid conducted by prosecutors authorized per TMK Article 10, for
charges of “Provoking the public to riot, attacking law enforcement forces and their vehicles, suspicion of
partaking in actions of damaging public and private property”, arrest and house search warrants were issued
against 56 people. 30 people were arrested. (tekrar)
- Against those who protested Ahmet Atakan’s death on 10 September 2013, following the complaint
filed by the police officers, in the lawsuit brought before İstanbul No 34 Criminal Court of First Instance, due
to charges of “violating law no 2911”, 25 people are on trial. These persons, as a part of the investigation,
were held in custody for a duration of 2 days.
- According to the data in the indictment prepared by İzmir Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office regarding
Gezi demonstrations (numbered 2013/49); at least 393 people were arrested, with 124 of them being arrested
on 31 May, 188 of them on 1 June, 74 of them on 2 June, 4 of them on 3 June and 3 of them on June 4
(Taksim Dayanışma Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights) page 35).
- In Mersin, on 2 June, 4 people were arrested and held in custody for 1 day each.
- In Muğla, on 1 June, 56 people; on 2 and 3 June, 27 people have been arrested.
- In Samsun Atakum, on 1 June, 190 people were arrested. Charges were dropped against 81 people
who have been arrested.
- In Şarköy Criminal Court of First Instance, for joining the Gezi protests on 17 and 19 June, and
charges of “violation of law no 2911” against 4 persons and for the same reason, against 2 persons, lawsuits
were brought (2014/69)
Allegations of Sexual Harassment under Custody
A young woman who participated in the Gezi protests, stated in her interview with journalist Ayşe
Arman, that she was subjected to insults, swearing and she has been sexually harassed while she was detained
89
by the police.130 Another person who was arrested around the same time expressed that he witnessed those
events.131
Detainments Pending Trial (Jail Sentences beingserved in advance of the trial)
- In Adana No 8 Assize Court (Case No 2013/141), 24 people are still on trial within the scope of TMK
Article 10. 14 people have been detained pending trial in this scope, however, in the first trial, those people
have been released. The case which was before the court on 25 February 2014, due to the courts authorized
under TMK Article 10 have been abolished, will be continued to be tried by Hatay No 2 Assize Court.
- In İstanbul No 8 Criminal Court of First Instance, due to charges of “violation of law no 2911,
resisting officer on duty for prevention of performance of duties, and restricting freedom”, 13 people are on
trial. 8 of them, in that scope, were detained pending trial on 8 July 2013. These people were released on 17
July 2013.
- For charges of “violation of law no 2911”, Ali Sarıçiçek, who was arrested in Taksim while he was
selling flags, and 8 people in total, were detained pending trial. Those detained were released 8 days later
following a second objection (İstanbul No 9 Criminal Court of First Instance Case No 2013/296).
- On 11 June 2014, during Gezi protests, within the scope of the operation made by the prosecutors
authorized under TMK Article 10, 59 people were arrested. Following the interrogation process conducted in
the prosecutor’s office, of the 59 people who has been arrested, 28 were released. 26 people were referred to
the court demanding they be detained pending trial, and 5 people were referred to the court demanding they be
placed under judicial control. The court judged 4 people to be detained pending trial, and 22 people to be
released. The motion to place 5 people under judicial control was denied (Case No 2014/121).
- Among the 64 people arrested in the scope of the investigation conducted by İstanbul Deputy Chief
Public Prosecutor’s office on 17 June 2014, 34 of them were detained pending trial for “being a member of an
armed terrorist organization”.
- In the case before Kocaeli No 6 Criminal Court of First Instance numbered 2013/48, due to the
demonstrations held on the day 16 June, 2 people were detained pending trial.
The Complaints of Gezi Protesters
The complaints filed by the Gezi protesters against the police officers were joined together, however, no
development have occurred yet, no police officer was even called to give a statement.132
The General Situation:With the total number not being definitively known, the minimum and verified
numbers are included. Until this date, there are, at least 7990 people against whom investigations were
launched, 5513 people who were arrested, 5335 people who were sued, 445 people who were subject to raids
conducted in the scope of Fight Against Terrorism, 189 people who were detained pending trial, and 15
people who were sentenced.
130
Ayşe Arman, Hürriyet Gazetesi, 3 Ekim 2013.
http://www.sendika.org/2013/10/ben-tanigim-o-polis-pinari-tecavuzle-tehdit-etti-ayse-arman-hurriyet/
132
İstanbul Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı, 2013/79334-99394.
131
90
CHAPTER FOUR
VIOLATIONS OF RIGHTS ENCOUNTERED DURING THE GEZI
PROTESTS
During the Gezi protests, the discourses and statements of politicians and high level executives, the
decisions of the administrators, the intense interventions made by the law enforcement and finally, the attacks
of civilian persons, led to a chain of an interwoven and continuous chain of human rights violations. The most
significant link of this chain is, without a doubt, the breach of the right to hold meetings and demonstration
marches. The attempts to prevent and oppress the exercise of this right led to further violations of rights.
The oppression and violence inflicted by the government against the attempts of individuals to express
their views in public locations in a collective and free manner, in some cases escalated to the extent of
breaching the right to live, and in some cases, resulted in the implementation of some practices which would
be considered within the scope of the ban on ill treatment and torture. However, the process was not limited to
the violence committed on those who directly were involved in the struggle going on in the public squares; the
right to work of the workers in certain professions such as the members of press, whose main duty is to share
the legal and democratic battle in progress with the public, the health workers, who are with the people as
required by their profession etc. has also been violated.
The Gezi protests, which were initiated by people who intended to preserve their areas of living, 91
witnessed interventions in which this right was violated extensively. In the police interventions, in which
pepper gas was used unnecessarily and excessively, along with the protesters, those who did not participate in
the demonstrations such as the residents of the city, the shopkeepers, the patients undergoing treatment in the
hospitals, tourists and the law enforcement officers who used this gas themselves were subject to this gas as
well. The indifferent use of those chemicals, of which we do not have adequate information regarding their
effects on human health, created a serious public health hazard.
I. THE FREEDOM OF/RIGHT TO EXPRESSION, ASSOCIATION, HOLDING
MEETINGS AND DEMONSTRATION MARCHES
Freedom of thought and expression, which enables citizens to have a say in matters that concern them
and thus enables them to establish a public supervisionover thepolitical rulership, has been acknowledged as a
cornerstone in democratic societies since the 18th century and has noncontentiously been included in every
international human rights document as well as constitutions. During Gezi events that began on May 2013, the
most fundamental right that has been violated was based on this freedom which has been existing for hundreds
of years. The violations which took place within the scope of this, when evaluated in regards to the principle
of wholism of human rights:
a.The right to peaceful assembly and organizing demonstrations as a form of collective exercise of
freedom of expression in public places, has beenbreached by public authorities in a systematical and arbitrary
manner.
b.The freedom of association, which plays an important role in ensuring collectivity has been violated.
c. Actions and discourses which are not within the scope of assemblies and demonstrations, as well ass
press activities has been subject to unlawful interferences.
A chain of widespread violations against the freedom of expression from multiple directions has
sparked reaction from the public. Due to the attitude of the public authority, protests have come to be made
continuously, spreaded to a wide location and led to the mobilization of crowded masses. In the interval
between May 2014-September 2014, 5532 demonstrations have been held in 80 cities of Turkey, with 3,6
million people participating in those demonstrations.133
A)Arbitrary and Systematical Violation of Constitutional Right to Hold Peaceful Assemblies and
Demonstration Marches
 Per the Article 34 of the Constitution, “Everyone has the right to hold unarmed and peaceful meetings
and demonstration marches without prior permission.”
 Law No 2911 on Demonstrations and Public Meetings Article 10 conditions the exercise of this right
to “giving notice in advance”.
-The procedure of “giving notice in advance”, which is stated in the law due to the rule of being in 92
accordane with a higher norm (hierarchy of norms), cannot be interpreted as a procedure of permission. The
procedure of notification states the freedom of assembly and demonstration as being allowed as a rule, and
banned only in exceptional casesand as a final security measure, only when there is a serious and imminent
threat to public order and security. The justification of banning the freedom of collective expression due to it
being an “unauthorized demonstration” when it is being exercised without prior notice by the public authority
in Turkey, is botha clear violation of what the Constitution has to say, as well as a breach of the European
Convention on Human Rights to which Turkey is a party.134
During the Gezi protests, meetings and demonstration marches, regardless of giving prior notification or
not, have been systematically banned. Therefore, prohibition became the rule, and the freedom became the
exception. Since prohibition is the heaviest interference that can be made to the exercise of a right, it should
be based on concrete and serious data instead of general, abstract and clichéd reasons. In the duration of Gezi,
the decisions to ban of the public authority have been justified in various ways:
• For concerns of the inability to provide security and distruption of public order, some locations being
unavailable for meetings and demonstrations as required by law, has been presented as the basic reason. Due
to it being a general reason referenced to for the interference and prevention of nearly all of the exercises of
133
134
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Gezi, One year on, May 2014.
Sergey Kuznetsov/Russia, no: 10877/04, 23.10.2008, par. 42 ; Balçık andothers/Turkey, no: 25/02, 29.11.2007, par. 49.
the freedom of assembly and expression that are unwelcome by the public authority, it is far from being
concrete and serious.
• The distruption of traffic flow, some locations becoming temporarily unavailable for use or some
people in the vicinity facing a certain amount of annoyances, all expressed occasionally by the public
authority as reasons to ban the freedom to hold demonstrations and meetings, was not accepted by the ECHR
as a just cause and in the past, judgments of violations were given within this framework.135
• Finally, the possibilities of provocations or attacks by people of opposing views, which are presented
for reasons, should not be interpreted in a way that by itself leads to the banning of a demonstration. When
such a risk is in question, the public authorities are under positive obligation to ensure the demonstration takes
place in a peaceful manner and without interferences, by taking all kinds of necessary security precautions.136
- Regarding meetings and demonstration marches, the choice of venue is an inseperable element of the
freedom of expression. In that regard, the fact that the demonstrations that began with the goal of preventing
the attempts intending to change the nature of the Taksim Gezi Park, and spread with the struggle for
protecting common living areas throughout the entire country, took place in certain public areas (for example,
Taksim Square and Gezi Park in İstanbul, Kızılay Square in Ankara), regarding the goal of the meeting, is a
completely natural and legitimate choice. However, during the protests, the collective freedom of expression
was aimed to be prevented, by the method of closing those chosen venues entirely to meetings and
demonstrations. The categorical banning of locations which do not conform with the requirements of a
democratic society and have the nature of interference to the core of the right, have legal basis (Law No 2911 93
Articles 6 and 22, which give administrative authorities discretionary power). This abstract and prohibitory
mentality which has legal basis, is being defined by the ECHR as a significant obstacle on the exercise of the
right to demonstrate, and according to the conditions of the concrete case, it is expressed that parks, squares,
streets, churches, courthouses, cemetaries etc. may be used as locations for holding meetings and
demonstrations.
• In its Disk and Keskjudgment dated 27 November 2012, ECHR reminded the symbolic and historic
significance of the Taksim Square regarding 1 May celebrations, and emphasized that the insistence of the
protesters for the location is understandable and this choice should be considered as an element of the right
being exercised.137
• In the Samüt Karabulut application, which is about a press statement by Human Rights Foundation
(İHD) on Taksim Tünel Square not being allowed, ECHR concluded that in the concrete case, without
acceptable justification and without presenting adequate evidence showing it being a necessary precaution in a
135
Balçık and others/Turkey, par. 49; Oya Ataman/Turkey, no: 74552/01, 05.12.2006, par. 38; Disk ve Kesk/Turkey, no:
38676/08, 27.11.2012, par. 29.
136
Plattform “Ärzte für das Leben”/Austria, no: 10126/82, 21.06.1988, par. 32
137
Disk and Kesk/Turkey, par. 31.
democratic society, the administrative act of declaring the location of meeting is not appropriate constitutes a
clear breach of the right to hold meetings and demonstrations.138
Locational intervention, despite the Gezi protests having come to an end, is still ongoing. Taksim
Square and the Gezi Park is still unavailable for meetings, demonstrations, and even press statements. In many
demonstration marches, with Berkin Elvan’s funeral (who lost his life due to a gas canister impact he suffered
to his head in the Gezi protests), 1 May of 2014 and Anniversary of Gezi being the first and foremost, law
enforcement denied entrance of the protesters to Taksim Square and Gezi Park. The right to hold meetings and
demonstration marches, therefore freedom of expression is being continued to be breached.
- Non-violent meetings and demonstrations are peaceful demonstrations and they enjoy the safeguards
granted by Article 34 of the Constitution and Article 11 of ECHR. In other words, non-violent demonstrations
cannot be forcefully oppressed by the public authority. In the scope of the criteria set by ECHR, the Gezi Park
protests, unlike the attempts of the public authority to present them as violent protests, are peaceful and due to
reasons given as being violent or not complying with conditions of priornotification, they have been violently
oppressed by the law enforcement.
• In its Gün and others judgment, which is about the punishment of a group that is member of a political
party, due to organizing an illegal and violent demonstration, ECHR emphasized that if the organizers of the
meeting did not encourage the demonstrators to be violent, if they did not resort to violence themselves and if
the meeting concluded in a peaceful manner, the demonstration will be regarded as “peaceful”. The Court
stated that just because after the meeting has been disbanded, there has been incidents of violence in the 94
streets, the meeting cannot be considered as non-peaceful; it further expressed that such incidents which do
not spread to the overall meeting cannot revoke the right to hold meetings and demonstrations, and cannot
justify criminal sanctions to those who exercise their right to hold peaceful demonstrations.139
The Gezi Park protests, in which except for the clashes initiated by the attempts of the law enforcement
to violently oppress peaceful demonstrations, violence has not been dominant throughout the protests as well
as not adopted by the majority of the protesters, are peaceful. Taking into account the fact that the persons and
groups who called for the protests did not encourage the demonstrators to inflict violence, and actions of
violent tendencies have not been condoned, the dispersion of all of the demonstrations for the reason of being
violent is a disproportionate interference to the right to peaceful demonstration and represents a violation of
freedom of expression, and the right to hold meetings and demonstrations.
The Gezi protests, which mostly took place spontaneously for reasons such as of bulldozers entering the
park, tents being set on fire etc. have been oppressed by the law enforcement for reason of not complying with
the prior notification condition. Regardless of happening spontaneously or in a planned manner, the
oppression of peaceful demonstrations for a merely procedural condition, within the scope of ECHR
judgments, is being considered as unnecessary and disproportionate interference. What this means is that, the
exercise of the right to hold peaceful meetings and demonstrations, even if it is against legal provisions, is still
138
139
Samüt Karabulut/Turkey, no: 16999/04, 27.01.2009, par. 36.
Gün and others/Turkey, no: 8029/07, 18.06.2013, par. 50, 51 ve 83.
being safeguarded by the human rights law. As a matter of fact, the ECHR has givennotable judgments in this
regard, resulting in Turkey’s conviction.
• In its Oya Ataman judgment, ECHR noted that it would be in accordance with the requirements of a
democratic society for the public authorities to show non-violent illegal demonstrations a certain degree of
tolerance and unless a clear and imminent danger for public order does occur, it should refrain from
interventions.140
• ECHR, in its Disk and Kesk judgment, which is about the closure of Taksim Square for 1 May
celebrations, once again,determined the fact that despite the demonstrators did not resort to violence, they
became subject to brutal interventions beginning with the early hours of the morning, constitutes an
unnecessary and excessive restriction imposed on the right to hold meetings and demonstrations.141
Even if a meeting or demonstration is in violation of the laws in effect, giving non-violent
demonstratiors a duration long enough to allow for them to express themselves is necessary in order to
safeguard the essence of this right.142 Therefore, the intervention of law enforcement to Gezi Park protests
purely because they have been organized in a manner non-compliant with the law, constitutes a breach of the
right to hold meetings and demonstrations.
- During the Gezi protests, the law enforcement used unnecessary, excessive and illegal force against
the protesters.
 Unlawful orders,are defined in Article 137 of the Constitution in the following manner:
“If a person employed in any position or status in public services finds an order given by his/her
superior to be contrary to the provisions of by-laws, regulations, laws, or the Constitution, he/she shall not
carry it out, and shall inform the person giving the order of this inconsistency. However, if his/her superior
insists on the order and renews it in writing, his/her order shall be executed; in this case the person executing
the order shall not be held responsible.
An order which in itself constitutes an offence shall under no circumstances be executed; the person
who executes such an order shall not evade responsibility.”
- Regarding the violations of rights resulting from the illegal orders directing the use of force against the
demonstrators during the Gezi protests, the security officers who executed the orders should be held
responsible as much as their superiors who issued the orders.Since per Article 90/5 of the constitution,
international conventions regarding human rights are in a prevailing status over the law, the interventions of
law enforcement conducted in violation of the Convention and the judgments of the ECHR are considered
within this category. Due to the arbitrary prevention of meetings and demonstation marches, the forceful
dispersion of peaceful demonstrations and in that while, the law enforcement using disproportionate and
unnecessary force are all against the ECHR case-law, the law enforcement who receive an order promting
140
Oya Ataman/Turkey, par. 41; Disk and Kesk/Turkey, par. 36.
Disk and Kesk/Turkey, par. 31-38.
142
Samüt Karabulut/Turkey, par. 37.
141
95
thoseactions have an obligation to not to execute the order in question. This obligation is not limited merely to
law enforcement. As the Constitution clearly mentions “a person employed in any position or status in public
services” and his/her hierarchical “superior”, all public personnel who issue orders to intervene in peaceful
demonstrations and who execute those orders shall be held responsible.
- Assuming that the members of law enforcement assigned to suppress the Gezi protests are acting on
the orders they received from their superiors, it should be stated that all of the violations of rights that
occurred during the demonstrations have resulted due to unlawful orders. Both the demonstrators who lost
their lives, who suffered inhuman or ill treatment, as well as the officers of the law enforcement who worked
under heavy and ill conditions, were exposed to tear gas alongside the protesters and lost their lives while
executing the instructions they received, are victims of the chain of unlawful orders in question.
- In the interrogation stage of the rights violations and crimes committed during the interventions,
Article 137 of the Constitution should be taken into account and the responsibility of the public officers who
issued the orders and executed them should be determined within the framework of those principles.
 Per PVSK (law regarding the duties and powers of the police), the police has, against a crowd not
complying with orders to disperse and pursuant to the condition of abiding by the boundaries set by the same
law, the authority to use force. According to this:
- The police may use force “for the intention of breaking the resistance and limited by the amount
necessary to break the resistance” against the resisting individuals (Articles 16 and 24).
- The force that will be used by the police should be determined by “the nature and level of the
resistence” and be used with a “progressively increasing rate” (Article 16)
The fact that the police interventions suffered during the Gezi protests are in contradiction with the
principle of “proportionality” is surfaced with the judgments given by ECHR against Turkey in similar issues.
• The following events: following a protest that ended with police intervention, the battery and arrest of
the protesters in a different location143; protesters who do not engage in clashes with the police suffering
battery with batons and brute force144; pepper spraying an already-neutralized demonstrator on his/her face145;
the use of firearms against the demonstrators who are resisting the police using sticks and bats146, have all
been considered as disproportionate interventions by the ECHR.
• In light of these data, the following incidents that took place during the Gezi Park interventions; the
use of force against who do not resist the police, and have been, in fact, conducting a sit-in; just as in the
“Woman in Red” example, the use of pepper spray against non-resisting demonstrators; the continuation of
using force following dispersed demonstrations and as in the Divan Hotel example, spreading the use of force
to even indoors; the throwing of gas canisters into hospital buildings, the battery of demonstrators in the alleys
etc. such uses of force should be considered as unnecessary, disproportionate and illegal interventions. The
143
Açık and others/Turkey, no: 31451/03, 13.01.2009, par. 31-33.
Subaşı and Çoban/Turkey, no: 20129/07, 09.07.2013.
145
Ali Güneş/Turkey, no: 9829/07, 10.04.2012, par. 41-43.
146
Evrim Öktem/Turkey, no: 9207/03, 04.11.2008, par. 47-53.
144
96
authorization of the law enforcement to use force is limited with dispersing the demonstration, and
maintaining the use of force after this goal has been fulfilled will be an arbitrary and excessive use of force.
- In the Gezi Park interventions, the most controversial tool used by the law enforcement as a physical
force has been the pepper gas. In fact, during the events, the use of pepper gas has become ordinary; small
groups not resisting the police, persons indoors and even people who did not join the demonstrations have
been exposed to pepper ges. In just the first 15 days of the protests, 150.000 gas bombs have been deployed147.
As a result of the excessive use of pepper gas and aiming the gas canisters directly on persons, a lot of people
have lost their lives, were heavily injured or became permanently disabled. Due to the law enforcement using
pepper gas as a punishing weapon, Turkey has been, in many occasions, convicted by the ECHR: in the Ali
Güneş case, pepper spraying a demonstrator captured by the police on his face148; in the Abdullah Yaşa and
others case, during an intervention to a violent demonstration by pepper gas, a cas canister injuring a
demonstrator on the head149; and in the İzci case, the intensive use of pepper gas against peaceful protests150,
have led to the result of violating the right to hold meetings and demonstrations and/or the ban on torture and
ill-treatment. All of those interventions which caused violations in those applications, have also been
frequently encountered in the Gezi Park events. Therefore, even when considered for purely the use of pepper
gas, it is clear that the Gezi Park interventions constitute a serious chain of human rights violations.
- The Gezi Park protests, which began with the demand of keeping Taksim Gezi Park as a park area;
following the police violence and statements of the rulership, transforming into a social opposition movement
by uniting in the criticism of the political rulership; and during which, the right to hold peaceful meetings and
demonstrations have materialized, have not only been prevented by the intervention of law enforcement, but
by the statements of the politicians and high level administratiors as well. Among the political statements and
rhetoric having the nature of interfering with the right to hold peaceful meetings and demonstrations, the
prevailing ones are as follows:
• The first reaction of the rulership against the Gezi protests has been to put forward the “the will of the
nation” rhetoric. As a result of this, demonstrators who desired to exercise their constitutional rights have been
characterized as “marginals” and “looters (çapulcu)” who mobilized and resorted to violence in order to
overthrow the government.
• It was proposed that the Gezi protests have been pre-designed and organized by “foreign forces”.151
• In the “respect the will of the nation” rallies as well, which were organized simultaneously with the
Gezi protests; along with presenting the Gezi protests as a movement developing against the will of the public,
the perception that those who attend the rally are the true determiners of the will of the nation has been
created. Therefore, on one hand, the demonstrators whose numbers are over 3.5 million have been placed
147
Taksim Dayanışması’nın Hak İhlalleri Raporu (Taksim Solidarity Report of Violations of Rights), July 2014, s. 8.
Ali Güneş/Turkey.
149
Abdullah Yaşa ve others/Turkey, no: 44827/08, 16.07.2013.
150
İzci/Turkey, no: 42606/05, 23.07.2013.
151
http://www.aksam.com.tr/siyaset/basbakan-erdogan-olaylarin-istihbaratini-3-ay-once-aldik/haber-215118
148
97
outside “the will of the nation”; on the other hand, the Gezi protests have been attempted to be discredited in
the eyes of the large masses supporting the rulership.
• Citing democractic demands and the exercise of constitutional rights as crimes is another example of
rherotical interference. In this process of “criminalization”, by the rulership, the Gezi protests were
categorically declared as “crimes”, and the demonstrators have been outright declared as criminals. The
statements that; those who joined the protests should be tried for the crime of “Attempting to dissolve
Government, or partially or entirely avoids its performance” 152; those who will be present in Taksim Square
after a certain hour will be treated as “member of a terrorist organization”153, and the statements indicating
those who join or support the demonstrations are in an attempt to organize a coup d’état against the elected
government are in agreement with this policy154. Those and similar expressions, along with being
incompatible with the presumption of innocence, which is one of the fundamental principles of a state of law;
they will also, without legal basis, impose restrictions on the exercise of the right to hold meetings and
demonstrations. As a matter of fact, those statements will be perceived as some sort of an “intimidation” by
persons who wish to exercise their constitutional rights in a peaceful manner, and taking into account the
positions of those who said the words, will create a dissuasive effect on the exercise of the freedoms.
• Another factor causing pressure on those who joined the Gezi protests and those who supported them,
is the statements that sharpen the reactions developing against the protests, justify the violence exerted on the
protesters and incite violence. Due to their truthfulness not being proven, statements that may be considered
false allagations and that were voiced many times; the demonstrators consuming alcoholic beverages in the
mosque, and battering a scarf-wearing woman in Kabataş due to her clothing; will have the result of
provoking a part of the society by using religious values, against the citizens exercising their right to
demonstrate.
• It is clear that the statements about the 50% mass who voted for the party in power are hardly being
kept in their homes155 (T.N.: they are eager to take it to the streets and attack the protesters, but they are barely
being convinced by the ruling party to remain in their homes and not acting upon their ‘urges’) or those who
perform “pan/pot protests” should be turned in to the police by their neighbours156, will create an effect
ostracizing social tolerance and escalate the polarization in the society.
• In the “respect the will of the nation” rallies, the participants, targeting the Gezi protesters, and
addressing the Prime Minister, chanting “let us go, we shall pass, we shall quash Taksim” 157, and such
expressions including implications of violence not being condemned by the members of the rulership, instead
responding them in silence, have led to the formation of an environment that is not only threatening to the
right to demonstrate of the protesters, but their safety of life as well.
152
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/mehmet_ali_sahin_gezi_eylemleri_muebbetlik_suc_kapsaminda-1144298
http://www.sabah.com.tr/gundem/2013/06/16/egemen-bagistan-gezi-parki-aciklamasi
154
http://www.zaman.com.tr/politika_samil-tayyar-gezi-parkinda-hedef-darbe-girisimi_2101474.html
155
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/23429709.asp
156
http://bianet.org/bianet/siyaset/148606-basbakanin-cagrisi-komsunuzu-ihbar-edin
157
http://www.haberler.com/yol-ver-gidelim-taksimi-ezelim-4707106-haberi/
153
98
• In the Gezi Park events, where along with the police intervention, attacks of third persons also led to
loss of live and injuries, the political rulership only targeted the violent protesters, and developed a rhetoric
excusing, justifying and praising the violence exerted on the demonstrators. The statement “those who resort
to violence will be subjected to violence”158 and the praise of the law enforcement “they are making
history”159, created the impression that the violence the demonstrators have been subjected to is being
indulged by the political rulership and shall be kept unpunished.
- Finally, the right to hold meetings and demonstrations, in which the collective freedom of expression
is most widespreadly put into practice, is being violated not only by the unlawful interferences of the law
enforcement or the rhetoric and statements made by the political rulership, but also by not effectively
investigating the violence which the peaceful demonstrators are being subjected to by the law enforcement or
civilian persons. For example, despite what is supposed to happen when the police is faced with criminal
interferences such as the tents of the demonstrators being set on fire, the chasing and battery of the
demonstrators in alleys by persons wielding bats, knives, machetes etc. is for the police to protect the
demonstrators from the attacks and capture the attackers, it is observed that during the Gezi protests process,
these interferences are not being shed light upon, in fact; in some cases, the law enforcement destroyed
evidence.
Regarding the investigation of the rights violations that occurred as a result of the unnecessary and
disproportionate use of force by the law enforcement and the punishment of those responsible, the ECHR has
convicted Turkey.
• The ECHR, in the İzci case, judged that due to the law enforcement taking part in the ill-treatment of
the demonstrators via using excessive force keeping their helmet numbers hidden, it has taken a long time for
them to be identified and as a result, the statute of limitations on the criminal case has lapsed and the case was
dismissed, therefore the burden of effective investigation has been violated by Turkey. The Court,
furthermore, expressed that in ill-treatment cases, there should not be any statute of limitations and the
suspected and accused police officers should be removed from duty during the investigation and criminal
lawsuit160; the security officers who during the interventions to the demonstrations caused the death of the
demonstrators by using excessive force should not be left unpunished by mobilizing the “self defense” and
“exceeding of limit during self defense” provisions161, and the investigations that will be conducted should
allow holding the high-ranking security officers responsible from their actions162.
158
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/-siddet-yapan-siddet-gorur-/siyaset/detay/1736369/default.htm
http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25450862/
160
İzci/Turkey, par. 69 vd.
161
Evrim Öktem/Turkey, par. 55-56; Aydan/Turkey, no: 16281/10, 12.03.2013, par. 93-103.
162
İzci/Turkey, par. 98-99.
159
99
B)Breach of the Freedom of Association, which is one of the Fundamental Elements of the
Collective Nature of the Freedom of Expression
- Police raids have been conducted in the offices of the political parties which joined or supported the
Gezi protests163, and some party members have been arrested. Furthermore, no light was shed on the attacks
made on some of the party buildings, and effective investigations have not been conducted in order to identify
the attackers.
- Lawsuits have been brought on the demonstrators who joined the Gezi protests along with an
organization. The fact that against those who joined the demonstrations and those who organized them,
serious charges such as forming an organization for the intent of committing crime and attempting a coup
d’état in the indictments indicate that the freedom of association is under a very serious pressure for the future.
• Against the Taksim Solidarity, which was founded for the goal of preserving the Taksim Gezi Park
and includes a large number of non governmental organizations, a criminal lawsuit for charges of forming an
organization for the intention of committing crime has been brought. In the indictment accepted by the court,
while 5 Solidarity members are being charged with “joining illegal meetings and marches unarmed and
despite the order, not dispersing on their own accord; provoking the public for illegal meetings and
demonstration marches, forming an organization with the intent of committing crime”, 21 persons outside the
Solidarity are charged with violation of law no 2911 regarding meetings and demonstration marches. Trying
people who did not call for violence, who did not partake in violent activities and who only, in a completely
legal field, defended the right to the city for heavy charges constitutes an intimidation to all organizations 100
which are or which will be striving for their goals in an organized manner.
• Lawsuits against 35 people that include members of the fan group “Çarşı” have been filed. In the
indictment accepted by the court, among the charges are “attempting to dissolve Government of Turkish
Republic, or avoiding its performance”, “being a member of an organization formed for committing crimes”,
“forming or leading a terrorist organization”. Furthermore, in the indictment, tools such as “gas masks”, “gas
glasses” or “protective miner’s helmets” are presented as the evidences of crime.
C)Violation of Individual Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Press
- Individual actions and statements of opinion that do not fall into the category of meetings and
demonstration marches have been subjected to interference during the Gezi protests process.
• The “standing man” or “standing person” demonstrations that commenced in Taksim Square and
spread to cities outside İstanbul have been intervened with. A part of the demonstrators in Taksim Square have
been arrested, and a protester in Şanlıurfa was fined. The prevention of such individual protests which in no
way is violent and presents any danger for the public order is an unjust interference to the freedom of
expression.
• Theater actor Mehmet Ali Alabora who joined the Gezi protests was targeted for the play “Mi Minör”
he directed and acted in year 2012, and was accused with making the preparations of the Gezi protests. On the
163
Gezi Parkı Olayları (The Gezi Park Events), İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013, s. 72 ve 73.
other hand, due to a tweet made by the artist, investigation(s) was(were) launched for charges of “openly
provoking commission of crime”, with all being concluded with dropping of charges 164.Launching a criminal
investigation for a tweet in the form of “The issue is not only the Gezi Park my friend, didn’t you get it yet?
Come on, join us” is, from a perspective of the freedom of expression, is an unacceptable situation.
• In İzmir, 34 people have been arrested due to the content they shared on social media for charges of
“inciting riots”, and were released after a while.165
- A large number of journalists who desired to take footage of the Gezi protests and make news stories
about them have been attacked by the law enforcement and arrested166. In this way, the journalists and
reporters informing the public about the Gezi protests was de-facto denied, newspapers and television
networks were pressured, the press workers who criticized the reaction of the political rulership to the Gezi
events and the police violence have been dismissed by sacking or forcing to resign.
• According to data from Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS), as of 24 June 2013, at least 22 press
members have been subject to battery from the police, verbal abuse or insults and have been attempted to be
prevented from performance, 28 press members have been injured due to the gas bombs, pressurized water
and plastic bullets used by the police. 14 journalists were arrested while on duty, and 4 were arrested
following police raids167.
• For the reason of making news stories regarding the Gezi protests, a large number of press workers
have been dismissed168. According to data from Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS), as of 22 July 2013, 59
journalists have lost their jobs. 22 journalists were dismissed, and 37 were forced to resign169. One week later, 101
TGS announced that the number of journalists dismissed due to Gezi news reached 81170.
• Due to this pressure on the press workers, many press organs started implementing auto-censorship,
and gave little space to news and footage about the Gezi protests. Because of the most widely watched
national TV networks ignoring the Gezi events, the interest in foreign press organs and social media increased.
The networks who gave the most space to the Gezi events; Halk TV, Ulusal TV, EM TV and CEM TV, due to
“encouraging violence with their broadcast regarding the Gezi events”, were fined by The Radio and
Television Supreme Council for 11.866 TL each.171
164
http://www.sabah.com.tr/gundem/2014/01/07/mehmet-ali-alaboraya-takipsizlik
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/twitter_baskinlarinda_gozalti_sayisi_34e_yukseldi-1136449
166
Gezi Parkı Olayları (The Gezi Park Events), İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013, p. 62.
167
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/iste_gezi_magduru_gazeteciler-1138925
168
Gezi Park Protests, Amnesty International, October 2013, p. 49.
169
http://www.bianet.org/bianet/medya/148636-gezi-direnisinde-59-gazeteci-isten-cikarildi-istifaya-zorlandi
170
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/ve_can_dundar_da_gitti-1144521
171
Gezi Parkı Olayları (The Gezi Park Events), İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013, p. 62.
165
II.THE BAN ON ILL TREATMENT AND TORTURE, THE RIGHT TO LIFE
- According to the data of Turkish Medical Association, as of 10 July 2014, more than 8000 people
have been injured, with 61 of those being injured critically, 104 people suffered head traumas and 11 people
lost an eye172. In many of the recorded footage, it was seen that the law enforcement used pepper gas canisters
and plastic bullets at close range, with aiming deliberately to cause injury. Attacking the bodily integrity of the
protesters by using this type of weapons as a means for punishment constitutes a violation on the ban on ill
treatment.
- All of the arbitrary interventions described below, which were uncovered by the photos and footage
broadcast by the press, should be considered as torture and/or inhumane and degrading treatment:
• In cases where using force is not inevitable, in other words, in cases where no violence and physical
resistance exists, the use of violence by the law enforcement;
• In cases where resistance does exits, the disproportionate use of force (pepper gas, pressurized water,
plastic bullets, batons etc.);
• All cases where force is being used as a means of punishment;
• The use of pepper gas indoors; the use of force in any way against a person who already has been
subdued;
• Sexual assault and attacks;
• Insults, swearing and degrading verbal attacks;
• The long-term and unjustified detainment of the demonstrators, preventing them to meet their basic
needs;
• The use of force against the injured and ill persons in hospitals and infirmaries, the use of pepper gas
in those locations;
• The unnecessary handcuffing of the detained or arrested demonstrators;
•…
-In cases where those treatments are made by civilian persons, the law enforcement have a duty to stop
those persons and capture them, and they are obliged to protect the demonstrators from all sorts of violence
against them from the outside. If this obligation is not fulfilled, the law enforcement will be responsible due to
negligence, tolerance or cooperation; and the security officers will be responsible due to the violation of the
ban on torture and ill treatment.
172
Gezi Park Protests, Amnesty International, October 2013, p. 15.
102
- As a result of the unnecessary, disproportionate and illegal interventions on the Gezi Park protests
aiming to suppress them, a large number of deaths have occurred. According to the report of the International
Federation for Human Rights, the following violations of rights have occurred in Gezi events173:
Mehmet Ayvalıtaş: Died on June 2nd, after being crashed by a car which was driven into a crowd
demonstrating in Ümraniye, Istanbul, on June 2nd, 2013
Ethem Sarısülük: Died on June 12. He was shot in the head by a live bullet shot by a police officer
during the demonstrations held in Ankara on June 1st, 2013. His cerebral death was declared on June 12th,
2013. Footage showing the moment the gun was fired has been broadcast by the media.
Abdullah Cömert: Died on June 22nd, after being hit in the head on the occasion of demonstrations
held in Hatay on June, 3rd 2013.
Ali İsmail Korkmaz: Died on July 9th. He was beaten in an alley by a group consisting of police
officers and civilian persons, following a demonstration held on June 3rd in Eskişehir. The moments showing
the beating has been erased from the security camera footage, later on, the erased footage was recovered.
Ahmet Atakan: Died on 9 September 2013 during a demonstration in Hatay Armutlu.Claims of a tear
gas canister shot from a police officer’s gun causing his death was voiced. The police, on the other hand,
claimed that Ahmet fell to his death from a rooftop.
Berkin Elvan: Died on 11 March 2014. On June, he was injured by a gas bomb canister. He left home
to buy bread. He was in a coma for 269 days.
İrfan Tuna: He was a caretaker at work aside of demonstrations in Kizilay square in Ankara which
were being dispersed with a heavy dose of tear gas. He died on June 5 from a heart attack resulting from the
inhaling of the tear gas
Zeynep Eryaşar: Died from a heart attack suffered after having been exposed to tear gas in Avcılar,
İstanbul.
Selim Önder: He suffered strong breathing problems following the dipersal of tear gas on 31 May
2013, which subsequently caused his heart attack and death on 16 June.
- Clearly, all of the death incidents resulted from the use of lethal force by the law enforcement,
particularly the use of pepper gas with aiming deliberately on people and/or the attacks of third persons. The
force used by the police throughout the Gezi events, are illegimate regarding both the norms of the
Convention and the rules of universal human rights, and the state is directly responsible from the death
incidents.
• Per Article 2 of the Convention, in order for the use of lethal force by the police to be considered
legitimate, all of those three conditions must be met:
173
International Federation for Human Rights(FIDH), Gezi, One Year On, May 2014, p. 8.
103

One of the cases of: a person being protected against illegal violence (self-defence), the lawful
capture of a person or the lawful suppression of a rebellion or riot must be in question.

The use of force must become a certain necessity.

The force being used by the police must be proportionate with the legitimate aim being
desired to be reached.
. The use of lethal force observed in the Gezi Park event and in some cases, violated the right to life, in
some cases, violated the ban on torture and ill-treatment, do not meet these criteria which provide legitimacy.
• In the case of Ethem Sarısülük, who lost his life with a police bullet, none of the aforementioned
exceptional cases are in question. In fact, just as it cannot be said that the conduct of the police officer who
responded to the stones being thrown with firearms is self-defence, it is also not possible to talk about a
rebellion or a riot in the legal sense. Therefore, in this case where the exceptional conditions did not realize
and the use of force is not absolutely necessary, without needing to apply the proportionality criteria, it could
be said that the right to life of Ethem Sarısülük has been violated.
• Regarding the losses of life resulted due to the police using gas bombs with deliberately aiming on
persons, the same evaluation must be made. The exceptional situations which would justify and make it
necessary for the law enforcement to use lethal force did not occur.Even if it is assumed that these situations
did occur, since the use of has bombs with deliberately aiming on people is pursuing the goal of direct
punishment, the force being used do not serve a legitimate cause.
- The losses of life that resulted from the excessive use of pepper gas should be examined from a 104
different angle. In fact, the use of pepper gas in social events, despite the many cases of death in the past, is
not defined directly as a lethal force in the legal regulations and ECHR judgments. However, it is clear that,
the responsibility of the deaths resulting from the use of pepper gas without the necessary conditions being
formed (i.e. against non-resisting people or in confined spaces, indoors) or from its misuse (i.e. people who
already have been subdued); or in cases where the use of pepper gas was necessary, deaths resulting from the
excessive and disproportionate use of pepper gas, lies with the state.
- Due to the death incidents resulting from the attacks of third persons (the killing of Ali İsmail
Korkmaz), the responsibility of the state may also come into question. If the state officers supported the
attacks of third persons, if they failed to take precautions against the attacks they know about or they were
supposed to know about, if they failed to stop the third persons whe conducted the attacks or did not grant the
necessary aid for the injured persons, due to the violation of the right to life, this may lead to the responsibility
of the state to arise.
-Another situation that leads to the state becoming responsible in cases of ill treatment, torture and
death, is that effective investigations are not being carried out about these cases or allegations. Public
authorities, following an effective investigation, should identify those responsible, and, if required, should put
them into trial and punish them. The state which fails to fulfill this obligation, even if it is not being held
directly responsible of the ill-treatment or death, the state is still regarded as having violated the right to life or
the right to protection of bodily integrity of the person. This issue has been thoroughly examined in other
sections of this report.
III. THE RIGHT TO HEALTH
A) A General View
The right to health has been regulated in Article 56 of 1982 Constitution under the title “Health, the
environment and housing” and the sub-title “Health services and protection of the environment”.
During the Gezi Park events process, a large number of interferences that targeted the right to health
have surfaced. As evaluated in detail in the preceeding parts of this report many events such as the police
exercising disproportionate violence, the police continuing to use force against those who suffered injuries, the
use of pepper gas as a weapon against the public, allegations of using pepper gas past expiration date and
introducing chemicals into the pressurized water, the lack of adequate ambulances and medical personnel, the
attitude of the hospitals and physicians towards the injured, the interventions on the temporary infirmaries set
up during the events, the medical institutions and medical personnel, led to the violation of different rights. It
is possible to consider the aforementioned interventions, along with the other rights, within the scope of the
right to health as well.
Regarding the generations of rights, the right to health which is considered as one of the second
generation rights, considering its scope, it is closely connected with the right to life, the right to protect and 105
improve his/her corporeal and spiritual existence and the right to bodily integrity174, which are all among the
first generation rights and in the scope of negative statutory rights175.
Among the responsibilities of the State within the scope of the right to health is providing the service
for improving health when health becomes impaired. However, the only responsibility arising from the right is
not just this one. Beyond that, the individual is also supposed to be protected from actions hazardous to his/her
health. Within the context of this responsibility, an action the hazardous effects of which is clear not to be
performed by the state or not being allowed to be performed by third persons, is also present. In that regard,
the police exercising disproportionate violence, the police continuing to use force against those who suffered
injuries, the use of pepper gas as a weapon against the public, allegations of using pepper gas past expiration
174
The text of Article 17 of the Constitution, titled “Personal inviolability, corporeal and spiritual existence of the
individual” is as follows: “Everyone has the right to life and the right to protect and improve his/her corporeal and
spiritual existence.The corporeal integrity of the individual shall not be violated except under medical necessity and in
cases prescribed by law; and shall not be subjected to scientific or medical experiments without his/her consent. (…)”
175
The Constitutional Court, in its related case-law, emphasized those connections.See AYM, E. 2010/29, K. 2010/90,
K.T.16.07.2010, RG, 04.12.2010, 27775; AYM, E.1990/27, K.1991/2, K.T. 17.01.1991, RG, 19.08.1991, 20965; AYM,
E. 1972/2, K. 1972/28, K.T. 23.05.1972, RG, 21.11.1972, 14368.
Furthermore, the ECHR included the “right to health” which is not in the Convention, by relation of the right to life
(Article 2 of the Convention), in its case-law in an indirect way. For example, in the case of Calvelli and Ciglio, the
ECHR included the obligation of the state to make the necessary regulations forcing the preacutions for the protection of
the patients in hospitals to be taken. Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy, no. 32967/96, judgment of GC, 17.01.2002, para. 55. See
also McCann and Others v. United Kingdom, no 18984/97, judgment of GC, 05.09.1995.
date and introducing chemicals into the pressurized water, constitute violations of the aforementioned
responsibility of the State.
About the use of pepper gas, there are previous judgments by the ECHR about Turkey. Taking into
account the judgments finding violations given by the ECHR regarding the pepper spraying an alreadycaptured demonstrator on his/her face176,; the gas canister hitting a demonstrator on the head in a
demonstration177,, the intense use of pepper gas against peaceful demonstrators178, it is clear that during the
Gezi Park events, the right to health has been violated regarding the intense use of pepper gas179.
Providing comprehensive and correct information about the effects of pepper gas on human health is
among the positive obligations of the State due to the right to health as well.180
The interventions conducted during the Gezi Park events have affected, alongside those who actively
participated in the protests, but those who reside in the locations where the interventions took place as well. In
particular, allegations of the intensely used pepper gas during the events by the law enforcement conducting
the interventions, deliberately being shot inside houses have been voiced frequently181. This situation led to,
along with violation of the right to health, also the result of the violation of the inviolability of the domicile
regulated in Article 21 of the Constitution182.
The obligations of the security forces have been determined as follows with Article 5 of the United
Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials183: “Whenever the
lawful use of force and firearms is unavoidable, law enforcement officials shall: (a) Exercise restraint in such
use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence and the legitimate objective to be achieved; (b) 106
Minimize damage and injury, and respect and preserve human life; (c) Ensure that assistance and medical aid
are rendered to any injured or affected persons at the earliest possible moment; (d) Ensure that relatives or
close friends of the injured or affected person are notified at the earliest possible moment.
By the ECHR, it was stated that the State is responsible not only for the actions of the public officials
causing death, but also the planning and execution of a life-threatening operation in a manner minimizing the
use of lethal force as much as possible184. According to the Court, the actions of the public officials complying
with the legal regulations regarding the use of firearms is not sufficient. In that regard, the criteria of
proportionality included in Article 2 of the Convention and being enforced strictly must also be fulfilled185.
The attitude of the hospitals and physicians against the persons injured during the events are also of the
nature of violating the right to health. Especially, different cases such as the physicians not demanding the
176
Ali Güneş/Turkey, no. 9829/07, 10.04.2012.
Abdullah Yaşa and others/Turkey, no. 44827/08, 16.07.2013.
178
İzci/Turkey, no. 42606/05, 23.07.2013.
179
For the medical explanations of TTB (Turkish Medical Association) regarding the use of pepper gas, see Appendix I.
180
Gezi Parkı Olayları (The Gezi Park Events), İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013, p. 84.
181
Sedat Ergin, “Yatak odanızdan içeri biber gazı fişeği girerse”, Hürriyet, 25 Haziran 2013,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/23578038.asp (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
182
It is stated that everyone has the right to respect for his home in Article 8 of the Convention as well.
183
United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, Article 5:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/UseOfForceAndFirearms.aspx
184
McCann and others/United Kingdom, no. 18984/91, Judgment by the GC, 05.09.1995, para. 194.
185
Nachova and others/Bulgaria, no. 43577/98, Judgment by the GC, 06.07.2005, para. 99.
177
police officers to step outside during the medical examination, the persons not being examined before they
give a statement to the police, the injured persons not being accepted by the hospital, not drafting the proper
medical report despite the persons having been battered186, should be considered in contradiction with the
State’s duty to not be in an obstructive attitude in the person choosing, receiving and continuing to benefit the
service he will apply to in the scope of the right to health187.
Despite being included in the positive obligations of the State in the scope of the right to health, it was
observed that the state did not maintain adequate number of ambulances and emergency medical personnel in
the scene, and did not take the necessary precautions188 to provide access to medical services by the persons.
Cases such as the interventions to the infirmaries set up during the events and to the medical personnel
working in those infirmaries189 led to the result of the violation of the negative obligation of the State within
the scope of the right to health190.
B) Changes in Law that will Limit the Rights and Authority of the Physicians and Medical Chambers
With the law known as the full-time law and the omnibus bill draft including many different law
changes regarding health, an article unpredecented in the world aiming to punish such emergency attempts has
been prepared and sent to the Parliament on 20.06.2013.
The last form in the Omnibus Bill numbered 6514 which was accepted by the parliament, validated by
the President of the Republic and recently brought before the Constitutional Court is as follows:
“ARTICLE 46 – Law no 3359 has been amended as follows:
“AMENDMENT 11 – All actions and transactions regarding the providing of health services are
inspected by the Ministry of Health.
With the exception of in exceptional circumstances the health service provided by the persons
authorized to perform their profession until the emergency medical services arrive and the medical service
becomes continuous, those who provide health services without license or those who make ulicensed
persons provide health services, will be punished by jail from one year to three years and be fined by up to
twenty thousand days judicial fine. The medical institutions which open service units subject to special
permit without authorization from the Ministry of Health or provide services that will be provided in such
186
The inability to obtain battery report is significant for impunity as well. Because, in cases when persons demand
compensation or the proof of ill-treatment, such procedural safeguards carry a special importance.Gezi Parkı Olayları
(The Gezi Park Events), İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013, p. 53.
187
For different examples seeGezi Parkı Olayları (The Gezi Park Events), İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013,
p..85.
188
“On several occasions people calling the 112 emergency phoneline, were being answered by ambulance personnel that
the ambulances were not allowed to come.”. FIDH, Gezi, One year on, May 2014, p. 9.
189
Sağlıkta Gündem, “Doktor coplandı”, 20 Aralık 2014, http://www.sagliktagundem.com/haber/doktor_coplandi.htm
(Retrieved: 11.12.2014)
190
Amnesty International Report, p. 47.
107
units, are fined by administrative fines for an amount up to half of the gross service revenue of the previous
month.”191
C) The Repression of and the Lawsuits Being Filed against Doctors and Trade Associations
During the Gezi Park Resistance process, physicians, in order to oppose the environmental and green
area massacre, naturally took their place. However, as a result of the State intervention in the form of
disproportionate use of force, when being faced with the people present in the demonstration area requiring
emergency assistance due to being subject to gas, coronary and respiratory problems, or due to life-threatening
injuries resulting from the impact of tear gas canisters and plastic bullets; this time, as part of the medical
profession, have done emergency treatments. After initially giving medical attention to the patients on location
and attempting to provide the arrival of the States’ ambulance, as a result of the rapid increase on the number
of people requiring emergency assistance and the event transforming into some sort of extraordinary event,
they have had to give this emergency aid in some sort of emergency room units which were established in the
demonstration locations or suitable nearby locations or in Sahara-tents, known as “infirmaries” in the media.
In Dolmabahçe, in the first days of the Gezi Park Resistance during the intense pepper gas intervention, due to
a lack of any other nearby available locations as shelter, to people who were affected by the gas or who
suffered serious head trauma and took shelter in Dolmabahçe Bezmialem Mosque for dear life; the initial
medical attention have had to be given in this location. This attempts of emergency aid done by the physicians
as a part of their professional ethics during the Gezi Park Resistance, with being defined as unlicensed and
unpermitted professional applications by the political rulership, are declared criminal and investigations have
been launched. Two young physicians, are still on trial for charges of “littering the mosque” and “providing
medical assistance to criminals”.192
Finally, the Ministry of Health have filed a lawsuit against the Executive Board and Honor Board of
Ankara Branch of Turkish Medical Association which assisted in the providing of emergency health
services during the Gezi Park Resistance process, demanding their removal from office193.
IV.
GEZI
PARKI
EYLEMLERINE
KATILAN
VE
DESTEK
VEREN
KIŞILERINÇALIŞMA YAŞAMINDA KARŞILAŞTIĞI MÜDAHALELER
Gezi eylemleri ve takip eden süreçte bu eylemlere katılan bireylerin etkilendikleri en önemli
sonuçlardan biri çalışma yaşamlarına etkilerinden kaynaklanmıştır. Bu etki, kişilerin, gezi parkı olaylarına
fiilen katılmaları, sosyal medya aracılığı ile veya fiili olarak ortaya çıkan tartışma ortamına dahil olmaları
nedeniyle çalışma yaşamında farklı disiplin cezalarına ve ayrımcı muamelelere maruz kalmaları şeklinde ifade
191
Bkz. http://www.ttb.org.tr/mevzuat/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=303&Itemid=28 (Retrieved:
11.12.2014).
192
Cumhuriyet Gazetesi 7 Mayıs 2014, “Tıp Fakültesi Eğitimini Yanlış mı Öğrendim?”,
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/69165/_Tip_fakultesi_egitimini_yanlis_mi_ogrendim__.html (Retrieved:
11.12.2014); Sendika.org 12 Nisan 2014, “Gezi’nin Hekimleri Yargılanamaz”,
http://www.sendika.org/2014/04/gezinin-hekimleri-yargilanamaz/ (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
193
Hekim Postası 12 Kasım 2014, http://www.hekimpostasi.org.tr/2014/11/12/atonun-gezi-davasinda-durusma-aralikayina-ertelendi/ (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
108
edilebilir. Bu noktada, eylemlere katılan ve sosyal medya aracılığı ile destekleyen çalışanların194 bu nedenle
çalışma yaşamında kamu ve özel sektör işverenlerinin tepki ve olumsuz yaklaşımlarına karşı ifade, toplanma
ve örgütlenme hak ve özgürlüklerinin korunması konusu özel önem taşımaktadır.
Halkın pek çok kesiminden farklı kişilerin ve örgütlerin yanı sıra kamu çalışanları, işçilerin yanı sıra
akademisyenler, öğretmenler, avukatlar, mühendisler, hekimler de Gezi eylemlerine katılmış, sosyal medya da
dahil olmak üzere farklı mecralarda yaşanan güncel gelişmelerle ilgili açıklamalarda bulunmuştur. Gezi
eylemlerine katılan ve destekleyen kamu çalışanlarının kaçı hakkında idari soruşturma başlatıldığı, bu
çalışanlara verilen disiplin cezaları ve diğer olumsuz sonuçlar gibi konularda net bir bilgi bulunmamaktadır.
Ancak; çok sayıda kamu çalışanı tarafından gezi olaylarına bireysel olarak ya da bağlı oldukları sendikalar
aracılığıyla destek verildiği, yine eylemlere katılan ve destek veren pek çok kişinin özel sektörde bağımlı işçi
olarak çalışmaya devam ettiği öngörülebilir.
Çalışma ilişkilerinde kamu ve özel sektör işvereni tarafından çalışanın siyasi düşünce ve eylemlerinden
dolayı hakkında soruşturma açılması, farklı ağırlıktaki disiplin cezalarına maruz kalması, işten çıkarılmasının
yanı sıra farklı ve ayrımcı muamelelere maruz kalması da mümkündür. Çalışma yaşamında etki gösteren bu
tip müdahaleler, Anayasa’nın 49. maddesinde düzenlenen çalışma hakkı ile bağlantılı olarak
değerlendirilebilir. Yine Gözden Geçirilmiş ASŞ’nda ayrımcılık yasağına ilişkin düzenleme ile, Şartta yer alan
haklardan yararlanmanın diğer nedenlerin yanı sıra siyasiyada başka görüşler nedenine dayanan hiç bir
ayrımcılığa tâbi olmaksızın sağlanması gerektiği belirtilmiştir195. UÇÖ’nün 158 sayılı Sözleşmesi’nde de
“siyasi görüş, hizmet ilişkisine son verilmesi için geçerli bir neden teşkil etmez” düzenlemesine yer
verilmiştir196.
Kişiler üzerindeki etkilerinin önemi dikkate alınarak Gezi Parkı eylemlerine fiilen katılan veya
destekleyen kişilerin çalışma yaşamında ifade, toplanma ve örgütlenme özgürlüklerinin korunması konusuna
da değinmekte fayda vardır. Anayasa’da düzenlenen bu hak ve özgürlüklerin çalışanlar bakımından da geçerli
olduğu açıktır. Ancak, bu hak ve özgürlüklerin kullanımının gerek kamu ve gerekse özel sektör çalışma
ilişkilerinde farklı gerekçelerle sınırlandırıldığı, işveren ve İdare’nin müdahalelerine açık olduğu
belirtilmelidir. Bu konuda, özellikle ifade özgürlüğü, barışçıl toplantı ve gösteri yürüyüşü ile örgütlenme
özgürlüklerine İnsan Hakları Avrupa Sözleşmesinin 10 ve 11. maddeleri ile sağlanan güvencelere
başvurulması mümkündür. Zira, bu düzenlemelerde herkese tanınan bu hak ve özgürlükler, İHAM
kararlarında gerek kamu gerekse özel sektör çalışanları bakımından da korunmaktadır. Sözleşmeyi insan
haklarına bütüncül bir yaklaşım ışığında yorumlayan İHAM farklı kararlarında çalışanların bu hak ve
194
Örneğin; Cumhuriyet Gazetesi, 06 Aralık 2013, Belediye çalışanının 'sosyal medyada Gezi Parkı eylemcilerine destek
verdiği' ve '29 Ekim öncesi yaptığı paylaşımlarda devlet büyüklerine hakaret ettiği' gerekçesiyle işten çıkarılması.
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/16339/Gezi_yi_destekledi_isten_atildi_.html (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
195
Gözden Geçirilmiş Avrupa Sosyal Şartı, Bölüm IV-Madde E.
196
UÇÖ, 158 sayılı Sözleşmesi (madde 5/d).
109
özgürlüklerinin çalışma ilişkisi bağlamında da ancak demokratik bir toplumda gerekli olduğu ölçüde
müdahale edilebilir olduğunu açıklamıştır197.
Çalışanların siyasi faaliyetleri nedeniyle işten çıkarıldığı veya disiplin cezalarına maruz kaldığı
durumlarda Mahkeme, siyasi tartışma özgürlüğünün ifade özgürlüğünün özel bir yönü olduğunu belirterek, sık
sık siyasi nitelikli faaliyetlerin, Sözleşme’nin 10. maddesi kapsamına girdiğini açıklamaktadır198. Yine
İHAM’a göre; ‘siyasi faaliyet’ yoruma açık ve kesin olarak tanımlanamayan bir kavramdır.199 Bu bağlamda;
siyasi bir faaliyet nedeniyle yapılan sınırlamalar, barışçıl bir gösteriye katılmak, basına açıklama yapmak ve
sendika üyesi olmak gibi, siyasi yönleri olması muhtemel etkinliklerde bulunmaya ilişkin koşulların
dayatılması ile ilgili olabilmektedir200.
İfade özgürlüğü, kişilerce bireysel olarak kullanılabileceği gibi, dernekler ve siyasi partiler aracılılığı ile
yapılacak örgütlü eylemlerde olduğu gibi toplu halde de kullanılabilmektedir. Dolayısı ile toplantı ve gösteri
yürüyüşleri201, dernek ve siyasi parti kurma özgürlüğü, ifade özgürlüğünün bir bakıma, değişik tarzları,
uzantılarıdır202. Bu bağlamda, çalışanların özellikle siyasi parti üyeliği ve faaliyetlerinin de dahil olduğu genel
olarak siyasi faaliyetlerine yönelen kısıtlamalar (ki bu kısıtlamalar, işten çıkarılma da dahil olmak üzere
çalışmaya ilişkin disiplin cezalarıdır) söz konusu olduğunda, demokratik toplumda gereklilik değerlendirmesi,
Sözleşme’nin 10 ve/veya 11. maddesi kapsamında yapılmaktadır203.
Gezi Parkı eylemlerine katılan ve farklı platformlarda destek veren kişilerin çalışma ilişkilerinde bu
nedenle cezalandırılması Anayasa ve İHAS ile güvence altına alınan farklı hakların ihlali sonucunu
doğurmuştur. Bu tespit, özel sektör çalışanlarının yanı sıra kamu sektörü çalışanları bakımından da geçerlidir. 110
Gezi Parkı olayları esnasında mesleğini icra eden gazeteci ve doktorların da gözaltına alınması,
engellenmesi ve fiziksel müdahalelere maruz kalmanın yanı sıra çalışma ilişkilerinde de müdahalelere maruz
kaldığı medyaya yansımıştır. Gezi Parkı eylemleri devam ederken ve takip eden süreçte gazetecilerin ve
medya çalışanlarının işten çıkarıldığı, işten uzaklaştırıldığı ve istifaya zorlandığına ilişkin farklı iddialar
gündeme gelmiştir204. Yine olaylar esnasında yaralanan kişileri tedavi ettikleri gerekçesiyle sağlık görevlileri
hakkında açılan ve devam eden yargılamalar mevcuttur205.
197
Fuentes Bobo/İspanya, no. 39293/98, 29.02.2000; Trade Union of the Police in the Slovak Republic ve
diğerleri/Slovakya, no. 11828/08, 25.09.2012; Vogt/Almanya, no. 17851/91, Büyük Daire kararı, 26.09.1995; Eweida ve
diğerleri/Birleşik Krallık, no. 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10, 36516/10, 15.01.2013.
198
Bkz.,Rekvényi/Macaristan, no. 25390/94, para. 26; Ceylan/Türkiye, no. 23556/94, Komisyon Raporu, 11.12.1997,
para. 40.
199
Rekvényi/Macaristan, no. 25390/94, para. 26.
200
Bkz., Rekvényi/Macaristan, no. 25390/94, para. 36.
201
Açık ve diğerleri/Türkiye, no.31451/03, 13.01.2009, para. 40; Karatepe ve diğerleri/Türkiye, no. 33112/04, 36110/04,
40190/04, 41469/04, 41471/04, 07.04.2009, kararın türkçe çevirisi için bkz., http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
202
Tanör, Siyasi Düşünce Hürriyeti ve 1961 Türk Anayasası, s.28.
203
Rekvényi/Macaristan, no. 25390/94, para. 58; Vogt/Almanya, para 64; Sigurjónsson/İzlanda, no. 16130/90,
30.06.1993, para. 37.
204
“Gezi Direnişinde 59 Gazeteci İşten Çıkarıldı”, Bianet, 22 Temmuz 2013, (Retrieved: 11.12.2014); Farklı pek çok
örnek için bkz., Gezi Parkı Olayları, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013, s.61-64; Uluslararası İnsan Hakları
Federasyonu (FIDH), Bir Yılın Ardından Gezi, Mayıs 2014, s. 17. CPJ (Committee to Protect Journalists) kaynaklarına
göre, en azından 22 gazeteci ve köşe yazarı işinden uzaklaştırıldı ve 37 gazeteci Gezi olaylarına yer verdikleri için işten
ayrılmaya zorlandı. www.cpj.org/2014/02 (Retrieved: 11.12.2014)
205
Uluslararası İnsan Hakları Federasyonu (FIDH), Bir Yılın Ardından Gezi, Mayıs 2014, s. 10, 25 vd.
A) Kamu çalışanları bakımından
Türkiye’de kamu personel sistemi; idari, askeri, akademik ve adli personel bakımından öngörülmüş dört
farklı alan üzerinden yapılanmıştır. Kamu personelinin hak ve özgürlüklerinin, tüm hukuk sistemlerinde, özel
sektör çalışanlarından farklı bazı kısıtlamalara tabi tutulduğu söylenebilir. Ancak; kamu çalışanlarının hak ve
özgürlüklerine getirilen bu sınırlamaların, farklı hukuk sistemlerinde sınırlamanın ve sınırlanan çalışanların
kapsamı bakımından değişiklik gösterdiği belirtilmelidir. Türkiye’de kamu personeli bakımından kabul edilen
sınırlama ve özellikle yasaklar, gerek çalışan ve gerekse sınırlamaların kapsamı konusunda oldukça geniştir.
Anayasa’daki düzenleme temel ilkeleri belirlemek dışında bir açıklama getirmemekte olup, kamu
personeli bakımından geçerli olan haklar, ödev ve sorumluluklar ile yasakların ilgili yasalar ile belirlendiği
görülmektedir. Bu bağlamda, ilgili yasal düzenlemelerde belirlenen farklı kamu personeli kategorileri
bakımından özellikle ödev ve sorumluluklar ile yasakların, gerek düzenlenme ve gerekse uygulamadaki
kapsamları bakımından, bu kişilerin farklı hak ve özgürlüklerine ağır müdahaleler olarak nitelendirilmesi
mümkündür. Özellikle; toplu eylem yasakları, siyasi yasaklar ile örgütlenme ve grev yasakları Anayasa’nın
yanı sıra İHAS’ın ilgili hükümlerinin ihlali niteliğindedir.
Mahkeme ve Komisyon, Sözleşme’nin 10. maddesi ile ifade özgürlüğüne sağlanan korumadan tüm
çalışanların yararlanabileceğini kabul etmektedir.206
Mahkeme’ye göre: “Sözleşme’nin hiç bir yerinde Taraf Devletlerin kamu gücünü kullanan sıfatı ile
işveren sıfatları arasında açık bir ayrım yapılmamıştır. Sözleşme’nin 11(2). fıkrası ayrıca, taraf devletlerin
çalışanlarının toplanma ve örgütlenme özgürlüklerine saygı göstermekle yükümlü olduklarını belirtmektedir. 111
Devletin çalışanlarıyla ilişkisi ister özel hukuk isterse kamu hukuku alanına girsin, 11. madde,‘işveren olarak
Devleti’ bağlar”.207Ancak; kamu görevlilerinin işini dikkate alan Mahkeme’ye göre, çalışanın işinin niteliği
dolayısıyla, belli meşru müdahale sebepleri bakımından Taraf Devletlerin takdir marjı geniş olarak
yorumlanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda; yargıçlar bakımından yargının tarafsızlığı ve bağımsızlığının sağlanması
belirleyici olmakta iken, farklı çalışanlar bakımından ulusal güvenlik, kamu düzeni ve başkalarının hak ve
özgürlüklerinin korunması amaçları dikkate alınarak çalışanın ifade özgürlüğüne yönelen müdahale,
demokratik bir toplumda gerekli olarak nitelendirilebilmektedir. Mahkeme, yaptığı demokratik toplumda
gerekliliğe ilişkin değerlendirmede müdahalenin ölçülülüğünü de dikkate almaktadır.
Barışçıl gösteriler olarak nitelendirilmesi gereken Gezi Parkı eylemlerine katılmak ve/veya sosyal
medya aracılığı ile bu konudaki düşüncelerini açıklayan çalışanların da Anayasa’nın 34. maddesi ile İHAS’ın
11. maddesinde tanınan güvencelerden faydalanması gerekmektedir. Devletin “işveren sıfatı” ile kamu
çalışanlarının bu hak ve özgürlüklerine yönelttiği müdahaleler bakımından da negatif yükümlülüğü devam
206
Örneğin bkz., Wille/Liechtenstein, no. 28396/95, 28.10.1999 (yargıç); Ahmed ve diğerleri/Birleşik Krallık, no.
22954/93, 02.09.1998; Vogt/Almanya, para. 43; Glasenapp/Almanya, no. 9228/80, 28.08.1986;Kosiek/Almanya, no.
9704/82, 28.08.1986 (memur); Rekvényi/Macaristan, no. 25390/94, 20.05.1999 (polis); Hadjianastassiou/Yunanistan, no.
12945/87, 16.12.1992; Engel ve diğerleri/Hollanda, no. 5100/71, 5101/71, 5102/71, 5354/72;5370/72, 08.06.1976
(asker). Ve ancak belli çalışanların, ifade özgürlüğünü kullanmaları sırasında görevlerinden kaynaklanan bir takım
sınırlamalara tâbi olabilecekleri de kabul edilmektedir.
207
Schmidt ve Dahlström/İsveç, para. 33, aynı yönde açıklamalar için bkz., Swedish Engine Drivers’ Union/İsveç, para.
37; Demir ve Baykara/Türkiye, para. 109.
etmektedir. Farklı bir ifade ile Devletin, kamu çalışanlarının ifade, toplanma ve örgütlenme özgürlüklerine de
demokratik bir toplumda gerekli ve ölçülü olmadığı müddetçe müdahele etmemesi gerekmektedir.
Gezi Parkı olayları süresince çalışanların örgütlenme özgürlüğünün ihlaline sebep olan bir diğer konu,
farklı sendikalar tarafından alınan kararlar doğrultusunda gerçekleştirilen iş bırakma eylemleri konusunda
İdari yöneticiler tarafından yapılan açıklamalar208 ve bu eylemlere katılan sendika üyesi çalışanların bu
nedenle disiplin soruşturmalarına ve farklı ağırlıktaki disiplin cezalarına209 maruz kalmalarıdır.
Eğitim-Sen, KESK, DİSK ve Tüm BEL-SEN gibi farklı 11 sendika tarafından 657 sayılı Devlet
Memurları Kanunu’nda değişiklik öngören yasa tasarısının değerlendirilmesi ve farklı taleplerin yanı sıra Gezi
Parkı olaylarına demokratik bir çözüm bulunması talebi ile 4-5 Haziran 2013 tarihlerinde grev kararı
alınmıştır210. 17 Haziran 2013 tarihinde de KESK, TMMOB, TTB ve TDB alınan ortak bir karar
doğrultusunda bir günlük bir iş bırakma eylemi yapmıştır211. İçişleri Bakanı tarafından bu eylemlerin
kanunsuz olduğu ve katılan işçi ve memurların bu eylemlerinin sonuçlarına katlanacağına ilişkin
açıklamalarda bulunulmuştur.212
Kamu görevlilerinin sendikalarının aldığı kararlar doğrultusunda toplu eylem hakkına sahip oldukları;
insan hakları sözleşmelerde hiçbir tereddüde yer bırakmayacak şekilde tanınmaktadır.
Bunlardan UÇÖ’nün 151 sayılı Sözleşmesi’nde kamu görevlileri örgütlerinin amacının, kamu
görevlilerinin çıkarlarını savunmak ve geliştirmek olduğu, kamu çalışanlarının çıkarlarını savunmak amacıyla
etkinliklerde bulunabilecekleri düzenlenmiştir (md. 3). Yine UÇÖ’nün 87 sayılı Sözleşmesi’nin 3/1
maddesinde; kamu çalışanlarının örgütlenme ve etkinlikte bulunma özgürlüğü, aynı maddenin 2. fıkrasında; 112
kamu makamlarının bu hakkı sınırlayacak veya kullanılmasına engel olacak nitelikte her türlü müdahaleden
sakınmaları gerektiği düzenlemiştir. Sözleşmenin 8/2 maddesinde de, sözleşme ile öngörülen güvencelere
zarar verecek nitelikte iç hukukta yasal düzenleme yapılamayacağına, uygulamada da bu hakların
kısıtlanamayacağına yer verilmiştir.
İHAM, İnsan Hakları Avrupa Sözleşmesi’nin 11. maddesi kapsamında, sendikal eylem ve etkinlikler
nedeniyle verilen cezaları, Sözleşmeye aykırı bulmaktadır.213 İHAM farklı kararlarında, Sözleşme’nin 11.
maddesi ile sendikanın yapacağı toplu eylemler yoluyla, sendika üyelerinin mesleki çıkarlarını savunma
208
“Gökçek’ten greve katılan memurlara: Eyleme katılırsan ve pişman olmazsan atarım”, Radikal Gazetesi, 05 Haziran
2013, (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
209
“Gökçek'ten 14 Memura Gezi Cezası!”, 25 Nisan 2014, http://muhalefet.org/haber-gokcekten-14-memura-gezi-cezasi0-10571.aspx (Retrieved: 11.12.2014); “Geziye destek veren asistanlar işten atıldı”, Evrensel Gazetesi, 4 Mart 2014,
http://www.evrensel.net/haber/79625/geziye-destek-veren-asistanlar-universiteden-atildi (11.12.2014); “Gezi’de iş
bırakana iki yıl kıdem durdurma cezası”, Bianet, 6 Şubat 2014, http://bianet.org/bianet/emek/153300-gezi-de-is-birakanaiki-yil-kidem-durdurma-cezasi (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
210
4-5 Haziran Grev Kararı ve Savunması,
http://www.egitimsen.org.tr/genel/bizden_detay.php?kod=19825&sube=70#.VI7I3tKsWE4 (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
211
“DİSK, KESK, TMMOB, TTB ve TDB iş bıraktı”, http://www.ttb.org.tr/index.php/Haberler/isbirakma-3878.html (Retrieved:
11.12.2014).
212
“Sokağa çıkan kamu çalışanı sonucuna katlanır”, Radikal Gazetesi, 17 Haziran 2013,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/politika/bakan_guler_sokaga_cikan_kamu_calisani_sonucuna_katlanir-1137969 (Retrieved:
11.12.2014).
213
Urcan ve diğerleri/Türkiye, no: 23018/04, 23034/04, 23042/04, 23071/04, 23073/04, 23081/04, 23086/04, 23091/04,
23094/04, 23444/04, 23676/04, 17.07.2008; Karaçay/Türkiye, no. 6615/03, 27.03.2007; Kaya ve Seyhan/Türkiye, no.
30946/04, 15.09.09; Satılmış ve diğerleri/Türkiye, no. 74611/01, 26876/02, 27628/02, 17.07.2007.
özgürlüğünü güvence altına alındığını, sendika üyeleri tarafından gerçekleştirilecek olan bu eylemlere taraf
Devletlerin izin vermesi gerektiğini, 11. maddede grev yapma hakkı açık bir şekilde ifade edilmemişse de bu
hakkın tanınmasının, en önemli sendikal haklardan biri olduğunu, genel bir grev yasağının Sözleşmenin 11.
maddesinin ihlali anlamı taşıdığını, sendika üyelerinin grev ve eylemlere katıldıkları için disiplin cezası ile
cezalandırılmalarının sendikal hakları kullanmaya yönelik caydırıcı bir niteliğe sahip olduğunu, bu yöndeki
yasaklama ve engellemelerin demokratik bir toplumda gerekli olmadığını tespit ettiği görülmektedir.
B) Özel sektör çalışanları bakımından
Siyasi görüş, ifade ve eylemleri nedeniyle çalışma yaşamında hukuka aykırı ve ayrımcı muamelelere
maruz kalınması sadece kamu çalışanlarına has durumlar değildir. Zira özel sektör çalışma ilişkilerinde de
farklı nedenlerle bu yönde muameleler söz konusu olmaktadır. Gezi Parkı olayları ve devam eden süreçte özel
sektör çalışanları tarafından çalışma ilişkileri bağlamında bu yönde muamelelere maruz kalındığı ileri
sürülmüştür. Bu konuda; THY iştiraklerinden birinde çalışan iki kişinin sosyal medyada yaptıkları
paylaşımlardan dolayı, “performans düşüklüğü, şirket menfaatlerini önemli ölçüde ihlal ve iş arkadaşlarının
performanslarını aksi yönde etkilemek” gerekçelerine dayanılarak işten çıkarılmaları; eğitim sürecinde olan
diğer 2 kişinin ise işe alınmaması; özel bir televizyon kanalında yayınlanan bir dizinin senaristinin, sosyal
medyada Başbakana hitaben yazdığı bir ifade nedeniyle işten çıkarılması gibi gelişmeler örnek olarak
gösterilebilir214.
Özel hukuk iş ilişkileri bakımından da İHAS’ın koruma sağlaması mümkündür. Zira Mahkemeye göre;
her ne kadar başvuru konusu müdahale, özel hukuk iş ilişkisi ile ilgili olsa ve Taraf Devletin doğrudan bir 113
müdahalesi bulunmasa da, Sözleşme hakları bakımından sorumluluğunun devam etmektedir.215
İlk olarak özel sektör çalışanlarının Gezi Parkı Olaylarına katılımları ve desteklemeleri nedeniyle
çalışma ilişkilerinde karşılaşmaları olası müdahaleler konusunda, devletin pozitif bir yükümlülüğünün
bulunduğu belirtilmelidir. İHAM’a göre: “Her ne kadar 11. maddenin temel amacı, madde ile korunan
haklarının kullanılması konusunda bireylerin, kamu otoritelerinin keyfi müdahalelerine karşı korunması olsa
da ulusal otoritelerin, belli durumlarda, örgütlenme özgürlüğünün etkili şekilde kullanılmasını güvencelemek
amacıyla özel bireyler arasındaki ilişkilere, makul ve uygun önlemler almak suretiyle müdahale etmek
mecburiyetinde olabilir”.216 Bu bağlamda; devletin, çalışanın, özel sektör işvereni tarafından sadece belli bir
siyasi partiye üye olması nedeniyle işten çıkarıldığı durumlara karşı koruma sağlamaya ilişkin ya da en
azından bu tip bir iş sözleşmesinin feshinin, verili bütün koşulları ışığında bağımsız bir orantılılık
değerlendirmesi yapılmasını mümkün kılan araçların sağlanması konusunda pozitif bir yükümlülüğü
bulunmaktadır217. Özel sektör çalışanları bakımından işverenin ticari menfaatlerine veya işyerindeki çalışma
huzuruna olumsuz etkisi olacak herhangi bir somut şart mevcut değil ise çalışanın sadece popüler siyasi
görüşlere sahip olmaması, işverenden farklı görüş ve çıkarlara sahip olması nedeniyle farklı muamele
214
Farklı örnekler için ayrıca bkz., Gezi Parkı Olayları, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013, s. 65.
Sorensen ve Rasmussen/Danimarka, no. 52562/99 and 52620/99, 11.01.2006, para. 57.
216
Redfearn/Birleşik Krallık, para. 42; ayrıca bkz., mutatis mutandis, Plattform “Ärzte für das Leben”/Avusturya, para.
32-34; Gustafsson/İsveç, para. 45; Fuentes Bobo/İspanya, no. 39293/98, para. 38.
217
Redfearn/Birleşik Krallık, para. 43.
215
görmesi, disiplin cezalarına maruz kalması ve/veya işten çıkarılması, Sözleşme’nin 10. maddesine (tek başına
veya 14. madde ile bağlantılı olarak) aykırılık teşkil edecektir. Dolayısıyla, özel sektör çalışanlarının özellikle
mesai saatleri dışında gerçekleştirdikleri siyasi katılım ve eylemleri nedeniyle işten çıkarılma da dahil olmak
üzere ayrımcı muamelelere maruz kalmaları, istifaya zorlanmaları gibi durumlarda ifade özgürlüğü ve/veya
toplanma ve örgütlenme özgürlüğüne müdahale edilmiş olacaktır.
V. AKADEMIK ÖZGÜRLÜKLER
Gezi Parkı olayları ve devam eden süreçte farklı şekillerde müdahalelere maruz kalan bir diğer özgürlük
alanı akademik özgürlüklerdir. Gezi Parkı Olayları ve devam eden süreçte akademisyenlerin ifade
özgürlüğüne getirilen sınırlamalar218, yine internet üzerinden ve eylemli şekilde olaylara destek veren
açıklamalarda bulunan akademisyenler hakkında disiplin soruşturması açılması219, disiplin cezaları verilmesi
ve görevden alınması gibi durumlar, akademisyenlerin ifade ve toplanma özgürlüklerinin yanı sıra çalışma
hakkını ihlal eder nitelikteki müdahalelerdir220.
1982 Anayasası’nın 27. maddesinde “herkes, bilim ve sanatı serbestçe öğrenme, öğretme, açıklama,
yayma ve bu alanlarda her türlü araştırma hakkına sahiptir” düzenlemesine yer verilmiştir.
Anayasa’nın 130. maddesinin 4. fıkrasında ise, “Üniversiteler ile öğretim üyeleri ve yardımcıları
serbestçe her türlü bilimsel araştırma ve yayında bulunabilirler. Ancak, bu yetki, Devletin varlığı ve
bağımsızlığı ve milletin ve ülkenin bütünlüğü ve bölünmezliği aleyhinde faaliyette bulunma serbestliği
vermez” şeklindeki düzenleme mevcuttur.
İHAS kapsamında, Komisyon ve Mahkeme kararlarında; Sözleşmenin ifade özgürlüğünün düzenlendiği
10. maddesi kapsamına, diğer ifade türlerinin yanı sıra (siyasal, sanatsal ve ticari) ifadelerin yanı sıra
akademik ifadelerin221 de girdiğinin kabul edildiği görülmektedir.
Bu noktada vurgulanması gereken bir diğer husus, akademisyenler tarafından açıklanan akademik
ifadelerin/açıklamaların da Sözleşme’nin 10. maddesi ile korunduğudur. Mahkemenin, farklı pek çok
kararında akademik özgürlüğün222 ve akademik çalışmaların223 önemini vurguladığı belirtilmelidir. Mahkeme;
akademik araştırma ve eğitimde akademik özgürlüğün, kısıtlama olmaksızın ifade ve eylem özgürlüklerini,
218
Örneğin, Üniversite Rektörü tarafından akademisyen ve üniversite çalışanlarına atılan mesajla, kendilerinden izin
almadan konuşmalarının ve demeç vermelerinin yasaklanması, “Rektörden izin almadan konuşmak yasak”, soL Portal,
15 Haziran 2013, (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
219
Uludağ Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesinde öğretim üyesi olan Timuçin Köprülü’nün mezuniyet töreni sırasında “Diren”
yazılı bir tişört giymesi ve Gezi Parkı olayları sırasında polisin tutumunu eleştiren ve öğrencilerin davranışını öven
konuşması nedeniyle Rektörlük tarafından hakkında soruşturma açılması, “Diren tişörtü soruşturmasına profesörden
mektuplu yanıt”, soL Portal, 22 Temmuz 2013, (Retrieved: 11.12.2014). 13 Ağustos 2013 tarihinde Rektörlük tarafından,
Köprülü’ye hakkında “disiplin cezası verilmesine gerek olmadığı”na ilişkin karar tebliğ edilmiştir. “Yrd. Doç. Dr.
Köprülü: #diren tişört cezasından beraat ettim”, Radikal, 16 Ağustos 2013, (11.12.2014).
220
Farklı örnekler için bkz., Gezi Parkı Olayları, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013, s. 76; Uluslararası İnsan
Hakları Federasyonu (FIDH), Bir Yılın Ardından Gezi, Mayıs 2014, s. 18.
221
Sorguç/Türkiye, no. 17089/03, 23.06.2009, para. 35.
222
Sorguç v. Turkey, No. 17089/03, 23.06.2009, para. 35; Sapan/Türkiye, no. 44102/04, 08.06.2010, para. 34.
223
Aksu/Türkiye, no. 4149/04, 41029/04, 15.03.2012, para. 71.
114
bilginin araştırma yapma özgürlüğünü, bilgi ve gerçeğin paylaşılması özgürlüğünü, güvence altına alması
gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır224.
Benzer vurgunun Mahkeme tarafından akademik özgürlükler konusunda referansta bulunulan
Recommendation 1762 (2006) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe ta da yer verildiği
belirtilmelidir225.
Gezi Parkı olayları bakımından, Mahkemenin, akademisyenlerin gerek çalıştıkları kurumlar ve gerekse
hükümet tarafından, çalışma konu ve içerikleri ile ilgili müdahale ve sınırlamalara maruz kalmaları
durumundaki tavrı önem taşımaktadır. Mahkemeye göre, akademik özgürlük, sadece bilimsel ve akademik
araştırmalar ile sınırlı değildir. Bu özgürlük aynı zamanda, akademisyenlerin araştırma, profesyonel uzmanlık
ve yetkinlik alanlarında tartışmalı ve genel kabul görmeyenler de dahil olmak üzere görüş ve düşüncelerini
özgürce ifade edebilmelerini de kapsamaktadır226. Özgürlük bunların yanı sıra çalıştıkları üniversite, kamu
kurumlarının işleyişi ve siyasi sistemin incelenmesi/değerlendirilmesi ve eleştirilmesini de kapsamaktadır 227.
Mahkemeye göre, akademisyenlerin araştırma yürütmesi ve ulaştıkları bulguları yayınlamalarının
sınırlandırılması oldukça dikkatli bir denetimi beraberinde getirecektir228. Bir diğer kararda ise, ceza hukuku
profesörü olan başvurucunun polis şiddetini serbestçe eleştiren ifadeleri nedeniyle cezalandırılmasının,
Sözleşmenin 10. maddesine aykırı olduğuna karar vermiştir229. Mahkemeye göre; akademisyen olan
başvurucunun toplum önünde cereyan eden hassas tartışmaya katkısının demokratik bir toplumdaki önemini
vurgulayarak, bu derece alevlenmiş bir tartışma ortamında birtakım abartıların dahi hoşgörüyle karşılanması
ve eleştiri sınırları içinde değerlendirilmesi gerektiği ifade edilmiştir230.
Mahkeme, 2010 yılında verdiği bir kararında, akademisyen olan başvurucunun üniversitede ders verdiği
dönemde derslerde kürt sorunu ve ermeni sorunu konularında yaptığı açıklamaların “ülke güvenliğini
tehlikeye soktuğu” gerekçesiyle İçişleri Bakanlığı’nın kararı ile ülkeye girişinin yasaklanmasının ifade
özgürlüğünü ihlal ettiğine karar vermiştir231.
Bu konu özellikle akademisyenlerce Gezi Parkı eylemleri ve devam eden süreçte ortaya çıkan farklı
ihlallerin değerlendirilmesi ve araştırılması konusunda karşılaşılabilecek engelleyici ve caydırıcı nitelikli
müdahalelerin akademik özgürlüğün ve ifade özgürlüğünün ihlali sonucu doğuracağı belirtilmelidir.
224
Mustafa Erdoğan ve diğerleri/Türkiye, no. 346/04 39779/04, 27.05.2014, para. 40.
Parlamentary Assembly, Recommendation 1762 (2006), “Academic freedom and university autonomy”, para. 4.1,
http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta06/ERec1762.htm (Retrieved: 11.12.2014).
226
Mustafa Erdoğan/Türkiye, no. 346/04 39779/04, 27.05.2014, para. 40.
227
Sorguç/Türkiye, no. 17089/03, 23.06.2009, para. 35; Sapan/Türkiye, no. 44102/04, 08.06.2010, para. 34. Akademik
ifade özgürlüğünün değerlendirildiği diğer bazı kararlara örnek olarak bkz., Lunde/Norveç, no. 38318/97, 13.02.2001;
Başkaya ve Okçuoğlu/Türkiye, no. 23536/94 ve 24408/94, Büyük Daire kararı, 08/07/1999; Cox/Türkiye, no. 2933/03,
20.05.2010; Mustafa Erdoğan/Türkiye, no. 346/04 39779/04, 27.05.2014, para. 40.
228
Mustafa Erdoğan/Türkiye, no. 346/04 39779/04, 27.05.2014, para. 40.
229
Nilsen and Johnsen/Norveç, no. 23118/93, 05.11.1999.
230
Nilsen and Johnsen/Norveç, no. 23118/93, 05/11/1999, 05.11.1999.
231
Cox/Türkiye, no. 2933/03, 20.05.2010.
225
115
BEŞİNCİ BÖLÜM
GEZI, POLIS ŞIDDETI VE CEZASIZLIK
I. GİRİŞ
Kolluk güçlerinin faili olduğu ağır insan hakları ihlallerinin idari ve cezai açıdan etkili bir biçimde
soruşturulması, sorumluların yargılanması ve işledikleri suçla orantılı bir cezaya hükmedilmesi Türkiye
açısından istisnaidir. İnsan hakları mahkemeleri kararlarında, insan hakları örgütlerinin çalışmalarında ve
konu ile ilgili literatürde giderek daha fazla çerçeve bir terim olan cezasızlık232 kavramı ile açıklanan bu
olgunun varlığı Gezi hareketi ile ilk kez bu kadar yaygın biçimde toplumun daha geniş kesimleri tarafından
teslim edilmiştir. Gezi eylemleri bu bakımdan yargının kolluk şiddetine ilişkin kayıtsızlığı, yer yer tarafgir ve
partizan tutumuna ışık tutmuş, Türkiye’nin özellikle 1990’lı yıllarda tepe noktasına varan kadim cezasızlık
geleneğinin daha iyi anlaşılabilmesini sağlamıştır. Bu bölüm, Gezi ile ilgili kolluk tarafından işlenen ihlallere
dönük cezasızlık pratiğine daha yakından bakmayı amaçlıyor. Bu pratiğin somut veçhelerine geçmeden önce,
cezasızlık olgusunu kuşatan ve onu anlamayı daha da mümkün kılan bir çerçeveyi işaret etmek zorunludur.
Bilindiği üzere, mevcut siyasi iktidar, kendi döneminin ilk yıllarında gerek uzun soluklu insan hakları
mücadelesinin kazanımları ve gerekse ontolojik bir mesele olarak telakki ettiği Avrupa ile bütünleşme
sürecinin zorunlulukları dolayısıyla Türkiye’nin insan hakları sicilini düzelteceğini belirtmiş ve işkence ve
kötü muamele ile ilgili de “sıfır tolerans” politikasının benimsediğini ilan etmişti. Bu politikaların ne düzeyde
içtenlikle benimsendiğine ilişkin Gezi hareketinin ortaya çıktığı Mayıs 2013’e kadar sayısız veri halihazırda
bulunuyordu. 2004 yılında NATO gösterileri, 2008 1 Mayıs’ı, 2013 1 Mayıs gösterileri, 2006 Newroz’u gibi
fiili olarak olağanüstü hal devam eden illerde yapılan gösterilere karşı polisin müdahalesi giderek daha fazla
işkence ve kötü muamelenin sokakta devam ettiğini gösteriyordu.233 Nitekim İHAM, 2013 yılında İzci
kararında, hükme bağlanan 40’ı aşkın karar ve devam eden 130 dava ışığında Türkiye’de kolluğun gösterilere
müdahalesinde sistemik sorunların bulunduğunu vurgulamıştır.234 Gezi bu bakımdan, kitlesel bir direnişe
yaygın ve sistematik - esasen insanlığa karşı suç teşkil eden - müdahale biçimlerinin yer yer ortaya çıkması ve
kısmen püskürtülmesi sonucunu doğurmakla kalmamış, aynı zamanda belirgin bir biçimde terörist, marjinal,
232
BM, İnsan Hakları Komisyonu (UN Commission on Human Rights), Impunity: Report of the Independent Expert to
Update the Set of Principles to Combat Impunity, Diane Orentlicher, 18 Şubat 2005, E/CN.4/2005/102, UN SubCommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Final Report on the Question of the Impunity
of Perpetrators of Human Rights Violations (Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), El Hadji Guiesse,
E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/8, 1997 ve ‘Question of the Impunity of Perpetrators of Human Rights Violations (Civil and
Political), Revised Final Report, 2 Ekim 1997, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/Rev.1. Daebler-Gmelin, Herta, ‘The State of Human
Rights in Europe: the Need to Eradicate Impunity’. (Report submitted to Committee on Legal Affairs and Human
Rights), Doc. 11934, 2009, http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Doc/XrefViewHTML.asp?FileID=12695&Language=en
Cezasızlık kavramı ilk kez, İHAM’ın Yaşa/Türkiye (63/1997/847/1054) davasında kullanılmıştır; 2 Eylül 1998, para. 104,
‘cezasızlık iklimi’ (‘climate of impunity’).
Ayrıca, Türkiye’deki cezasızlık alanlarına ilişkin bkz., Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or
Arbitrary Executions (Christof Heyns), A/HRC/23/47/Add.2 , s. 4.
233
İşkenceye Karşı Komite raporu, CAT/C/TUR/CO/3, 20 Ocak 2011, para. 7,
234
İzci/Türkiye, Başvuru no: 42606/05, 23 Temmuz 2013, para. 95-99.
116
çapulcu adı altında tanımlamayı seçtiği muhalif kesimlerine dönük düşman ceza hukuku kodları ile şekillenen
bir retoriği öne çıkarmıştır. Bu retorik her ne kadar polis şiddetinin orantılı olduğu, polisin göstericilere karşı
ateşli silah kullanmadığı biçiminde yer yer savunma hattında olsa da, aynı zamanda açık bir biçimde polis
şiddetine övgü olarak tezahür etmiştir. Polisin son derece sabırlı, itidalli, tahammüllü davrandığının adeta
kahramanlık destanı yazdığının Polis Akademisi mezuniyet töreninde ifade edilmesi235 izdiham yaratacak
ölçüde sokakta saldırganlaşan bir kolluk kuvvetinin yeni suçlara azmettirilmesi anlamına gelmiştir.
II. ŞIDDETIN ‘ENVANTERI’
Gezi eylemlerinde sokaktaki kolluk şiddetini muhtelif söylem ve araçlarla bizatihi teşvik ve tahrik eden
siyasi iktidar, ne eylemlerin en yoğun olarak yaşandığı dönemlerde ne de aradan geçen zamanın ardından
yaşanan hak ihlallerinin cezalandırılması yönünde bir irade sergileyebilmiştir. Polisin suç işlemeyeceği,
işlemişse açık yüreklilikle söyleyeceğine ilişkin iktidarın liderinde tecessüm eden siyasi tutum, 236 ihlallerin
görmezden gelinmesinin esasen ilk işareti olarak kayıtlara geçmiştir. Ne var ki, polis şiddetinin medya
aracılığıyla bütün dünyaya iletilebildiği, insan hakları örgütlerinin teyakkuzda olduğu ve hatta Avrupa
Parlamentosu tarafından alınan bir karara237 konu olacak derecede görünür olduğu bir dönemde sadece bu
gerekçelerle polisin destan yazdığı yönündeki açıklamaların yetmeyeceği anlaşılmış olmalıdır. Bu itibarla,
konuya dönük uluslararası kamuoyunun tepkisi ve enternasyonal dayanışma dolayısıyla Türkiye’nin taraf
olduğu insan hakları sözleşmelerinden kaynaklanan mekanizmalar nedeniyle hükümetin açıklama yapma
mecburiyeti doğmuştur. Bu bağlamda, Avrupa Konseyi İnsan Hakları Komiseri’ne, BM İnsan Hakları 117
Konseyi’ne verilen yanıtlarda başlatılan soruşturmalarla ilgili kimi bilgiler paylaşılmıştır. Bununla birlikte,
başta Taksim Dayanışması olmak üzere, polisin hak ihlallerine ilişkin soruşturma ve kovuşturmalara ilişkin
muhtelif raporlar, söz konusu yanıtlarda verilen rakamların gerçek rakamlardan bir hayli uzak olduğunu
düşündürmektedir. Bu sayılar yine Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu Gezi Raporu ve Kamu Denetçiliği
Kurumu’na ve çeşitli gazete haberlerine yansıyan adli ve idari soruşturma verileri ile uyum içinde değildir.
Aşağıda kimi detaylarıyla bu veriler değerlendirilmeye çalışılacaktır.
Avrupa Konseyi İnsan Hakları Komiseri, Nils Muižnieks’in 1-5 Temmuz 2013 tarihinde Türkiye
ziyareti çerçevesinde hazırlanan ve Kasım 2013 tarihinde yayımlanan raporuna göre, İstanbul’da bir polis
memuru ve 4 zabıta memuru, İzmir’de 2 polis memuru açığa alınmıştır.238 İstanbul’da, 5 polis memuru, bir
birlik amiri, çevik kuvvet şube müdürü, bir emniyet amiri, 7 belediye zabıta görevlisi; Ankara’da bir polis
memuru ile kimliği belirlenemeyen kolluk görevlisi; İzmir’de, il emniyet müdürü, 3 emniyet müdür
yardımcısı, 2 ilçe emniyet müdür ve 2 kaymakam ile ilgili adli ve idari soruşturmalar devam ettiği konusunda
235
‘Erdoğan: Polis kahramanlık destanı yazdı’, 24 Haziran 2013,
http://www.ntv.com.tr/arsiv/id/25450862/ (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
236
Ibid.
237
European Parliament, Joint Motion for a Resolution on the situation in Turkey, 2013(2664 (RSP), RC/939893ENdoc,
12 Haziran 2013.
238
Commisioner for Human Rights, CommDH(2013)24, 26 Kasım 2013, Avrupa Konseyi İnsan Hakları Komiseri Nils
Muizniek’in raporunun Türkçesine şuradan erişilebilir:
https://wcd.coe.int/com.instranet.InstraServlet?command=com.instranet.CmdBlobGet&InstranetImage=2395762&SecM
ode=1&DocId=2079702&Usage=2 (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
bilgilendirmiştir. Avrupa Konseyi İnsan Hakları Komiseri Muižnieks, bir başkomiser ve 3 polis memuru ile
ilgili 16 ay, bir şube müdür yardımcısı ve komiser yardımcısı için dört ay kıdem durdurma ve 3 polis ile ilgili
maaş kesim cezası verilmesinin önerildiğini öğrenmiştir. Aynı raporda, İzmir’de iki bakanlık müfettişi
tarafından çevik kuvvet mensupları ve faili belirlenememiş kolluk görevlileri ile ilgili hazırlanan iki raporun
İzmir Cumhuriyet Savcılığı’na verildiği bildirilmiştir.
Birleşmiş Milletler İnsan Hakları Konseyi’nin 14 Haziran 2013’te239 Gezi eylemleri sırasında yaşanan
hak ihlallerine ilişkin olarak sorduğu sorulara Türkiye’nin Birleşmiş Milletler Cenevre Ofisi Daimi
Temsilciliği’nin 6 Eylül 2013 tarihinde verdiği yanıtta240 ise, daha kapsamlı bilgiler bulunmaktadır. Bu rapora
göre:
Adana’da 1-4-15 Haziran 2013’te gerçekleşen olaylarla ilgili kasten yaralama ile ilgili biri takipsizlikle
sonuçlanan 8 ayrı soruşturma;
Ankara’da öldürme ile ilgili devam eden bir soruşturma dışında, suçun nitelikli yaralama olarak
belirlendiği ve 216 kişinin mağdur olarak belirlendiği 83 ayrı soruşturma;
Antalya’da, 1, 2 ve 3 Haziran 2013’te gerçekleşen olaylarla ilgili olarak işkence, yaralama, görevi
kötüye kullanma, hürriyeti tahdit, hakaret ve tehdit suçlarından devam eden soruşturmalar; bu soruşturmalar
içinde 17 polis hakkında 12 kişinin mağdur olarak belirlendiği işkence suçu ile ilgili 9 ayrı soruşturma;
Aydın/Söke’de 1 Haziran 2013’te 4 kişinin yaralanması ile ilgili olarak zor kullanma yetkisinde sınırın
aşılması suçu ile ilgili bir soruşturma;
Bursa’da 2 Haziran 2013’te 4 kişinin yaralanması ile ilgili olarak şüpheli polisler hakkında verilen
takipsizlik kararına rağmen devam eden soruşturma;
Eskişehir’de, kasten öldürme ve delillerin imhası ile ilgili 2 ayrı soruşturma ile görevi kötüye kullanma
ile ilgili 2 olmak üzere 4 “adli” soruşturma açıldığı bildiriliyor. (Açılan bu soruşturmalar içinde 4 kişi mağdur
olarak görünüyor.)
Gaziantep’te 1 Haziran 2013’te bir kişinin yaralanması ile ilgili bir polis hakkında başlatılan
soruşturma;
Hatay’da Abdullah Cömert’in öldürülmesi ile ilgili yürütülen soruşturma;
Isparta’da 1 ve 2 Haziran 2013’te gerçekleşen olaylara ilgili olarak 2 kişinin mağdur olarak
belirlendiği yaralama, zor kullanma yetkisinde sınırın aşılması ve hakaret suçları ile ilgili devam eden 2 ayrı
soruşturma;
İstanbul’da yaralama, zor kullanma yetkisinde sınırın aşılması ve hakaret ile ilgili açılan, 308 kişinin
mağdur olarak belirlendiği 7 ayrı soruşturma;
239
Office of the United Nations, High Commissioner, TUR 3/2013,
Unhttps://spdb.ohchr.org/hrdb/24th/public__UA_Turkey_14.06.13_%283.2013%29.pdf
240
Türkiye’nin Cenevre’de BM nezdindeki Daimi Temsilciliği tarafından verilen yanıtlara şuradan erişilebilir.
https://spdb.ohchr.org/hrdb/24th/Turkey_06.09.13_(3.2013).pdf (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014), s.6.
118
İzmir’de 1 Haziran ve 11 Haziran 2013 arasında 76 kişinin mağdur olarak belirlendiği ve 41 polisle ile
ilgili yaralama ve zor kullanma yetkisinde sınırın aşılması suçu ile ilgili açılan 37 ayrı soruşturma;
Kocaeli’nde 2 Haziran 2013’te 3 kişinin yaralanması iddiası ile ilgili olarak görevi kötüye kullanma,
yaralama ve hakaret ile ilgili 2 ayrı soruşturma;
Mersin’de 1 Haziran ve 4 Haziran 2013 arasında 8 kişinin, 20 Haziran 2013’te ise 14 kişinin
yaralandığı olaylarla ilgili olarak 3 ayrı soruşturma;
Muğla’da 3 kişinin boğazını sıkan ve yumruklayan polisle ilgili yaralama suçundan açılan dava
bulunduğu belirtilmiştir.
Öncelikle, dikkat edilirse Türkiye hükümeti adına yapılan bu açıklamada 241 her ne kadar suç tavsifleri
bir istisna ile Türk Ceza Kanunu’na göre yapılmış olsa da soruşturmaların adli mi idari mi olduğu belirsizdir.
Duruma ilişkin karmaşa, bazı soruşturmalara ilişkin adli (judicial) ve cezai (criminal) terimlerinin bulunması
ile daha da karmaşıklaşmaktadır. Bununla birlikte, yaşanan polis şiddetini karşılamakta burada yansıtılan ve
gerçekliğine ilişkin aşağıda tartışılacağı gibi derin tereddütler bulunan rakamların dahi yetersiz olduğu
anlaşılmaktadır.
Türkiye Kamu Denetçiliği Kurumu’na hitaben İçişleri Bakanlığı Mülkiye Teftiş Kurulu Başkanlığı’nın
6 Ağustos 2013 tarihinde yazdığı yazıya göre ise, İstanbul’da bir polis memuru ile 4 zabıta memurunun,
İzmir’de 2 polis memurunun görevden uzaklaştırıldığı; inceleme ve ön incelemenin o tarih itibariyle devam
ettiği bildirilmiştir.242 İç İşleri Bakanlığı Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü adına Kamu Denetçisi’ne hitaben 26
Eylül 2013 tarihli yazıda çok sayıda inceleme ve soruşturmanın yapıldığı ifade edilmiştir.243 Bu inceleme ve
soruşturma sürecine ilişkin ise ancak çok sınırlı ve aşağıda kimi detaylarıyla belirtilecek Türkiye İnsan Hakları
Kurumu’na verilen cevaplarda daha detaylı olarak geçen kimi olay ve mağdur kişilere yer verilmiştir.
Belirtilen soruşturmalar içinde İzmir’de “Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi Çiğli ilçe teşkilat binasının Molotof
kokteyli atılmak suretiyle yakıldığı olayda güvenlik zafiyeti olduğu”, Ankara’da ise “önleyici kolluk
tedbirlerinin alınmasında ve uygulanmasında zafiyet olup olmadığı” iddialarının en az “orantısız güç” olarak
ifade edilen polis şiddeti ile ilgili gündeme gelmesi dikkat çekicidir.244
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu tarafından hazırlanan ve 30 Ekim 2014’te yayımlanan rapora göre, 245 İç
İşleri Bakanlığı tarafından İstanbul, İzmir, Ankara, Hatay, Antalya ve Eskişehir’de idari soruşturmalar
başlatılmıştır.246 Soruşturmaların neredeyse tamamı, İç İşleri Bakanlığı’nın 11 Kasım 2013 ve 13 Ocak 2014
yazılarından anlaşıldığı üzere 2014 yılı başı itibariyle devam etmektedir. Aynı rapor komisyonunun talebi
üzerine Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü’nün Ocak 2014 tarihinde verdiği yanıta göre Gezi olaylarıyla ilgili 127
241
CommDH(2013)24, s. 22.
Kamu Baş Denetçisi M. Nihat Ömeroğlu’nun 03.2013/90 no’lu şikayete ilişkin verdiği 2013/90 sayılı tavsiye kararı, s.
30. http://www.ombudsman.gov.tr/contents/files/2013-90.pdf. İç İşleri Bakanlığı Mülkiye Teftiş Kurulu Başkanlığı’nın
6.8.2013 tarihli sayısı belirtilmeyen yazısı,
243
Ibid., s. 30.
244
Ibid., s. 31.
245
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu, Gezi Parkı Olayları, 30 Ekim 2014, Rapor no: 2014/03, şu adresten erişilebilir:
http://www.tihk.gov.tr/www/files/549139d24a468.pdf (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
246
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu Raporu, s. 18-25.
242
119
personel hakkında araştırma/soruşturma yapılmış/yapılmakta olduğu, yazı tarihi itibariyle 43 adet raporun
düzenlendiği belirtilmiştir. 247
Disiplin soruşturmalarına ilişkin yapılan bilgilendirme, hiçbir polisin bu sırada açığa alınmadığını
düşündürmekle birlikte, aynı raporun olayların kronolojisini bildiren kısmında İzmir Gündoğdu meydanında
“sivillere yönelik orantısız müdahalede bulunduğu iddia edilen” üç polis memurunun açığa alındığı
belirtilmektedir.248 Bu bilginin doğruluğuna ilişkin tereddütler, yukarıda Türkiye’nin Avrupa İnsan Hakları
Komiseri’ne verdiği yanıta göre Haziran 2013’te açığa alındığı söylenen zabıtaların Ağustos ayında tekrar
görevlerine döndüklerine ilişkin bilginin mevcudiyeti ile artmaktadır.249 Aşağıda değinileceği gibi, kolluk
görevlilerinin
disiplin
mevzuatında
açığa
alınma/görevden
uzaklaşma
tedbirine
ancak
istisnaen
başvurulabilecek olması da açığa alınma tedbirinin reel olarak uygulanmış olduğu konusunda ciddi soru
işaretleri uyandırmaktadır. Ethem Sarısülük’ü öldürmekten mahkûm olan Ahmet Şahbaz için dahi açığa
alınma tedbiri uygulanmamış ve muhtemelen sadece yoğun kamuoyu baskısı nedeniyle 24 ay uzun süreli
durdurma istenmiştir. Nitekim, fiil ile orantısız 24 ay süreli durdurmadan ibaret cezaya ilişkin olarak da “fiilin
işleniş şekli, durumun ağırlığı ya da zararın derecesine göre” Emniyet Örgütü Disiplin Tüzüğü Ek md. 6’ya
göre meslekten çıkarma cezası ağırlaştırılmış ceza olarak öngörülürken, önerilen cezayı ağırlaştırıcı bu durum
göz önüne alınmamış ve disiplin cezası alt sınırdan verilmiştir.250 Bunun dışında, İzmir’de bir komiser ve 3
polis memurunun; Antalya’da 13 polis memurunun, İstanbul’da bir 3. sınıf emniyet müdürü, 4. sınıf emniyet
müdürü ve 2 polis memurunun 16 ay uzun süreli durdurma ile cezalandırılmalarına dönük raporlar tanzim
edilmiştir.251 Eskişehir’de ise nihai olarak 2 polis hakkında ‘16 ay uzun süreli durdurma cezası’ ile
cezalandırılmaları görüşünü içeren rapor Eskişehir Valiliği’ne gönderildikten sonra diğer 2 polis hakkında da 120
ceza soruşturması devam ettiği anlaşıldığı için, Eskişehir İl Polis Disiplin Kurulu tarafından söz konusu polis
memurları aleyhine de disiplin soruşturması açıldığı ve252 bu soruşturmaların Eskişehir’de 5 kişinin
gösterilerde yaralanması ile ilgili disiplin soruşturmaları ile birleştirilmesine karar verildiği ifade edilmektedir.
Nihai olarak Eskişehir’de 5 kişinin yaralanması ile ilgili ise üç polis memuru hakkında ‘16 ay uzun süreli
durdurma’ cezası ile cezalandırılmaları yönündeki rapor tanzim edildiği ifade edilmiştir. Yine İzmir’de iki 3.
sınıf emniyet müdürü ve bir komiser yardımcısı hakkında “kask kayıtlarının düzenli olarak tutulmadığı
iddiaları ile ilgili olarak” 4 ay süreli durdurma cezası verilmesinin talep edildiği kaydedilmektedir. 253
Ankara’da bir komiser yardımcısının süresi belirtilmeksizin ‘uzun süreli durdurma’ cezası ile cezalandırılması
gerektiğine ilişkin bir rapor tanzim edilmiştir.254 Antalya’da 5 polis memuru ile Ankara’da bir emniyet amiri,
bir başkomiser ve bir polis memuru için “görevde kayıtsızlık göstermek ve görevi savsaklamak” nedeniyle ‘3
247
Ibid., s. 18.
Ibid., s. 93.
249
Ibid., s. 91, dn. 110 Raporda “İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediye Başkanı tarafından, 20 Haziran 2013 tarihinde yapılan
açıklamada; çadırları yaktığı iddia edilen dört zabıta görevlisinin açığa alındığı belirtildi. Bu kişiler Ağustos ayında tekrar
işe başladılar(.)” biçiminde ifade edilen göreve başlama ile ilgili bilginin kaynağı da belirsizdir.
250
Ibid., s. 67, ‘Meslekten men yerine kıdem durdurma cezası’, Milliyet, 6 Şubat 2014,
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/meslekten-men-yerine-kidem/gundem/detay/1832623/default.htm (Son Retrieved: Aralık
2014).
251
Ibid., s. 18, 21, 23.
252
Ibid., s. 24.
253
Ibid., s. 22.
254
Ibid., s. 20.
248
günlüğe kadar aylık kesimi’ cezası ile İzmir’de ‘aylık kesimi’ cezalarının talep edildiği anlaşılmaktadır. 255
İstanbul’da bir emniyet amiri ve üç polis ile ilgili ve Ankara’da bir emniyet amiri ve 2 polis memuru ile ilgili
bir astsubay çavuşun darp edilmesi olayında ilgili astsubayın “askeri kimlik kartında bulunan fotoğraflarının
basına sızdırılması”256 gerekçesi ile kınama cezası verilmesine karar verildiği ifade edilmektedir.
Önemle belirtmek gerekir ki, teklif edildiği veya verildiği söylenen disiplin cezaları, işlenen/isnat edilen
suçların vahametini yansıtmaktan uzaktır. Bilindiği üzere, Emniyet Örgütü Disiplin Tüzüğü uyarma, kınama,
aylık kesimi (üç günlüğe kadar, 4-10 günlük, 11-15 günlük), kısa süreli durdurma (4 ay, 6 ay, 10 ay), uzun
süreli durdurma (12 ay, 16 ay, 24 ay süreli durdurma) ve meslekten çıkarma ile memurluktan çıkarma
cezalarını öngörmektedir. Verilen az sayıda cezanın kınama, kısa süreli durdurma olduğu görülmektedir. Söz
konusu Tüzüğe göre, kasten insan öldürme (md. 8/6), “iş sahiplerine ya da herhangi bir nedenle Emniyet
binalarına gelen ya da getirilenlere işkence yapmak”, “suç kanıtlarını yok etmek veya bilerek ve isteyerek yok
olmasına neden olmak ya da saklamak, saklanmasına yardımcı olmak yahut değiştirmek”, “görevinin yerine
getirilmesinde dil, ırk, cinsiyet, siyasal düşünce, felsefi inanç, din ve mezhep ayrımı yapmak, laikliğe aykırı
veya bölücü davranışlarda bulunmak ya da emniyet mensupları arasında bu yolda ayrım yapıcı tutum ve
davranışlarda bulunmak”, “kasıtlı olarak gerçek dışı rapor vermek veya tutanak düzenleyip imza etmek veya
ettirmek”, yalan yere tanıklık, suç tasnii, iftira, sahtecilik gibi fiiller meslekten çıkarma cezasını
gerektirmektedir. “İş sahiplerini veya herhangi bir nedenle Emniyet binalarına gelen ya da getirilenleri
dövmek” (12 ay uzun süreli durdurma), iş sahiplerine ya da herhangi bir nedenle Emniyet binalarına gelen ya
da getirilenlere hakaret etmek (4 ay süreli durdurma), iş sahiplerine veya halka karşı onur kırıcı söz söylemek
veya davranışta bulunmak ise aylık kesimini gerektiren disiplin suçlarıdır. Yine, aynı Tüzüğün 12. maddesine 121
göre,
“Herhangi bir işe ilişkin yazılı kağıt, belge, mikrofilm aslı veya kopyalarını kasıtlı olarak yok eden,
ortadan kaldıran ya da belge niteliği taşıyan bilgisayar programlarını, dosyalarını, verilerini hukuka aykırı
olarak ele geçiren, başkasına zarar vermek üzere kullanan, tahrip eden, değiştiren, silen, sistemin işlemesine
engel olan ya da yanlış biçimde işlemesini sağlayanlara uzun süreli durdurma cezasının üst sınırı verilir.”
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu’na İç İşleri Bakanlığı tarafından gönderilen ve yukarıda tarihleri
belirtilen iki ayrı yazı içeriği göz önüne alındığında devam eden disiplin soruşturmaları açısından önemli bir
tedbir olan görevden uzaklaştırmanın/açığa almanın Gezi eylemlerinde suç işleyen polislerle ilgili
uygulanmadığı anlaşılmaktadır. Zira, ancak ilgili disiplin kurulu kararı ile meslekten çıkarma cezası verilenler
kararın onaylanmasına kadar süre içinde görevden uzaklaştırılabilir. Nitekim, bu hüküm özellikle kolluk
güçlerinin toplumsal gösterilerde işlediği suçlar bakımından Asayişe Müessir Bazı Fiillerin Önlenmesi
Hakkında Kanun ile ayrıca güvenceye kavuşmakta ve insan haklarının korunması açısından ciddi sakıncalar
taşımaktadır. Söz konusu kanunu 3. madde yollamasıyla 1. madde A bendine göre PVSK 16. maddeye göre
polisin zor ve silah kullanan polisler hakkında açığa alma, işten el çektirme işlemi uygulanmaz.
255
256
Ibid. s. 21-23. .
Ibid., s. 20.
Üçüncüsü, açılan az sayıdaki disiplin soruşturmalarında ceza verilmesine yer olmadığı kararları
özellikle amir durumunda polisler için çoğunluktadır. İstanbul’da bir emniyet amiri hakkında Emniyet Genel
Müdürlüğü Merkez Disiplin Kurulunca 27.11.2013’te ceza tertibine mahal olmadığına dair karar verilmiştir.
Af Örgütü raporunda da belirtildiği üzere en fazla yaralanmaların meydana geldiği Hatay’da, 3 Haziran 2013
tarihindeki gösteriler sırasında polisin göstericilere karşı “orantısız güç kullandığı iddialarını doğrulayacak
maddi delil bulunmadığı ve konuların iddiadan öteye gitmediği” raporuyla disiplin soruşturulmasına dahi
lüzum görülmemiştir.257
Başlatılan ceza soruşturmalarında da sürecin son derece yavaş ilerlediği anlaşılmaktadır. Açılan az
sayıda soruşturma, rapor tanzim edildiği sırada henüz devam etmektedir. İzmir’de biri komiser 4 polise ilişkin
Savcılık tarafından soruşturma yapılmasına dair izin verilmiştir. İstanbul’da, aralarında 3. sınıf emniyet
müdürü ve 4. sınıf emniyet müdürü bulunan 5 polis memuru hakkında “soruşturma izni verilmesi” gerektiği
görüşünü içeren ön inceleme raporu İstanbul Valiliği’ne verilmiş ve İstanbul İl İdare Kurulu Müdürlüğü’nce,
3 polis memuru hakkında soruşturma izni verilmesi, 3. sınıf ve 4. sınıf emniyet müdürleri hakkında
“soruşturma izni verilmemesi” kararı verilmiş ve bir polis memuru ile ilgili düzenlenen rapor ise doğrudan
İstanbul Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı’na gönderilmiştir. İstanbul’da “H.Y.258 adlı kişinin” darp edilmesi ile ilgili
olarak iki ayrı TOMA aracında bulunan 4 polisle ilgili soruşturmanın devam ettiği bildirilmektedir. Ankara’da
ise, Ethem Sarısülük’ün ölümüyle ilgili devam ettiği belirtilen soruşturma dışında, bir astsubay çavuşun darp
edilmesi, hakarete uğraması ve gözaltına alınması ile ilgili olarak, şikâyetin doğrudan Cumhuriyet
Başsavcılığınca soruşturulacak fiiller içinde olduğuna ilişkin rapor Ankara Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı’na
gönderilmiştir. Hatay’da Abdullah Cömert’in ölümüyle ilgili olarak yapılan “izinsiz gösteri ve yürüyüşün 122
dağıtılmasının hem yasa gereği olması, hem de yapılan işlemlerin mevzuat çerçevesinde usulüne uygun olarak
uygulanması dolayısıyla”, 2., 3., 4. sınıf emniyet müdürleri, bir komiser yardımcısı ve 15 polis memuru
hakkında herhangi bir işlem yapılmasına gerek duyulmamıştır. Antalya’da bir 2. sınıf emniyet müdürü, 3. sınıf
emniyet müdürü ve 4. sınıf emniyet müdürü ile 4 polis memuru hakkında “soruşturma izni verilmemesi”
gerektiği görüşünü düzenleyen ön inceleme raporu hazırlanmıştır. Yine, milletvekilleri Ramis Topal’ın
İstanbul’da ve Muharrem Işık’ın Ankara’da yaralanmaları ile ilgili olarak Ağustosta polis başmüfettişi
görevlendirildiği de belirtilmiştir.259
Açıldığı ve devam ettiği söylenen bu disiplin soruşturmaları ve ceza soruşturmalarına ilişkin ön
süreçlere dair dikkat çeken kimi hususlar bulunmaktadır. Birincisi, sözü edilen disiplin soruşturmaların
tamamı gerçekten açıldıysa akıbetlerine ilişkin kimi gazete haberleri dışında bilgiler mevcut değildir.260 Bir
gazete haberine göre, İstanbul, İzmir, Eskişehir ve Hatay’da görevli polis memurları hakkında yürütülen
soruşturma Kasım 2013’te tamamlanmıştır. İzmir’de 14, İstanbul’da 12, Eskişehir’de ise 4 polis hakkında üç
günlük maaş kesimi, 4 ay süreli kıdem tenzili ve 16 ay süreli kıdem durdurma cezaları talep edilmiştir. 261 Bir
257
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu Raporu, s. 24.
H.Y olarak adı kısaltılan mağdur Hakan Yaman olmalıdır. Hakan Yaman dövülerek ateşe atılması ve gözünüm
çıkartılması olayı ile ilgili olarak bkz., Uluslararası Af Örgütü, s. 11-12.
259
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu Raporu, s. 19.
260
Ibid.
261
Kamil Elibol, Hatay Polisine Gezi cezası yok, Bugün, 24 Kasım 2013,
258
başka gazete haberi de, Ankara’da aradan geçen bir yıl sonra, Gezi Parkı eylemlerinde aralarında yüz ve ayak
bölgelerine gaz fişeğinin isabet etmesi sonucu yaralanan 4 mağdurun bulunduğu 6 kişinin şikayeti ile
başlatılan disiplin soruşturmalarına ilişkin bazı bilgiler içermektedir. Söz konusu habere göre, zor kullanma
yetkisinde sınırın aşılmamasına ilişkin yapılan uyarılara rağmen toplulukların dağıtılması amacına uygun gaz
kullanmayan ve amirlerin emirlerine uymayan personel hakkında disiplin soruşturması yürütmeyen 6 polis
müdürüne aylık kesim cezası, bazı kişilerin yaralanmasına neden olan 7 polis memuruna da 6 ay kıdem
durdurma cezası verilmiştir.262 Diğer soruşturmalardaki sürecin ne aşamada olduğuna ilişkin ise kamuoyunun
herhangi bir bilgisi bulunmamaktadır. Bir başka gazete haberine göre ise, Antalya’da Vedat Oğuz’un kör
olmasına neden olan gaz fişeğini kullanan polise 16 ay kıdem durdurma263 cezası verildiği belirtilmektedir.
Bu belirsizlik Taksim Dayanışması tarafından hazırlanan rapordaki veriler ışığında artmaktadır. Taksim
Dayanışması tarafından hazırlanan rapora göre, polis şiddeti nedeniyle Ankara’da suç duyurusunda bulunan
370 kişi saptanmıştır.264 Ankara’da suç duyuruları ağırlıklı olarak gaz fişeği ve plastik mermi yaralanması,
gözaltında işkence ve kötü muamele ve kişileri usulsüzce alıkoymak için yapılan ve kayıt altına alınmayan
gözaltında yapılan işkence hakkında olduğu ve hâlihazırda bazı polisler hakkında takipsizlik kararı verildiği
belirtilmektedir.265 Aynı rapora göre İstanbul’da devam eden soruşturmalarla ilgili olarak BM İnsan Hakları
Konseyi’ne verilen yanıttaki bilgilerin doğruluğu Mayıs 2014 itibariyle teyit edilememiştir.266 Gerek
Ankara’daki gerek İstanbul’daki soruşturmaların birkaç ana dosyada birleştirildiği bildirilmektedir. Yine aynı
rapordaki veriler çerçevesinde, Bursa, Çanakkale, Dersim, Diyarbakır, Gaziantep, Isparta, Kırşehir, Kocaeli,
Malatya, Manisa, Sakarya, Samsun, Tokat ve Tekirdağ’da açılmış ve devam eden soruşturmalarla ilgili
spesifik olarak mağdur avukatları olmak üzere kamuoyu bilgi sahibi değildir.
Açılan soruşturmaların sayısının azlığı, polisin neden olduğu işkence ve diğer kötü muamele fiillerinin
sayısı düşünüldüğünde tablo daha net bir biçimde ortaya çıkmaktadır. TTB’nin Ağustos 2013 tarihli raporuna
göre o tarih itibariyle yaralı sayısı 8163’tür.267Şikâyet eden mağdur sayısının azlığı özellikle belirli illerde çok
daha dikkat çekicidir. Uluslararası Af Örgütü’nün raporuna göre, polis şiddetinin en yoğun olduğu, göz kaybı
gibi ağır yaralanmaların oluştuğu Adana ve Antakya’daki avukatlar, “sadece birkaç kişinin polisle ilgili suç
duyurusunda” bulunduğunu aktarmışlardır.268 Mağdurların, kendilerine karşı işlenen suçlara ilişkin
şikâyetlerini dile getirmemelerinde, adaletin tesisi edileceğine ilişkin yaşadıkları tereddütler ve şikayet
etmeleri durumunda kendi aleyhlerine bir soruşturma başlatılacağına dönük kaygıların rol oynadığı
Uluslararası Af Örgütü raporunda da bir kez daha ortaya çıkmaktadır.269
http://gundem.bugun.com.tr/hatay-polisine-gezi-cezasi-yok-haberi/872507
‘Zor kullanma sınırı aşıldı’, Milliyet, 23 Aralık 2014, http://www.milliyet.com.tr/-zor-kullanma-siniri-asildi--gundem1988400/
263
‘Kör eden polise 16 ay kıdem durdurma cezası’, Hürriyet, 17 Eylül 2013,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/24730089.asp
264
Taksim Dayanışması, s. 11.
265
Ibid.
266
Taksim Dayanışması, s. 35.
267
Bkz., yukarıda.
268
Uluslararası Af Örgütü Raporu, ‘Yaralar Açık, Adalet Hala Yok’, Indeks: EUR 44/010/2014,
http://amnesty.org.tr/uploads/Docs/yaralar-acik-adalet-hala-yok83.pdf, s. 7.
269
Uluslararası Af Örgütü, s. 7.
262
123
Yine, Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu’nun raporuna göre, daha önce soruşturma başlatıldığı bildirilen
kimi illerde soruşturmaların akıbetine ilişkin en ufak bir bilgi bulunmamaktadır. Türkiye hükümetinin
Birleşmiş Milletler İnsan Hakları Konseyi’ne verdiği yanıta göre, yukarıda belirtildiği üzere, Adana’da kasten
yaralama ile ilgili 8 ayrı soruşturmanın, Aydın/Söke’de, 4 kişinin yaralanması ile ilgili olarak zor kullanma
yetkisinde sınırın aşılması suçu ile ilgili soruşturmanın,270 Gaziantep’te bir kişinin yaralanması ile ilgili bir
polis memuru hakkında başlatılan soruşturmanın, Mersin’de 22 kişinin yaralandığı olaylarla ilgili olarak
açılan 3 ayrı soruşturmanın, Kocaeli’nde 2 Haziran 2013’te 3 kişinin yaralanması iddiası ile ilgili olarak
görevi kötüye kullanma, yaralama ve hakaret ile ilgili 2 ayrı soruşturmanın akıbeti ile ilgili bir bilgi
bulunmamaktadır. Taksim Dayanışması’na göre Mayıs 2014 itibariyle açılmış bu illerde idari ve cezai
soruşturma bulunduğu bilgisi bulunmamaktadır.271 Yine, İnsan Hakları Konseyi’nin verdiği yanıta göre
Muğla’da 3 kişinin boğazını sıkan ve yumruklayan polisle ilgili yaralama suçundan kamu davası açılmıştır,
fakat bu bilginin de Taksim Dayanışması Raporu için yapılan çalışma kapsamında doğrulanması da mümkün
olmamıştır.272
Taksim Dayanışması raporuna, muhtelif illerde (İstanbul, Eskişehir, Muğla, Hatay273) açılan az sayıda
soruşturmada verilen takipsizlik kararları yansımıştır. İstanbul ve Eskişehir’de zor kullanma yetkisinin
aşılması suretiyle kasten yaralama dolayısıyla açılan soruşturmalar hakkında takipsizlik kararı verilmiştir. 274
Eskişehir Savcılığı, takipsizlik kararına gerekçe olarak mağdurlardaki yaralanmaların kolluk tarafından
gerçekleştirildiğine ilişkin delil bulunmaması ve dolayısıyla faillerin meçhul kalmasını gerekçe göstermiştir.
İki ayrı mağdura ilişkin benzer sebeplerle takipsizlik kararı verilmiştir.275 Yine, kimi vakalarda da amir
durumdaki kolluk görevlileri veya suçu beraber işleyenler ile ilgili takipsizlik kararı verilmiştir. Ethem 124
Sarısülük’ün öldürülmesi ile ilgili sadece bir polis hakkında dava açılmış ve yargılama yürütülmüş, şüpheli
diğer polisler hakkında takipsizlik kararı verilmiştir.276 Abdullah Can Cömert’in biber gazı kapsülü ile
öldürülmesinde de sadece Ahmet Kuş hakkında ‘olası kastla öldürme’ suçu ile ilgili kamu davası açılmış,
şüpheli diğer polislerle ilgili takipsizlik kararı verilmiştir.277 Ali İsmail Korkmaz’ın öldürülmesi
soruşturmasında şüphelilerden Serkan Kavak ile ilgili olarak, olayı aydınlatmak üzere TÜBİTAK’a gönderilen
görüntüler beklenmeden takipsizlik kararı verilmiştir.278
Biber gazının neden olduğu ölümler ile ilgili verilen takipsizlik kararlarında ise ölüme neden olan kalp
krizi ile bireyin sağlığında bozulmaya neden olan fiil arasında nedensellik bağlantısı kurulamadığı için
270
Taksim Dayanışması, Hak İhlalleri Raporu Temmuz 2014,
http://takipteyiz.taksimdayanisma.org/icerik/raporlar/hakihlalleriraporu.pdf , s. 19.
271
Taksim Dayanışması, s. 10, 19, 23, 38, 39.
272
Ibid., s. 41.
273
Ibid., s. 14, 17.
274
Ibid., s. 20-21, 34, 35, 40.
275
Taksim Dayanışması Raporu, (s., 20-21). Soruşturma no: 2013/15211 ve 2013/34919), Soruşturma No: 2013/16059.
276
Ibid., s. 12. Yine, Ethem Sarısülük’ü öldürmekten mahkum olan Ahmet Şahbaz’a geçmiş tarihli ve gerçeğe aykırı
biçimde rapor tanzim eden Ankara’da Medicana International Hastanesi’nde çalışan iki adli tıp uzmanı doktoru aleyhine
açılan sahtecilik soruşturması da takipsizlik kararı ile sonuçlanmıştır. Ethem Sarısülük davasında yeni gelişme, Hürriyet
(Mesut Hasan Benli), 18 Nisan 2014, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/26250874.asp.
277
Taksim Dayanışması, s. 17.
278
‘Ali İsmail davasından ‘meşeli saldırgana’ soruşturma yok’, Radikal (İsmail Saymaz), 2 Ocak 2014,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/ali_ismail_meseli_saldirgana_sorusturma_yok-1169027.
Ayrıca
bkz.
Taksim
Dayanışması, s. 21.
takipsizlik kararı verilmiştir. İrfan Tuna’nın midesinde biber gazının etken maddelerinden Kapsaisin ve
Dihidrokapsaisin bulunduğu tespit edilmesine rağmen, görüşüne başvurulan İstanbul Adli Tıp Kurumu
Başkanlığı oybirliği ile “kalp damar hastalığı sonucu öldüğü” sonucuna varmıştır.279 Serdar Kadakal’a280
ilişkin olarak Adli Tıp 1. İhtisas Kurulu’nun tanzim ettiği ve Kadakal’ın kalp krizi geçirdiği raporunu gerekçe
göstererek Kadıköy Savcılığı, Kadakal ailesinin yaptığı şikâyet ile ilgili takipsizlik kararı vermiştir. İtiraz
üzerine İstanbul 6. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi de itirazı reddetmiş ve Kadakal’ın ailesi yaşama etkili başvuru
hakkının ihlal edilmesi dolayısıyla Anayasa Mahkemesi’ne bireysel başvuru yapmak durumunda kalmıştır.281
III. POLIS ŞIDDETINE İLIŞKIN SORUŞTURMALARA DAIR SORUNLAR
Gezi Parkı olayları çerçevesinde cereyan eden polis şiddeti ile ilgili yürütülen soruşturmalara ilişkin
ilerleme kaydedilmemesi sıklıkla gündeme gelmektedir. Kamu Denetçiliği Kurumu’nun tavsiye kararında
örneğin İstanbul Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı’nın 2 Ağustos 2013 tarihli yazısında282 ayrı ayrı devam ettiği iddia
olunan soruşturmalarla ilgili başlatılan soruşturma işlemlerini şöyle sıralamıştır:
“toplumsal olaylara müdahale sırasında değişik şekillerde yaralanan vatandaşlarımız tarafından
İstanbul Cumhuriyet Başsavcılıklarına şikâyet dilekçelerinin intikal ettiği, dilekçelerin her birisi için ayrı
soruşturma gerçekleştirilmekte olduğu, müştekilerin bahsettiği olayların detaylıca araştırılması, mobese
kamera görüntüleri ve işyeri kamera görüntülerinin temini, şikâyet dilekçelerinde yer verilen bilgiler eşliğinde
tanıkların, diğer dinlenecek kişilerin ve şüphelilerin tespiti, şüpheli güvenlik görevlilerinin açık kimlik ve
görev yeri bilgileri ile fotoğraflarının gönderilmesi ve delillerin toplanması talimatının İstanbul Emniyet
Müdürlüğüne verildiği” (Vurgular eklenmiştir.)
Ne var ki, son olarak Berkin Elvan’ın biber gazı kapsülü ile vurularak hayatını kaybetmesine ilişkin
soruşturma olmak üzere,283 yürütülen soruşturmalar ve yargılama süreçleri mağdurları ve yakınlarını tatmin
etmekten uzaktır. Aşağıda, bu nedenleri değerlendirmeden öncelikle etkili bir soruşturma yürütülmesine
ilişkin kriterlerin altını çizmekte fayda bulunuyor.
İHAM Assenov ve diğerleri/Bulgaristan kararında, polis tarafından veya devletin diğer kolluk güçleri
tarafından ciddi biçimde kötü muameleye maruz kaldığına ilişkin tartışılabilir bir iddiası olan kişinin iddiası
ile ilgili etkili bir soruşturma yürütmek zorunluluğu vurgulanmıştır.284 Bu ilkenin yaşam hakkı için de
önemine değinen Mahkeme, aksi takdirde, işkence, gayriinsanî ve aşağılayıcı muamele yasağının
önemsizleşeceği ve devletin ajanları tarafından gerçekleştirilecek kimi ihlallerin tamamen cezasız kalacağını
belirtmiştir.
279
‘İkinci rapor gazı görmedi!’, Vatan (Çınar Özer), 16 Şubat 2014, http://www.gazetevatan.com/ikinci-rapor-gazigormedi--610084-gundem/.
280
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/serdar_kadikoydeki_gaz_yuzunden_mi_oldu-1150775
281
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/kadakal_dosyasi_anayasa_mahkemesinde-1198790
282
Bkz., Kamu Başdenetçisi Ömeroğlu’nun tavsiye kararı, s. 36.
283
Tahincioğlu, Gökçer, Berkin Elvan dosyası nerede?, Milliyet, 7 Aralık 2014,
‘#BerkinElvanDosyasıNerede’, Bianet, 1 Aralık 2014,
http://www.bianet.org/bianet/insan-haklari/160406-berkinelvandosyasinerede
284
Assenov ve diğerleri/Bulgaristan, Başvuru no: 90/1997/874/1086, para. 101-106,
125
İHAM söz konusu karar dâhil muhtelif kararlarında ise etkili bir soruşturmanın kriterlerini tesis
etmiştir. Buna göre, etkili soruşturmadan söz edilebilmesi için; soruşturmanın bağımsız bir organ tarafından
285
tam ve titiz bir şekilde ve süratle yapılması,286 ihlalden sorumlu olanların belirlenmesi ve cezalandırılması
konularında sonuca götürebilecek nitelikte olması,287 soruşturmada gerekli olan ivedilik ve özenin
gösterilmesi288 ve soruşturmaların kamu denetimine açık olması gerekir.289 Kamu denetimi, her halükarda en
azından mağdurların veya kişi hayatını kaybetmişse yakınlarının menfaatlerini güvence altına almaya matuf
olacak biçimde soruşturmaya katılımları sağlanarak ulaşılabilir.290
İHAM içtihadı ile uyumlu olarak Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesi tarafından 30 Mart 2011 tarihinde
kabul edilen ‘Ağır İnsan Hakları İhlallerinde Cezasızlığın Ortadan Kaldırılması İle İlgili Kılavuz İlkeler’
çerçevesinde etkin soruşturma ile ilgili kriterlerin altı çizilmiştir.291
Bu İlkeler çerçevesinde, bir ceza soruşturmasında soruşturmanın suç faillerinin tespit edilmesi ve
cezalandırılmasını sağlayacak yeterlilikte olması gerekir.292 Yeterlilik olarak adlandırılan bu kriter
çerçevesinde delillerinin güvence altına alınmasını sağlamak için gerekenlerin yapılmış olması gerekir.
İkincisi, bir ceza soruşturmasında bütünsel bir yaklaşım izlenmelidir.293Baştanbaşalık olarak
adlandırılan bu ilkeye göre, soruşturmanın kapsamlı bir biçimde yürütülmesi, suça ilişkin ayrımcı saikin
mevcut olup olmadığı hususu dâhil araştırılmalıdır. Bu bağlamda, delillerin güvence altına alınması için
mağdur, şüpheli ve tanıkların tespit edilmesi, bu kişilerle görüşülmesi, ihlalin meydana geldiği yerin
incelenmesi, yetkili uzmanlar nezaretinde adli tıp açısından delillerin toplanması gibi atılması gerekli bütün
“makul adımlar” atılmalıdır.
Üçüncü bir ilke,294 soruşturmacıların tarafsızlığı ve bağımsızlığıdır. Etkili soruşturma bakımından bu
ilke işlendiği iddia edilen suç ile ilgisi bulunan kişilerin delilerin toplanmasına veya diğer soruşturma
işlemlerine katılmamasıdır. İşkenceye Karşı Komite de 14. Genel Raporu’nda “soruşturmanın uygulamada
yürütülmesi ile görevlendirilenlerin, vakaya karışmış birimden tamamen bağımsız” olması gerektiğini
285
Subaşı ve Çoban/Türkiye, 9 Temmuz 2013, Başvuru no: 20129/07, 9 Temmuz 2013, para. 43, Tahsin Acar/Türkiye,
Başvuru no: 26307/95, 8 Nisan 2004, para. 222.
286
Kelly vd./Birleşik Krallık, Başvuru no:30054/96,
4 Mayıs 2001, para. 97, Yaşa/Türkiye, Başvuru no:
63/1997/847/1054, 2 Eylül 1998, para. 102-104, Tahsin Acar/Türkiye, para. 223, Çakıcı/Türkiye, Başvuru no: 23657/94,
8 Temmuz 1999, para. 80, 87-106, Tanrıkulu/Türkiye, Başvuru no: 23763/94, 8 Temmuz 1999, para. 109.
287
Aydın/Türkiye, Başvuru no: 57/1996/676/866, 25 Eylül 1997, para. 105, Orhan Kur/Türkiye, Başvuru no:32577/02, 3
Haziran 2008, para. 45
288
Makaratzis/Türkiye, Başvuru no: 50385/99, 20 Aralık 2004, para. 74, Kelly vd./Birleşik Krallık, para. 95,
Güleç/Türkiye, Başvuru No: 54/1997/838/1044, 27 Temmuz 1998, para. 91-92,
289
Tahsin Acar/Türkiye, para. 225,
290
Tahsin Acar/Türkiye, para. 225, Oğur/Türkiye, Başvuru no: 21594/93, 20 Mayıs 1993, para. 92, Güleç/Türkiye, para.
82, Aksoy/Türkiye, Başvuru no: 21987/93, 18 Aralık 1996, para. 95-98.
291
Avrupa Konseyi, ‘Ağır İnsan Hakları İhlallerinde Cezasızlığın Ortadan Kaldırılması (Çev. Zeynep Güllü), Strazburg,
2013, Şu adresten erişilebilir:
http://www.ihop.org.tr/dosya/coe/CoE_Agir_Hak_Ihlalleri_Cezasizlik.pdf, s. 9-10, Kurt, Gülşah, Cezasızlık Sorunu:
Soruşturma Süreci, Hafıza Merkezi, İstanbul, 2014, s. 101-102. Ayrıca, Doğru, Osman, Soruşturma(ma), Radikal, 14
Temmuz 2013,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/radikal2/sorusturmama-1141905.
292
Avrupa Konseyi Ağır İnsan Hakları İhlallerinde Cezasızlığın Ortadan Kaldırılması El Kitabı
293
Ibid., , s. 10.
294
Ibid, s. 9.
126
belirtmektedir.295 Komite’ye göre, kamu görevlilerinin kötü muamele faili olduğu iddiasıyla yürütülen
soruşturmalarda, savcının soruşturulmasına ilişkin yakın ve etkili bir denetimin gerçekleştirilmesi, verilen
talimatların uygun tarzda, açık ve net olması gerektiğini belirtmektedir.
Dördüncü bir ilke,296 bir ceza soruşturmasının süratli bir biçimde yürütülmesidir. İşkenceye Karşı
Komite, 14. Genel Raporu’nda soruşturmanın titizlikle ve oldukça süratli bir şekilde yürütülmesi gerektiğni
belirtmiştir.297 Komite, yapılması zorunlu soruşturma işlemlerinin sebepsiz yere geciktirildiği veya savcılığın
veya adli makamların, bu işlemleri yapmaya muktedir olmadığının görülebildiği vakaların varlığını tespit
ettiğini ve bu tip soruşturmaların gerçek anlamda bir soruşturma faaliyetini ihtiva etmediğini belirtmiştir.
Beşinci ilke,298 kamu gözetimidir. Denetimin sağlanması, yurttaşların hukukun üstünlüğüne dair olan
inançlarının korunması ve sürdürülmesi, hukuka aykırı fillere hoşgörü ile yaklaşılmayacağına dair inancın
sağlanması için soruşturmanın kamu gözetiminde olması gerekir. İşkenceye Karşı Komite de 14. Genel Rapor
da vakadan vakaya değişiklik gösterebilmek ile birlikte, soruşturmanın sonuçlarının belli ölçüde kamu
gözetimine açık olması gerektiğini, özellikle ağır ihlallerde, mağdurun ve gerektiğinde mağdurun birinci
dereceden akrabalarının mağdurun meşru çıkarlarını korumak için sürece dâhil edilmeleri gerektiğini
belirtmektedir.299
Türkiye’de soruşturma sürecini kontrol eden süjeler olarak savcıların Gezi eylemlerindeki polis
şiddetine ilişkin delillerin elde edilmesinde TİHV ve İHD’nin de içinde bulunduğu Uluslararası İnsan Hakları
Federasyonu (FIDH) raporunda da belirtildiği ve aşağıda tartışılacağı üzere son derece “pasif ve
müsamahakar” davrandıklarına ilişkin kuvvetli emarelerin bulunduğu anlaşılmaktadır.300 Esasen, Türkiye’de 127
savcılar büyük ölçüde etkili bir soruşturma yürütülmesine ilişkin bazı yetkilerle donatılmışlardır. Bu
mevzuatın kısaca değerlendirilmesi savcıların Gezi ile ilgili soruşturma süreçlerindeki tutumunu daha net
olarak ortaya koyacaktır.
Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun (CMK) 161/1 maddesine göre cumhuriyet savcısı, doğrudan doğruya
veya emrindeki adli kolluk görevlileri aracılığıyla her türlü araştırmayı yapabilir ve bütün kamu
görevlilerinden her türlü bilgiyi isteyebilir. Adli kolluk görevlileri, bu bakımdan savcısının adliyeye ilişkin
bütün emirlerini gecikmeksizin yerine getirmekle yükümlüdür (md. 161/2). Yine, CMK 332/1’e göre suçların
soruşturma ve kovuşturması sorasında cumhuriyet savcısının hakim veya mahkeme tarafından yazılı olarak
istenilen bilgilere on gün içinde cevap vermesi zorunludur. Eğer bu süre içinde istenen bilgilerin verilmesi
imkânsız ise sebebi ve en geç hangi tarihte cevap verilebileceği aynı süre içinde belirtilir. CMK bunu güvence
altına almak için kanun tarafından kendilerine verilen veya kanun dairesinde kendilerinden istenen adliye ile
ilgili görev veya işlerde kötüye kullanma veya ihmalleri görülen kamu görevlileri ile Cumhuriyet savcılarının
295
European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, 14th General Report on the
CPT’s Activities, CPT/Inf(2004)28, http://www.cpt.coe.int/en/annual/rep-14.pdf, para. 33.
296
Avrupa Konseyi Ağır İnsan Hakları İhlallerinde Cezasızlığın Ortadan Kaldırılması El Kitabı , s. 11.
297
CPT/Inf(2004)28, para. 35.
298
Avrupa Konseyi Ağır İnsan Hakları İhlallerinde Cezasızlığın Ortadan Kaldırılması El Kitabı Ibid., s. 11.
299
CPT/Inf(2004)28, para. 36.
300
FIDH, Bir Yılın Ardından Gezi, Cadı Avcılığı, Emniyet Görevlilerin Dokunulmazlığı ve Hak ve Özgürlüklerin
Daralan Alanları, 2014,
https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/turkey_avril_2014_turc_web.pdf, (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
sözlü veya yazılı istem ve emirlerini yapmakta kötüye kullanma veya ihmalleri görülen kamu görevlileri ile
ilgili Cumhuriyet savcılarınca doğrudan doğruya soruşturma yapılacağını hüküm altına almıştır. Vali ve
kaymakamlar hakkında 2.12.1999 tarihli ve 4483 sayılı Memurlar ve Diğer Kamu Görevlilerinin Yargılanması
Hakkında Kanun hükümleri, en üst dereceli kolluk amirleri hakkında ise, hakimlerin görevlerinden dolayı tabi
oldukları yargılama usulünün uygulanması öngörülmektedir.
Hakimler ve Savcılar Yüksek Kurulu’nun bir genelgesinde ise, Türkiye’nin İHAM nezdinde etkili
soruşturma yükümlülüğünü ihlalinin tespit edildiği kararlar da gerekçe gösterilerek, “insan hakları ihlali,
işkence ve kötü muamele iddialarına ilişkin olarak yapılan soruşturmaların, kolluk kuvvetlerine
bırakılmayarak bizzat Cumhuriyet başsavcısı ya da görevlendireceği bir Cumhuriyet savcısı tarafından etkili
ve yeterli bir şekilde yürütülmesi” gerektiği belirtilmiş idi.301 1990 yılında Suçun Önlenmesi ve Suçlulara
Dönük Muameleye ilişkin 8. Konferansta Havana’da kabul edilen Savcılığın Rolüne Dair Yönerge’ye göre 302
savcıların mağdurların kişisel menfaatlerini etkileyen hususlarda onların görüş ve düşüncelerini alacağı,
özellikle ağır insan hakları ihlalleri ile ilgili soruşturmaların titizlikle yürütülmesi gerektiği ifade edilmiştir.
2005 yılında Avrupa Savcıları Konferansı’nda ‘Savcıların Etik ve Davranışlarına Dair Avrupa Esasları’ olarak
aldığı karara yansıyan ilkelere göre ise303 bir takipsizlik ya da kamu davasını açma kararını vermeden önce,
savcıların gerekli ve makul her türlü araştırma ve incelemenin yapıldığından veya yapılmakta olduğundan
emin olunması gerekliliğini vurgulamıştır. Söz konusu ilkeler bağlayıcı olmamakla birlikte savcıların çalışma
prensiplerine ilişkin etik ilkeleri ortaya koymaları açısından kuşkusuz önemlidir.
Adli kolluğa ilişkin ayrı bir teşkilat bulunmamasının savcıların burada sözü edilen görevlerini yerine
getirmesi açısından ciddi engeller teşkil ettiği konusunda kuşku bulunmuyor. Nitekim, savcıların ceza
soruşturmasındaki belirleyici rollerine rağmen yetki ve görevlerini yerine getirirken ihmal veya görevi (icrai
surette) kötüye kullanma niteliğindeki tutumları aynı soruşturmalarda polisin tutumundan bağımsız
değerlendirilemez. Kolluk görevlileri, muhtelif yöntem ve araçlarla Gezi ile ilgili soruşturmaların faillerinin
tespit edilmesini ve cezalandırılmasını sağlayacak biçimde süratle yapılmasının önüne geçmişlerdir.
Birincisi, kolluk görevlilerinin daha eylemler sürerken öldürme, işkence ve darp fiillerinin faili meçhul
kalmasını sağlayacak biçimde hareket ettikleri veya fiilen böyle bir durumun ortaya çıktığı
gözlemlenmektedir. Sıklıkla gaz maskesi taktıkları için kimliklerinin belirlenmesi son derece güç olan kolluk
görevlileri kask304 numaralarını da gizleyerek işledikleri suçların ortaya çıkmasını engelleyebilmiştir.305 Yine,
eylemler süresinde sokakta bulunan sivil giyimli polislerin çok azı yelek giymiştir. Hatta İzmir’de göstericileri
sopalarla kovalayan bazı kişilerin sivil polis olduğu yönünde bir açıklama yapılmak zorunda
301
Hakimler ve Savcılar Yüksek Kurulu, 18/10/2011, sayı: B.03.1.HSK:0.70.12.04-010.06.02-135-2011, Genelge no: 8,
http://www.hsyk.gov.tr/Mevzuat/Duyurular/genelgeler-kitapcigi.pdf, s. 105-112.
302
Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors,
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/RoleOfProsecutors.aspx, 13/d, 15. (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
303
European Guideşines on Ethics and Conduct for Public Prosecutors, CPGE (2005) 05,
http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/ccpe/conferences/CPGE/2005/CPGE_2005_05LignesDirectrices_en.pdf,
III/e.
(Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
304
Uluslararası Af Örgütü, s. 8
305
Konuyla ilgili değerlendirmeler ve mevzuata dair bkz., Gökçiçek Ayata vd., Gezi Parkı Olayları: İnsan Hakları
Hukuku ve Siyasi Söylem Işığında Bir İnceleme, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, İstanbul, 2013, s. 105-110.
128
kalınmıştır.306İkincisi, polisin darp ve işkence fiillerinin çoğu görgü tanıklarının ya da MOBESE kameraların
olmadığı yerlerde yaşanmıştır. Örneğin Ethem Sarısülük’ün öldürüldüğü 1 Haziran 2013 günü, MOBESE
kameralarının olay anında gökyüzüne çevrilmiş olduğu anlaşılmıştır.307 Uluslararası Af Örgütü’nün konuştuğu
mağdurlar da MOBESE bulunmayan yerlerde darp edildiklerini ve tacize uğradıklarını belirtmişlerdir.308
Soruşturma ile ilgili bu biçimde ortaya çıkan zorlukların, savcıların soruşturma süreci içinde ceza
muhakemesi mevzuatına göre emir ve talimatları altında bulunan adli kolluğu yönlendirmede, ihmalleri ve
suiistimalleri görüldüğünde ilgili kolluk görevlileri hakkında soruşturma başlatmakta son derece edilgen
davrandıkları, bu tutumlarının ise soruşturmaların bir türlü sonuçlanmamasına veya faili meçhuller arşivine
kaldırılmasına neden olduğu gözlemlenmektedir.
Gezi’deki polis şiddetinin en önemli delilleri niteliğindeki kamera kayıtlarının temini savcıların bu
tutumunu gözler önüne sermektedir. MOBESE kayıtları veya diğer kamera kayıtları bulunsa dahi bu kayıtların
saklanması veya silinmesi de mağdur avukatları tarafından gündeme getirilmiştir. Örneğin, Dilan Dursun’un
Ethem Sarısülük’ün cenaze yürüyüşünün yapıldığı Kızılay’da kafasından biber gazı ile hayati tehlikeye neden
olacak biçimde yaralanması ile ilgili soruşturmada da MOBESE kayıtları kilit önemde olmuştur.309 Bu olaya
ilişkin soruşturmada, MOBESE kamera kayıtları sunulmuş, fakat olayı aydınlatacak en önemli kamera
kayıtları savcılığa gönderilmemiştir.310 Bu kayıtlar daha sonra aynı gün katıldıkları gösteri nedeniyle
haklarında dava açılan kişilere karşı kullanılmıştır. Dava avukatları, bu kamera kayıtlarından birinde olaya
ilişkin görüntüleri tespit ettikten sonra savcılıktan talepte bulunmuş ve bu talep üzere, Savcılık söz konusu
görüntülere ancak Şubat 2014’te ulaşmıştır. Benzer bir tutum Muharrem Dalsüren soruşturması açısından da
son derece belirleyici olmuştur.311 Dalsüren’in avukatı soruşturmayı yürüten savcıdan olayın görüntülerinin
yer alabileceği MOBESE kayıtlarının istenmesini talep etmiştir. Fakat söz konusu görüntülerin 7 gün
geçtikten sonra otomatik olarak silindiğini belirten bir cevap alınmıştır. Bu yazı üzerine bir kez daha hareket
geçen Dalsüren’in avukatı polisten delillerin toplanması konusunda görevlerini yerine getirmezlerse
haklarında görevi ihmalden şikâyette bulunacağını belirtmiş ve o noktada bulunan polislerin listesini
istemiştir. İlginç ve vahim bir gelişme olarak, kolluk, olayın yaşandığı yerin 10 metre ötesindeki kamera
kayıtları dışında, Çankaya’daki bütün kamera kayıtları ile Çankaya’da görevlendirilen 300’e yakın polisin
isminin olduğu hangi polislerin olayın yaşandığı yerde görev yaptığını belirtmediği bir liste göndermiştir.
Dalsüren’in avukatının talebi ile savcı, olayın yaşandığı yerdeki kamera kayıtları ile göz yaşartıcı gaz atmakla
sorumlu polisler dahil bu noktada görevli bütün polislerin tekrar listesini talep etmiştir. Aralık 2014 itibariyle,
Muharrem Dalsüren, Agos Gazetesi’ne verdiği röportajda, MOBESE kameralarının saldırı anını çekmemiş
306
‘İzmir’de eli sopalı timler polismiş’, Hürriyet, 4 Haziran 2013,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/23432805.asp (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
307
‘Kamerayı gökyüzüne çeviriyor’ (Fevzi Kızılkoyun), Hürriyet, 23 Temmuz 2013,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/24072814.asp, ‘Ethem Sarısülük: Her aşaması tartışmalı dava’, BBC Türkçe (Sinan
Onuş), 3 Eylül 2014, (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/turkce/haberler/2014/09/140903_sarisuluk_davanin_gecmisi
308
Uluslararası Af Örgütü, s. 40.
309
Uluslararası Af Örgütü, s. 8.
310
‘Kamera oyunu mağdursan yok sanıksan var’, Hürriyet (Mesut Hasan Benli), 9 Nisan 2014,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/26182989.asp.
311
Uluslararası Af Örgütü, s. 9.
129
olduğunu belirtmiş olan savcılıktan o gün bölgede görev yapan 50 polisin ifadesinin alınması için talepte
bulunduklarını ve savcının bu kişilerin ifadelerini almamış olduğunu kaydetmiştir.312
Sadece Ankara değil, diğer illerde de polisin ve savcıların benzer tutumları dikkat çekicidir. Berkin
Elvan’ın Okmeydanı’nda başından biber gazı ile ağır yaralanmasının ardından soruşturma başlatılmıştır.
Kolluğun öncelikle “arşivimizde bulunmamaktadır” biçiminde cevap verdiği soruşturmada, kamera
görüntüleri daha sonra o gün Okmeydanı’nda görev yapan bir TOMA’dan çıkmıştır.313 TOMA’ya ait görüntü
kaydı dosyaya uzun bir sürecin ardından nihai olarak girebilmiştir. Hâlihazırda, olay yerinde bulunan üç polis
ve bir komiser yardımcısının eşkallerinin belirlendiği şeklinde haberler bulunuyor.314 Olaya ilişkin hazırlanan
ek bilirkişi raporlarında315 polisin biber gazı ile yaptığı atış öncesi Berkin Elvan’ın da bulunduğu noktadan
herhangi bir molotofkokteyli ya da havai fişek atılmadığının görüldüğü belirtiliyor.316
Yine, 3 Haziran’da biber gazı fişeği ile gözünü kaybeden Av. Sarper Gürcan’ın da biber gazı fişeğiyle
vurularak gözünü kaybetmesine317 ilişkin soruşturmada Emniyet’in MOBESE görüntülerini göndermediği
tespit edilmiştir.318 Taksim Dayanışması raporuna göre gaz fişeği nedeniyle görme yetisini % 80 oranında
kaybeden Davut Yıldız ile ilgili yürütülen soruşturmada, soruşturma kapsamında halen olay yerinde bulunan
gazcı personel listesi ve MOBESE görüntüleri beklenmektedir.319 Hatay’da Abdullah Cömert’in cenaze
yürüyüşünde Armutlu’da gerçekleşen polis müdahalesi sırasında gaz kapsülü ile gözünü kaybeden Mehmet
Murat Arslan320 ile ilgili yürütülen soruşturmanın da olay günü görev yapan kolluk kuvvetlerinin kasklarında
numaralarının bulunmaması dolayısıyla, istenen MOBESE kayıtları nedeniyle beklemede bulunduğu
anlaşılıyor.
Esasen, tüm bu sayılan olaylarda, ancak göz yaşartıcı gaz kullanımı eğitimi almış görevli polislerin
zaten bilinmesi gerekeceği için ilgili kişilerin adlarının savcılara bildirilmemesi görevin kötüye kullanılması
suçunu oluşturur (TCK md. 257). Haliyle, bu adların bildirilmesinde polise yükümlülüklerini ve yaptırımları
hatırlatmayan, sonuçları itibarıyla formaliteden öteye gitmeyen müzekkerelerle delillerin elde edilmesi
konusunda kolluk üzerine bir basınç oluşturmayan veya oluşturamayan savcıların tarafsız ve bağımsız hareket
ettiklerine inanmak da son derece güçtür. Nitekim, çok yeni bir gazete haberine göre, 321 İstanbul’da, Gezi’de
muhtelif uzuvlarının yaralanması, göz kaybına uğrama, darp, komaya veya bitkisel hayata girilmesine neden
312
‘Dalsüren: Orada bulunmak zorundaydım’, Agos, 23 Aralık 2014,
https://www.agos.com.tr/tr/yazi/10043/dalsuren-orada-bulunmak-zorundaydim.
313
‘Berkin’de de ‘yok’ denilen kayıtlar çıktı’, Radikal (İsmail Saymaz), 17 Nisan 2014,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/berkinde_de_yok_denilen_kayitlar_cikti-1187093.
314
‘Savcılık Berkin’in katillerinin peşinde’, Radikal (İsmail Saymaz), 1 Ekim 2014,
315
‘İşte Berkin’in vurulma anı’, Radikal (İsmail Saymaz), 7 Mayıs 2014,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/iste_berkinin_vurulma_ani-1190640.
316
‘Berkin’e atış yapma emrini bu amir mi verdi?’, Radikal (İsmail Saymaz), 5 Temmuz 2014,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/berkine_atis_yapma_emrini_bu_amir_mi_verdi-1200279
317
Avukat Sarper Gürcan adına Ankara Barosu Başkanı dahil olmak üzere avukatlarının hazırladığı şikayet dilekçesi şu
linkte bulunabilir: http://www.ankarabarosu.org.tr/Detay.aspx?SYF=8096
318
Taksim Dayanışması, s. 14.
319
Ibid., s. 14.
320
‘Hatay onu protestolarla uğurladı’, 4 Haziran 2013, http://www.odatv.com/n.php?n=hatayda-polis-ile-halkin-arasinaasker-set-kurdu-0406131200.
321
‘Dosyanın kapağı daha açılmadı’, Hürriyet (Ali Dağlar), 23 Aralık 2014,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/27826764.asp
130
olma fiillerine maruz kalan kişilere dönük soruşturma halihazırda sürüncemededir. Soruşturmaların bu kadar
yavaş biçimde ve sadece az sayıda (söz konusu habere göre soruşturma sadece bir savcı tarafından
yürütülmektedir) savcı tarafından yürütülmesi tek başına etkin soruşturma yükümlülüğünün ihlalini gözler
önüne sermektedir. Örneğin, Metzger/Almanya kararında322 İHAM, soruşturma ve yargılama süresinin makul
olup olmadığını değerlendirirken somut olayın koşulları çerçevesinde, özellikle vakanın karmaşık niteliği,
başvurucunun ve yetkili kamu kurumlarının tutumu çerçevesinde değerlendirileceğini belirterek, 323 ön
soruşturmanın sonuçlanması ile kamu davasının açılması arasında 15 aylık bir sürenin bulunmasını ağır bir
gecikme olarak değerlendirmiştir.
İkincisi, savcılar polis şiddetinin maddi unsurunu oluşturduğu suçlarla ilgili idareden izin almak
biçiminde bir uygulamaya gidebilmiştir. Bilindiği üzere, 16 Temmuz tarihinde Ankara 6. Ağır Ceza
Mahkemesi Ethem Sarısülük’ü öldürmekten sanık Ahmet Şahbaz hakkında soruşturmanın 4483 sayılı
Memurların ve Diğer Kamu Görevlilerinin Yargılanması Hakkında Kanun çerçevesinde “gerekli yasal izin
alınmadan” açıldığı gerekçesiyle davanın durmasına ve gereğinin yerine getirilmesi için dosyanın Ankara
Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı’na gönderilmesine karar vermiştir.324 Karara yapılan itiraz üzerine Ankara 7. Ağır
Ceza Mahkemesi, “olayın adli veya idari görevin ifası sırasında meydana gelmesinin önemli olmadığı” tespiti
ile ve İHAM’ın konuya dair içtihatlarına atıfla dosyanın ilgili mahkemede görülmeye devam edilmesine karar
verdi.325 Bu konuda yapılmış olan hatanın fark edilmiş olmasına rağmen, genel olarak kolluk görevlilerinin
soruşturulması konusundaki hukuksuzlukların Gezi’deki polis şiddetine ilişkin soruşturmalarda da aynen
devam ettiği söylenebilir.
Yine, pek çok durumda işkence fiillerinin de yaralama olarak nitelendirilmesini/tavsif edilmesini
sağlayan TCK md. 256’da düzenlenen zor kullanma yetkisinde sınırın aşılması suçunun izne tabi olarak
değerlendirildiği gözlemlenmektedir.326 1999 yılında yürürlüğe giren 4483 sayılı Kanun, eski Türk Ceza
Kanunu’na uygun olarak işkence (TCK md. 243) ve kötü muamele (TCK md. 245) fiilleri ile ilgili söz konusu
kanunda belirtilen soruşturma ve kovuşturma usullerinin uygulanmayacağını açıkça belirtmiştir. 2004 yılında
yeni TCK’nın kabul edilmesinden sonra, bu kanuna ilişkin yürürlük kanunu (5252 sayılı Türk Ceza
Kanununun Yürürlük ve Uygulama Şekli Hakkında Kanun) eski TCK’ya yapılan yollamaların yeni TCK’da
bu hükümlerin karşılığını oluşturan maddelere yapılmış sayılacağını hüküm altına almıştır. O halde, yeni
TCK’daki 94. ve 256. maddelerde düzenlenen işkence ve kötü muamele suçlarında soruşturma usulünün 4483
sayılı Memurlar ve Diğer Kamu Görevlilerinin Yargılanması Hakkında Kanun’daki hükümlere tabi olmadığı
açıktır. Buna rağmen, yukarıda Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu’nun Gezi raporuna da yansıyan kimi
soruşturmalarda izin alınmasına dönük uygulamaların hukuki bir dayanağı bulunmamaktadır.
322
Metzger/Almanya, Almanca çeviri, B. Angemessenheit der Verfahrensdauer. Kararı aktaran, Centel, Nur, ‘Adil
Yargılanma Hakkı ve Silahların Eşitliği Bağlamında Savcılık ve Savunma in TBB, ‘Bir Adli Organ Olarak Savcılık’,
TBB yayınları, Ankara, 2006 s. 186-218, s. 192.
323
Pélissier ve Sassi/Fransa, Başvuru no: 25444/94, 25 Mart 1999, para. 67-75.
324
‘Ethem Sarısülük davasına durdurma’, Cumhuriyet, 17 Temmuz 2013,
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/diger/434362/Ethem_Sarisuluk_davasina_durdurma__.html.
325
‘Cinayet görev suçu değildir’, Bianet (Ayça Söylemez), 19 Temmuz 2013,
http://bianet.org/bianet/insan-haklari/148605-cinayet-gorev-sucu-degildir.
326
Altıparmak, Kerem, ‘İşkenceyi nasıl bilirsiniz?: Türkiye’de orantısız güç kullanma sorunu’, Toplum ve Bilim, sy. 115,
2009, s. 138-176.
131
Savcıların delilleri bizzat toplamaları gereken soruşturma işlemlerindeki tutumları da dikkat çekicidir.
Kolluk güçleri tarafından işlenen suçlarla ilgili soruşturmalara derhal başlamaları gerekirken, bu konuda
süratle davranmamış ve gerekli özeni göstermemişlerdir. Örneğin, Ethem Sarısülük soruşturmasında savcılık
olay yerine ancak 5 gün geçtikten sonra gidebilmiştir.327 Yine, Ethem Sarısülük’ün öldürülmesi ile ilgili
soruşturmada savcılık şüphelinin ifadesini olayın üzerinden 23 günden fazla geçtikten sonra almıştır. 328 Yine
her ne kadar Gezi olaylarının sürdüğü günlerde olmasa da Uğur Kurt’un Okmeydanı Cemevi’nin bahçesinde
başından ateşli silahla vurulduğu olayda da savcının olay yerine gelebilmesi ancak 27 saat sonra mümkün
olabilmiştir, öyle ki bu sırada delillerin kaybedilmemesi için mağdurun yakınları ve arkadaşları olay yerinin
etrafını çembere alma zorunluluğu hissetmiştir.329 Dilan Dursun ile ilgili, suç duyurusunda bulunulmasına
rağmen olay yeri incelemesi ancak 4 gün sonra yapılabilmiştir.330
Savcıların soruşturmama ve takipsizlik kararlarında somut bir gerekçe ileri sürmeksizin hareket etmeleri
veya ön soruşturma işlemlerindeki kimi gerekçeleri etkili soruşturma yükümlülüğünün ihlali boyutlarına
varmaktadır. Oturduğu kafede gaza maruz kalan ve dövülen bir kişi ile ilgili olarak mülkiye ve polis
başmüfettişleri tarafından düzenlenen rapordaki gerekçeler dikkat çekicidir.331 Bu raporlara göre, mağdurun
belirttiği adresin (kafenin adresinin muhtemelen) kapalı olması, mağdurun gözaltına alınan kişilerden
olmaması (herhangi bir kayıt veya müracaatının bulunmadığı) gerekçesiyle, ön inceleme gerektirecek vasıfta
bir suç oluşmadığından dosya işlemden kaldırılmıştır.
Savcıların, suç mağdurlarının veya müştekilerin delil toplanması ile CMK md. 234 delillerin
toplanmasını
isteme
hakları
bulunmasına
rağmen
mağdurların
soruşturma
sürecinden
haberdar
edilmedikleri332 ve daha genel bir bağlamda kamuoyunun soruşturmaların akıbetleri konusunda
bilgilendirilmemiş olmaları etkili soruşturma yükümlülüğünün ihlali anlamına gelmektedir.
IV. YARGILAMA KONUSU SUÇUN NITELENDIRILMESINE/TAVSIFINE
İLIŞKIN SORUNLAR
Yargı erki mensupları pek çok vakada, failin olabilecek en az cezaya mahkumiyeti için fiilin tavsifinde
önemli bazı hatalar yapmıştır. Bu konudaki en tipik örnek Ethem Sarısülük’ün öldürülmesi olayında cinayetin
savcı tarafından kasten öldürme değil, meşru müdafaada sınırın taksirle aşılması olarak değerlendirilmiş
olmasıdır. Ethem Sarısülük’ün öldürülmesi ile ilgili savcı, Ahmet Şahbaz’ın fiilini, “kendisine saldırıda
327
Tahincioğlu, Gökçer, Beyaz Toros –Failleri Belli Devlet Cinayetleri, Doğan Kitap, İstanbul 2013, s. 174,
Sinan Onuş, Ethem Sarısülük: Her Aşaması Tartışmalı Dava, 3 Eylül 2014,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/turkce/haberler/2014/09/140903_sarisuluk_davanin_gecmisi.
329
‘Okmeydanı’nda ölü sayısı 2’ye yükseldi, savcı 27 saat sonra geldi’, Hürriyet, 23 Mayıs 2014,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/26470961.asp.
330
Uluslararası Af Örgütü, s. 8.
331
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Kurumu Raporu, s. 21.
332
Zafer Cömert şöyle anlatıyor: “Kardeşim vurulduktan 3 gün sonra falan savcının yanına gittim. Dedim katil nerede,
kardeşimi kim öldürdü? Savcı koltuğa yayılmış, niye geldin diye sordu bana. Biz ilgileniyoruz diyor, ikide bir
dürtüklemenize gerek yok. Sonrasında yedi buçuk ay geçti, hala ortada bir şey yok”.
Abdullah Cömert’in ailesi: ‘Savcı dürtüklemeyin bakıyoruz dedi, 8 ay geçti’, Radikal, 10 Şubat 2014,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/abdullah_comertin_ailesi_savci_durtuklemeyin_bakiyoruz_dedi_8_ay_gecti-1174872.
328
132
bulunan gösterici gruba karşı tabancasını çekerek havaya uyarı atışı yaptığı sırada 3. atışı yapmak isterken
dönüp kaçmaya çalıştığı esnada, omuz hizasından yukarıda tuttuğu tabancasının dönme hareketinin etkisi ile
yere paralel hale gelmesi ve o konumda iken atış yapması sonucu” ateş ettiğini ve atılan taşlar nedeniyle
meşru müdafaa halinde olduğunu belirtmiştir.333 Meşru müdafaa halinde ise sınırın kasten aşılmamış olduğunu
iddia ederek TCK’nın “sınırın kast olmadan aşılması halinde, fiil taksirle işlendiğinde de cezalandırılıyorsa,
taksirli suç için kanunda yazılı cezanın altıda birinden üçte birine kadar indirilerek hükmolunur.” Nihai
olarak, olayı aydınlatan sanık Ahmet Şahbaz’ın “çektim sıktım üç tane” şeklinde beyanın bulunduğu videosu
nedeniyle kast olmaksızın meşru müdafaada sınırın aşıldığı şeklindeki savcılık görüşü ve savunma çökmüş ve
sanık olası kastla insan öldürme suçundan 7. duruşmada haksız tahrik indirimi nedeniyle 7 yıl 9 ay hapis
cezasına çarptırılmıştır.334 Doğrudan kast ile hareket ettiği beyanı ile sabit olan sanık polis ile ilgili olarak olası
kast hükümleri esasen yerinde olmadığı gibi, haksız tahrik hükümlerinin uygulanması gerekçesini de anlamak
güçtür. Zira, polisin bir toplumsal gösteri sırasında, hukuka uygun hareket etmek zorunluluğu vardır. Bu
yükümlülük altındaki kişinin “haksız bir fiilin meydana getirdiği hiddet veya şiddetli elemin etkisi altında”
(TCK md. 29) suç işlediği ileri sürülemez.
İkincisi, işkence ve diğer kötü muamele fiilleri için açılan az sayıda soruşturmada kasten yaralama
hükümleri uygulanmıştır. Örneğin, Antalya’da Mustafa Düştegör’ün yerde sürüklenip dövülmesi ile ilgili
olarak biri amir 5 polis memuru ile ilgili dava basit yaralamadan dolayı açılmıştır. Cumhuriyet Gazetesi’nde 5
Kasım 2014’te yer alan habere göre, basit yaralama suçu nedeni ile 1’i amir 5 polis hakkında açılan ve
Antalya 11. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nde görülen davada, Düştegör’ün vekilinin suçun yaralama değil işkence
olduğu yönündeki görüşünün kabul edilmesi ve Mahkemenin görevsizlik kararı üzerine dosya Antalya 2. Ağır 133
Ceza Mahkemesi’ne gelmiştir.335 Benzer bir suçun nitelendirilmesi hatası, yine Antalya’da Gezi Parkı
protestoları sırasında otoparkta saklanan üç gencin çivili sopalarda kullanılarak darp edilerek dövülmesi ile
ilgili olarak failler hakkında davanın basit yaralama suçundan açılmasıdır.336
Gezi olaylarındaki polis şiddeti ile ilgili soruşturmalar yargının işkence suçunu çoğu zaman en iyi
ihtimalle yaralama olarak nitelendirdiğine ilişkin sayısız örnekle doludur. Antalya’da 3 Haziran 2013’te AKP
binası önündeki protestolar arasında kalan ve aralarında sivil giyimli kişilerin de olduğu polisler tarafından
önce cop ve tekmelerle yakalanan ve daha sonra serbest bırakılan Erdem Kara ile ilgili soruşturmada savcı
tarafından, “orantısız güç” kullanan 6 polis hakkında “kasten yaralama” suçundan dava açılmıştır.337 Yine,
Doğukan Bilir adlı üniversite öğrencisinin dövülmesine ilişkin üç polis, Şahan Gökpınar, Hüseyin Engin ve
333
Ankara Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı, Soruşturma no: 2013/75504, İddianame no: 2013/1494, Çağdaş Hukukçular Derneği
web sitesinden söz konusu iddianameye erişilebilir. chd.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Ethem-iddianame.docx (Son
Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
334
‘Sarısülük Davası’nda karar verildi’: 4 yılda çıkacak’, Cumhuriyet (Alican Uludağ), 3 Eylül 2014,
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/114167/Sarisuluk_Davasi_nda_karar_verildi__4_yilda_cikacak.html.
335
‘Polis Dayağına Kızlı-Erkekli Alkol Alıyorlardı’ Savunması, Cumhuriyet, 5 Kasım 2014,
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/137497/Polis_dayagina__kizli-erkekli_alkol_aliyorlardi__savunmasi.html
(Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
336
‘Çivili sopalı dayak ‘basit yaralama’, Milliyet (Gökçer Tahincioğlu), 6 Mayıs 2014,
http://www.milliyet.com.tr/civili-sopali-dayak-basit/gundem/detay/1877922/default.htm.
337
‘Antalya’da 6 polise ‘orantısız güç’ davası açıldı’, Evrensel, 12 Kasım 2014,
http://www.evrensel.net/haber/97294/antalyada-6-polise-orantisiz-guc-davasi-acildi
Olayın videosuna şu linkten erişilebilir: http://www.imctv.com.tr/2014/11/12/gezi-direnisi-sirasinda-darp-edilen-karapolise-dava-acti/ (Son Retrieved Aralık 2014).
Selçuk Bal ile sopayla göstericileri saldıran Serkan Kavak hakkında “basit yaralama” suçundan dava
açılmıştır. Davanın Eskişehir 9. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nde 16 Eylül 2014 tarihli ilk duruşmasında, Bilir’in
avukatının görevsizlik itirazı kabul edilerek dosya Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’ne gönderilmiştir.338 Ne var ki,
karara yapılan itiraz üzerine Eskişehir 1. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi “dosyanın incelenmesinde, davaya bakma
görevinin asliye ceza mahkemesine ait olduğu anlaşılmakla görevsizlik kararının kaldırılmasına karar vermek
gerekmiştir” şeklinde herhangi bir gerekçe belirtmeden dosyayı yeniden Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’ne
göndermiş ve bu Mahkeme de işkence olarak tavsif edilmesi gereken fiili, yaralama olarak değerlendirmiş ve
sanık polisler hakkında hükmün açıklanmasının geri bırakılması kararı vermiştir.339
V. YARGILAMAYA İLIŞKIN SORUN BAŞLIKLARI
Yargılama süjelerinin tarafsızlığı ve bağımsızlığına ilişkin pek çok sorunu gözlemlemek mümkündür.
Öncelikle, mahkemelerin, önlerine gelen dosyayı kamu güvenliği gibi soyut bir gerekçe ile ilgili mevzuat
çerçevesinde Adalet Bakanlığı’na göndermesi ve nihai olarak Yargıtay’ın davanın nakline karar vermesi
(CMK 19/2) yaşam hakkının etkili bir biçimde korunması ve adil yargılanma ilkelerinin ihlali niteliğindedir.
Ali İsmail Korkmaz cinayetinde Eskişehir 2. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi, daha davanın başlangıcında, tensip
zaptı ile birlikte, Eskişehir Valiliği ve Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığına soruşturma aşamasında geçen süreçte
eylemlerin adliye çevresinde ve Eskişehir ilinde devam etmiş ve ediyor olması dolayısıyla davanın
Eskişehir’de görülmesinin “güvenlik açısından tehlikeli” olup olmadığını sormuştur.340 Talebe ilişkin kamu
güvenliğine ilişkin bir tehlike ortaya çıkacağı gerekçesi ile dosya Adalet Bakanlığı’na gönderilmiş ve ilgili 134
Bakanlık da Yargıtay’dan davanın naklini talep etmiştir ve nihai olarak davanın nakli ile birlikte dosya
Kayseri 3. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’ne taşınmıştır. Fakat, Mahkeme, tanıkların bir bölümünün Eskişehir ve
Ankara’da, Korkmaz ailesinin ise Hatay’da ifade vermesine karar verince341 ceza yargılaması açısından ortaya
çıkan sonuçların vahameti giderek daha fazla artmıştır. Zira, dört ayrı şehre bölünen davada, henüz iddianame
sanıkların yüzüne okunmadan, 6 Ocak 2014’te Eskişehir’deki tanıkların ifadesinin alınmasına geçilmek
istenmiştir, avukatların kararlı müdahaleleri ile duruşma ertelenmiş ve esas mahkemesi Kayseri 3. Ağır Ceza
Mahkemesi’ne durumun sorulmasına karar verilmiştir. Nihai olarak, Kayseri 3. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi ise bir
kısım tanıkların Kayseri’de diğerlerinin ise Eskişehir’de dinlenmesine karar vermiştir.342 Kamu güvenliği
gerekçesi ile davanın nakli kararı verilmesini, kamuoyunun yakından takip ettiği Şerzan Kurt (Muğla), Uğur
ve Ahmet Kaymaz (Kızıltepe) davalarda aynı gerekçe ile davaların Eskişehir’e nakledilmiş olması karşısında
anlamak güçtür.
338
‘Yaralama değil işkence’, Milliyet (Kemal Göktaş), http://www.milliyet.com.tr/yaralama-degil-iskence-gundem1941196/ (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
339
Göktaş, Kemal, ‘Gezi’nin meşeli saldırganının cezası belli oldu: Eylemci dövmenin cezası ayda 250 TL’, http://kemalgoktas.blogspot.com/2014/12/gezinin-meseli-saldrgannn-cezas-belli.html (Son Retrieved: Aralık 2014).
340
‘Ali İsmail Korkmaz davası başka bir ilde görülebilir’, Hürriyet (Ali Dağlar), 1 Ekim 2013,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/24827401.asp.
341
‘Ali İsmail Korkmaz davası dörde bölündü’, Radikal (İsmail Saymaz), 4 Ocak 2014,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/ali_ismail_korkmaz_davasi_dorde_bolundu-1169278.
342
Taksim Dayanışması, s. 22.
Abdullah Can Cömert davasında uzun süren soruşturma sürecinin ardından davanın akıbeti de nakil
olmuştur. Bu davada da Yargıtay 5. Ceza Dairesi soyut bir kamu güvenliği gerekçesi ile davanın Balıkesir’e
nakledilmesine karar vermiştir.343
Benzer bir yaklaşımın Gezi eylemleri sürerken Maltepe/Gülsuyu’nda uyuşturucu satan çetelere karşı
yürüyüş sırasında vurularak hayatını kaybeden Hasan Ferit Gedik’le ilgili yargılamanın yapıldığı davada da
bulunduğunu söylemek mümkün. Kasten öldürme, kasten yaralama, suç işlemek amacıyla örgüt kurma ve üye
olma, nitelikli yağma gibi suçlarla ilgili olarak açılan davanın 3. duruşmasında mahkeme, Anadolu
Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı’na ve İstanbul Valiliği’ne müzekkere yazıp duruşmanın yürütülüp yürütülmeyeceği
ile ilgili görüşlerini sormuştur.344
Davanın nakilleri ile ilgili Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin Ali İsmail Korkmaz davası ile ilgili olarak verdiği
karar ise yargıda doğal yargıç ve delillerin doğrudan doğruyalığı ilkesini ihlal eden bu pratiği kalıcılaştıracak
bir nitelik taşıyor.345 Mahkeme ilginç bir biçimde başvurucunun ihlal iddiaları ile bağlı olmadığına karar
vererek davanın nakli kararını adil yargılanma ve etkili başvurma hakkı bağlamında değil sadece yaşam hakkı
ihlali ile ilgili olduğuna hükmetmiştir. İHAM’ın davanın nakli kararını tartışmayan AYM, Ali İsmail
Korkmaz’ın ailesinin yaptığı başvuruya, Şehap Korkmaz ve diğerleri/Türkiye kararına atıfla, geçen sürede
soruşturma ve yargılama makamlarınca yapılan işlemler dikkate alındığında, kamu davasının nakline ilişkin
süreç de dâhil olmak üzere soruşturma ve kovuşturmanın yaşam hakkını koruma açısından etkisiz olduğunu
ileri sürmenin ve olağan başvuru yollarının tüketilmesinin yarar sağlamayacağını kabul etmenin mümkün
olmadığına karar verdi.
Sürmekte olan yargılamalar ile ilgili diğer bir sorun mağdur yakınlarının hassasiyetlerinin gözetilmemiş
olması ve katılımcıların kriminalize edilmesidir. Yargılamalarda duruşma salonlarındaki polis ağırlığı mağdur
yakınlarında ve diğer izleyicilerde rahatsızlık yaratmıştır. Ethem Sarısülük’ün öldürülmesi ile ilgili Ankara 6.
Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde 23 Eylül 2013’teki ilk duruşmada, salondaki sivil giyimli Çevik Kuvvet polisleri
tartışma ve gerginliğe neden olmuştur.346 Yine, davanın üçüncü duruşmasında savcının uyuyan fotoğrafları
basına yansımıştır. Yaşanan bu olayın ardından mahkeme heyeti “mahkemenin tarafsızlığı ve adil yargılama
(sic) hakkı konusunda şüpheler” ortaya çıktığı için çekilme kararı almıştır. Bu talep reddedilmiş ve dosya
Ankara 6. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’ne geri gönderilmiştir.347
Yargılama mekânları da ciddi bir sorun başlığı olarak öne çıkmış, hatta Hasan Ferit Gedik davasında
olduğu gibi bir mahkemenin kendi yargı çevresi dışında görev yapmaya zorlanması gibi bazı talepleri
343
‘Abdullah Cömert’in dosyası Hatay’dan Balıkesir’e gönderildi’, Cumhuriyet, 24 Aralık 2014,
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/98565/Abdullah_Comert_in_dosyasi_Hatay_dan_Balikesir_e_gonderildi.ht
ml
344
‘Hasan Ferit Gedik davası yine görülemeden ertelendi’, CNNTurk,
http://www.cnnturk.com/haber/turkiye/hasan-ferit-gedik-davasi-yine-gorulemeden-ertelendi. (Son Retrieved: Aralık
2014).
345
Anayasa Mahkemesi, Başvuru no: 2013/8975, Karar Tarihi: 23/7/2014.
346
Tahincioğlu, s. 185.
347
‘Dava uyuyan hakimle devam edecek’, Bianet, 19 Şubat 2014, http://www.bianet.org/bianet/insan-haklari/153607dava-uyuyan-hakimle-devam-edecek.
135
gündeme getirebilmiştir.348 Hasan Ferit Gedik’i öldürmekten yargılanan sanıkların duruşmasında yer darlığı
nedeniyle müdahil avukatları ve izleyicilerin duruşmayı takip etmesi fiilen imkânsız hale gelmiştir. Daha
geniş bir salonda duruşmanın yapılması talebi üzerine, Anadolu Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı’nın adliyede büyük
salon olmaması ve büyük bir salonun ancak Adalet Bakanlığı’nın adliyeye ödenek verilmesi durumunda
yapılacağına ilişkin yazısı okunmuştur. Aynı yazıda Adalet Bakanlığı’nın konuya ilişkin çözümünün de
duruşmanın randevu ile Silivri’de görülmesi olabileceği ifade edilmiştir. Bir mahkemenin yargı çevresi
dışında çalışmaya zorlanamayacağı haklı olarak Gedik’in avukatları tarafından belirtilmiştir. Böyle bir
imkânsızlığın sadece fiziki olmadığı, duruşmanın Silivri Adliyesi’nde görülmesinin katılımı azaltabileceği de
açıktır.
VI. TANIK VE MAĞDURLARA İLIŞKIN YÜRÜTÜLEN
SORUŞTURMALAR / KARŞI DAVALAR
Gezi’deki kolluk şiddetine ilişkin polisler lehine cezasızlık zırhı sağlanmasının araçlarından biri de
mağdurların, suçtan zarar görenlerin ve tanıkların ceza yargılamasında şüpheli ve sanık haline getirilmesidir.
Kolluk şiddetine maruz kalmış kişilerin özellikle TCK md. 265’te düzenlenen suçun seçimlik hareketle
tanımlanan maddi unsuru cebir veya tehdit olmaksızın, korkutulması ve hak arama mücadelesinden
vazgeçirilmesi için memura mukavemet ile ilgili soruşturma ve davaların açılması insan hakları örgütlerinin
öteden beri işaret ettiği üzere suç işleyen güvenlik güçlerinin yargılanmasında temel sorun alanı olarak dikkat
çekmektedir.349 Özellikle, toplumsal gösterilerde işkence ve kötü muamele iddialarına ilişkin olarak polis
lehine giderek ve daha fazla memura mukavemet suçlaması ile dava açıldığı son yıllarda istatiksel olarak da
belirlendiği üzere dramatik bir biçimde artmıştır. Yine hakaret, yaralama, mala zarar verme, tehdit de hak
arama mücadelesini engellemek için açılan diğer soruşturmalarda başvurulmaktadır.
Başından biber gazı kapsülü ile yaralanan, beyin kanaması geçirdiği için sağlığında kalıcı bazı zararlar
oluşan ve kafatasındaki hasar çıplak gözle dahi görülebilen liseli Mustafa Ali Tombul’un şikâyeti üzerine
yaşanan gelişmeler bu izlek ile uyumludur. Tombul’un yaptığı şikâyet ile ilgili herhangi bir gelişme olmazken,
hakkında İzmir’de Gezi Parkı eylemlerinde çadırları kaldıran polise mukavemet dolayısıyla dava açılmıştır ve
dava hapis cezası verilerek hükmün açıklanmasının geri bırakılması kararı ile sonuçlanmıştır.350
348
Hasan Ferit Gedik davası yine görülemeden ertelendi’, CNNTurk,
http://www.cnnturk.com/haber/turkiye/hasan-ferit-gedik-davasi-yine-gorulemeden-ertelendi. (Son Retrieved: Aralık
2014).
349
Üçpınar, Hülya/koç, Aysun, Mevzuat ve Uygulamalar Işığında Cezasızlık Olgusu, TİHV yayınları, İzmir, 2011, s.
127-129, Human Rights Watch, ‘Adalete Karşı Safları Sıklaştırmak, Türkiye’de Polis Şiddetiyle Mücadele Önündeki
Engeller, 2008, s. 56-60.
http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/related_material/turkey1208tuweb.pdf
350
Gezi’de Yaralanan Mustafa’ya Tebligat Şoku, Hürriyet(Tufan Hamarat), 23 Ocak 2014,
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/25629865.asp, ‘İstanbul’da neredeyse öldürülüyordu, “İzmir’deydin” diye dava
açıldı.
http://www.cnnturk.com/haber/turkiye/istanbulda-neredeyse-olduruluyordu-izmirdeydin-diye-dava-acildi,
http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/id/25493842/, 23.1.2014. ‘Devlet Gezi eylemlerinde önce hapis cezası verdi, sonra komaya
soktu’, Diken, 24 Aralık 2014, http://www.diken.com.tr/devlet-gezi-eylemlerinde-komaya-soktu-sonra-hapis-cezasiverdi/.
136
Gezi olayları sürecinde geleneksel bu yöntemlerin yanında daha doğrudan ve açık bir biçimde
mağdurlar ve tanıklar hedef alınmıştır. Örneğin, Ethem Sarısülük’ün öldürülmesinin ardından olayın tanığı
olarak ifade veren kişiler olayların ardından gözaltına alınmıştır. Olayın tanığı Mehmet Can Tayşan hakkında
yakalama kararı çıkartılmış, gözaltına alınmıştır.351 Tanık olarak dinlenen Şahin İmga önce tutuklanmış, sonra
serbest bırakılmıştır. 352
Yine, Ethem Sarısülük’ün ailesi hakkında, Sarısülük’ü başından vurarak öldüren polis memuru Ahmet
Şahbaz’ın kendisini darp ettikleri gerekçesiyle yaptığı şikâyet üzerine, Ankara 5. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nde
dava açılmıştır. 17 Ekim 2014’te ilk celse görülmüştür.353 Baba Muzaffer Sarısülük hakkında, oğlunun
öldürülmesini protesto amaçlı bir trafonun altında ateş yakıp diş polikliniğinin kapısına “maddi tıp şeytandır”
biçiminde bir yazı yazmasından dolayı “kamu malına zarar vermek” iddiasıyla 12 yıla kadar hapis istemiyle
dava açılmıştır.354
31 Mayıs günü gözüne isabet eden gaz fişeği ile gözünü kaybeden ETHA muhabiri gazeteci Çağdaş
Küçükbattal, Gezi eylemleri ile ilgili hakkında devam eden soruşturma gerekçesiyle 4 Kasım 2013 tarihinde
evinden çıkıp durağa giderken gözaltına alınmıştır. Tutuklama talebi ile mahkemeye sevk edilen Küçükbattal
ile ilgili, Mahkeme ev hapsi kararı vermiştir. Çağdaş Küçükbattal gözaltına alındığı sırada İstanbul Tabip
Odası tarafından yapılan açıklamaya göre, son dört ayını hastane, ameliyat, pansuman ve kontrollerle
geçirmişti ve üçüncü bir ameliyata hazırlanmaktaydı.355 Bu bakımdan hasta haklarını da ihlal eden bu sürecin
mağdurun hak arama özgürlüğünü baltalamayı, mağduru korkutma ve yıldırmayı amaçladığı açıktır.356
Nitekim Küçükbattal’ın yaptığı şikâyete ilişkin soruşturmada hiçbir gelişme yaşanmamıştır.357
Yine, Taksim Dayanışması’nın raporuna göre, Dikmen’de gözaltına alınan 13 yaşındaki A.A. aleyhine
işlenen işkence suçu ile ilgili darp raporu bulunmasına rağmen soruşturmada takipsizlik kararı verilmiş, fakat
A.A. ile ilgili ‘2911 sayılı Toplantı ve Gösteri Yürüyüşleri Kanuna muhalefet etmek’ gerekçesiyle dava
açılmıştır.358
351
Bianet, Ayça Söylemez, http://www.bianet.org/bianet/bianet/147963-ethem-sarisuluk-un-bir-tanigi-tutuklandi-digerigozaltinda
352
‘Ethem Sarısülük: Her aşaması tartışmalı dava’, BBC Türkçe (Sinan Onuş), 3 Eylül 2014, (Son Retrieved: Aralık
2014).
353
‘Sarısülük ailesi hakkında açılan davanın ilk duruşması görüldü’, IMCTV, 17 Ekim 2014,
http://www.imctv.com.tr/2014/10/17/sarisuluk-ailesi-hakkinda-acilan-davanin-ilk-durusmasi-goruldu/.
354
İsmail Saymaz, ‘Vuran polis serbest, baba Sarısülük akıl hastanesine”, 3 Mart 2014, Radikal,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/vuran_polis_serbest_baba_sarisuluk_akil_hastanesine-1179195
355
‘Gezi’de gözünü kaybetti, gözaltına alındı’, Radikal, 5 Kasım 2013,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/gezide_gozunu_kaybetti_gozaltina_alindi-1159136.
356
‘Gezi’de gözünü kaybeden Küçükbattal’a ev hapsi kararı’, Radikal, 7 Kasım 2013,
http://www.radikal.com.tr/turkiye/gezide_gozunu_kaybeden_kucukbattala_tutuklama_talebi-1159592
357
Taksim Dayanışması, s. 31.
358
Ibid., s. 14.
137
ALTINCI BÖLÜM
GEZI PARKI EYLEMLERININ MEVZUATTA YARATTIĞI OTORITER
DEĞIŞIKLIKLER
Gezi Parkı eylemlerinden sonra toplumsal muhalefet ve hak özneleri üzerinde uygulanan baskıya
paralel şekilde mevzuat da otoriter şekilde gözden geçirilmiştir.
 2911 sayılı Toplantı ve Gösteri Yürüyüşleri Kanunu’nun bazı hükümlerinde 6529 sayılı Temel Hak ve
Hürriyetlerin Geliştirilmesi Amacıyla Çeşitli Kanunlarda Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanunla birtakım
rötuşlar yapılmakla birlikte, kanun değişikliği sırasında İHAM içtihatlarıyla uyumsuz hükümlere (örn. md
28/1, 32/1, 34/1) dokunulmamıştır. Bu durum, İHAS’a aykırı mevzuatın zımnen onaylanması anlamına
gelmektedir.
 Bir yandan toplantı ve gösteri yürüyüşü özgürlüğü genişlemezken, diğer yandan kolluk güçlerinin
yetkilerinin arttırılması konusunda adımlar atılmaktadır. İç güvenlik reformu adı atlında, toplumsal olaylarda
polislere daha katı önlemler alma yetkisi getiren yasa tasarısının hazırlıkları devam etmektedir.359
 Gezi Parkı eylemleri sırasında internet ve sosyal medya alternatif kitle iletişim aracı olarak
kullanılmış, göstericilerin ve insan hakları aktivistlerinin iletişimini sağlamıştır. Hükümetin, Gezi Parkı
olaylarından sonra, açık toplumun önemli unsurlarından olan internet özgürlüğü üzerinde sınırlandırıcı
adımlar attığı gözlemlenmektedir. Bu konuda en dikkat çekici gelişme, Twitter ve Youtube sansürlerinin faili
olan Telekomünikasyon İletişim Başkanlığı’na, bir tür ‘fişleme’ olarak görülebilecek yetkilerin tanınmasıdır.
5651 sayılı “İnternet Ortamında Yapılan Yayınların Düzenlenmesi ve Bu Yayınlar Yoluyla İşlenen Suçlarla
Mücadele Edilmesi hakkında Kanun”a “taraflara ilişkin IP adresi, verilen hizmetin başlama ve bitiş zamanı,
yararlanılan hizmetin türü, aktarılan veri miktarı ve varsa abone kimlik bilgilerini ifade eden Trafik bilgisinin
Telekomünikasyon İletişim Başkanlığı tarafından ilgili işletmecilerden temin edileceği” şeklinde bir ifade
(md. 3/4) eklenmiştir. Bu madde, Twitter360 ve Youtube361 kararlarında sansürü kaldıran AYM tarafından
Anayasa’ya aykırı bulunarak iptal edilmiştir.362
 Gezi Parkı eylemlerinin önemli bileşenlerinden birinin de üniversite öğrencileri olduğu bilinmektedir.
Eylemlerden sonra üniversitelerdeki özgürlükleri sınırlandırıcı pratikler gerçekleşmiştir. Buna paralel olarak
Yükseköğretim Kurumları Öğrenci Disiplin Yönetmeliği’nde sınırlandırıcı değişiklikler yapılmış363, “Kınama
359
'Polise yeni yetkiler ve güvenlik reformu yolda', Vatan, 14/10/2014.
E. 2014/3986, T. 2/4/2014,
361
2014/4705, 29/5/2014.
362
Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin 2/10/2014 tarihli ve E.: 2014/149, K.: 2014/151 sayılı karar ile iptal edilmiş olup, 9/10/2014
tarihli ve 29140 sayılı Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanan Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin 2/10/2014 tarihli ve E.: 2014/149, K.:
2014/14 (Yürürlüğü Durdurma) sayılı Kararı ile İptal Kararının Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanacağı tarihe kadar söz konusu
fıkranın yürürlüğünün durdurulması hüküm altına alınmıştır.
363
‘Kampüste Bildiri Yasak, Okuldan Uzaklaştırma Mümkün’, Bianet, 07/11/2013.
360
138
cezası getiren disiplin suçları”nı düzenleyen 5. maddenin birinci fıkrasına “izinsiz olarak bildiri dağıtmak”
şeklinde yeni bir disiplin suçu eklenmiştir.364
 Gezi Parkı eylemleri sırasında ve sonrasında akademisyenlerin yaşanan gelişmelere ilişkin çok sayıda
makale, kitap ve benzeri çalışmalar ürettiği gözlemlenmektedir. Bu ve diğer benzer çalışmalar karşısında
akademik özgürlükler alanında bir sınırlandırmaya gidilmiştir. Yükseköğretim Kurumları Yönetici, Öğretim
Elemanı ve
Memurları Disiplin Yönetmeliği’nin çok sayıda maddesinde cezalandırma politikası
katılaştırılmış ve akademik özgürlüklere ilişkin hükümler daraltılmıştır. Yönetmeliğin 6'ncı maddesinin birinci
fıkrasına eklenen yeni bir bent ile “Bilimsel tartışma ve açıklamalar dışında, yetkili olmadığı halde basına,
haber ajanslarına veya radyo ve televizyon kurumlarına resmi konularda bilgi veya demeç vermek" 365
şeklinde, kınama cezasını gerektiren yeni bir idari suç üretilmiştir.
 Gezi Parkı eylemleri sırasında, sadece akademisyenlerin değil, diğer kamu çalışanlarının da çeşitli
soruşturma ve cezalara maruz kaldığı bilinmektedir. Bu cezaların bir kısmı iptal edilmiştir. Mevzuatta
meslekten çıkarılan memurların işe iade edilmesine engel olacak değişiklikler yapıldığı gözlemlenmektedir.
6552 sayılı torba yasayla getirilen değişikliklerde İdari Yargılama Usul Kanunu’na (md. 28) bürokrasi ve
kolluk memurlarının meslekten çıkartılması halinde, bu kararların iptalinin 2 yıl süre içinde yapılabileceği ve
“mahkeme kararlarının yerine getirilmemesinin ceza soruşturması ve kovuşturmasına konu edilemeyeceği”
hükmü eklenmiştir. Söz konusu düzenleme yine AYM tarafından iptal edilmiştir.366
 Gezi Parkı eylemleri sırasında birçok baskı grubunun ve özellikle meslek örgütlerinin anayasal
haklarını kullandıkları ve bu bağlamda gösteriler sırasında aktif rol aldıkları bilinmektedir. Gezi Parkı 139
olaylarından sonra söz konusu meslek örgütlerinin yetkilerinin sınırlandırılmaya çalışıldığı
gözlemlenmektedir:
3194 Sayılı İmar Kanunu’nun 8. maddesine “Harita, plan, etüt ve projeler; idare ve ilgili kanunlarında
açıkça belirtilen yetkili kuruluşlar dışında meslek odaları dâhil başka bir kurum veya kuruluşun vize veya
onayına tabi tutulamaz, tutulması istenemez. Vize veya onay yaptırılmaması ve benzeri nedenlerle müellifler
ve bunlara ait kuruluşların büro tescilleri iptal edilemez veya yenilenmesi hiçbir şekilde geciktirilemez.
Müelliflerden bu hükmü ortadan kaldıracak şekilde taahhütname talep edilemez”367 şeklinde bir bent
eklenmiştir. TMMOB’a bağlı odalar, bu düzenlemeyi “Anayasal güvencelere sahip yerinden yönetim özerk
kuruluşları olan meslek kuruluşlarını otoriter bir tarzda vesayet altına almaya yönelik Kanun Hükmünde
Kararnamelerle yapılan düzenlemelerin devamı niteliğinde” olarak görmüş ve “Gezi Parkı direnişinin
ardından gerçekleştirilen bir intikam” olarak ifade etmişlerdir.368
364
RG, T. S. 28814, 07/11/2013.
RG, S. 28897, 29/01/2014.
366
Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin 2/10/2014 tarihli ve E.: 2014/149, K.: 2014/151 sayılı karar ile iptal edilmiş olup, 9/10/2014
tarihli ve 29140 sayılı Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanan Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin 2/10/2014 tarihli ve E.: 2014/149, K.:
2014/14 (Yürürlüğü Durdurma) sayılı Kararı ile İptal Kararının Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanacağı tarihe kadar söz konusu
fıkranın yürürlüğünün durdurulması hüküm altına alınmıştır.
367
RG, S. 28726, T. 02/08/2013.
368
TMOBB’a bağlı odalar tarafından yapılan “Cumhurbaşkanı, TMOBB ve Odalarının Anayasal Yetkilerini Ortadan
Kaldıran Düzenlemeyi Onaylamamalıdır” başlıklı basın açıklaması.
365
Daha spesifik bir değişiklik ise hekimlerin faaliyetleriyle ilgili olmuştur. 3359 sayılı Sağlık Hizmetleri
Temel Kanunu’na “Ruhsatsız olarak sağlık hizmeti sunan veya yetkisiz kişilerce sağlık hizmeti verdirenler, bir
yıldan üç yıla kadar hapis ve yüzbin güne kadar adlî para cezası ile cezalandırılır”369 (ek md. 11) şeklinde bir
madde eklenmiştir. Bu hüküm, Türk Tabipler Birliği tarafından, Gezi Parkı gibi kitlesel protestolarda
yaralılara müdahale eden doktorlara ve sağlık çalışanlarına ceza verilmesine yasal dayanak sağlamak amacıyla
getirilen bir madde olarak yorumlanmıştır.370 Gerçekten de, Yasa’nın görüşmeleri sırasında kabul edilen
önergeyle “Olağanüstü durumlarda mesleğini icraya yetkili kişilerce acil sağlık hizmeti ulaşana ve sağlık
hizmeti devamlılık arz edene kadar verilecek olan sağlık hizmeti hariç” tutulmuş olsa da; bu hükme ilişkin
“Acil durumlarda mesleği hekimlik olan kişiler hastaya müdahale edebilir. Müdahale etmek hakkı vardır ama
tedavi koşulları oluştuğunda bu kabul edilemez. Gezi olaylarında iki bin metrekarelik alanda dört Hastane ve
ambulanslar olmasına rağmen bir otelin Bodrum katında hastalara müdahale edildi”371şeklinde açıklama
getiren Sağlık Bakanı Mehmet Müezzinoğlu’na göre anılan istisna, Gezi Parkı eylemleri sırasında tıbbi yardım
sunan hekimler için uygulanamayacaktır. Müezzinoğlu’nun bu açıklaması Türk Tabipler Birliği’nin
kaygılarını doğrulamaktadır.
 Gezi Parkı eylemlerine farklı demokratik kitle örgütleriyle beraber özellikle futbol taraftar gruplarının
da dâhil olduğu gözlemlenmektedir. Bu gelişme, stadyumların daha katı biçimde denetlenmesine ve bu alanda
da özgürlüklerin sınırlandırılmasına yol açmıştır. 6222 sayılı “Sporda Şiddet ve Düzensizliğin Önlenmesine
Dair Kanun” ve kanunun uygulanmasına ilişkin Yönetmeliğin (md. 5/4 ve 11) öngördüğü Passolig kartı
uygulamasına ve ilgili düzenlemeler gereği taraftarların kişisel bilgilerin federasyon bünyesinde oluşturulan
merkezi veri tabanında tutulmasına başlanmıştır.
369
RG, S. 28886, 18/01/2014.
TBB tarfından yapılan “Yeni Sağlık Torbası’na Karşı Önemli İtirazlarımızı TBMM’de Dile Getirdik” başlıklı,
27/11/2013 tarihli açıklama.
371
‘Tam Gün Yasalaştı’, Milliyet, 02/01/2014.
370
140
DEĞERLENDİRME VE ÖNERİLER
I. ÖZET
2013 yazında bir kent ve çevre savunması hareketi olarak başlayan Gezi protestoları, kısa zamanda
toplumun değişik kesimlerinden gelen siyasi tepki ve talepleri içerisine alarak güçlü bir toplumsal muhalefete
dönüşmüştür. Bu muhalefetin siyasi iktidar tarafından şiddetle bastırılmaya çalışılması, temel hak ve
özgürlüklerin sürekli bir şekilde ihlal edildiği, hukuk devleti ve demokrasiyle bağların koparıldığı ve her türlü
muhalif düşüncenin suçlulaştırıldığı bir siyasi ortam yaratmıştır. Barışçıl sokak gösterileri ile dile getirilen
demokratikleşme ve özgürleşme talepleri, siyasi iktidar tarafından bir darbe girişimi olarak topluma sunulmuş,
bu suçlama göstericilere karşı hazırlanan iddianamelerde de yer almıştır. Bu ve Gezi sonrası meydana gelen
diğer gelişmeler, demokrasiden uzaklaşılarak otoriter hatta totaliter bir rejime doğru hızla yol alındığını
göstermektedir.
Rapor, Gezi sürecini değişik açılardan tahlil ederek özellikle aşağıdaki tespitler üzerinde
yoğunlaşmıştır:
Gezi’de gün yüzüne çıkan toplumsal muhalefet, bizzat iktidarın politikaları sonucu şekillenmiştir.
Özellikle kentsel ve ekolojik talan, kişi özgürlüğü ve özel yaşama müdahaleler, kadın bedeni üzerinden
siyaset, toplumu muhafazakarlaştırma çabaları ve artan polis şiddeti gibi faktörlerden beslenen Gezi
muhalefetinin milli irade karşıtlığı, darbe savunuculuğu veya komplolarla ilişkilendirilmesi mümkün değildir. 141
Anayasa ve uluslararası insan hakları hukuku ışığında bakıldığında, Gezi protestoları, geneli itibariyle,
barışçıl eylemlerdir. Bu eylemlerin sistematik bir şekilde yasaklanmış ve zor kullanılarak bastırılmış olması,
Anayasa’ya ve hukuka aykırıdır; toplantı ve gösteri yürüyüşü hakkının ihlali niteliğindedir.
Bu süreçte, bireysel ifade özgürlüğü, basın özgürlüğü, akademik özgürlükler baskı altına alınmış, çok
sayıda çalışan işten çıkarılmış veya soruşturmalara maruz kalmıştır.
Raporda yer verilen soruşturma ve dava örneklerinin gösterdiği gibi, bütün toplumu ve ülkeyi
ilgilendiren konularda barışçıl gösteri hakkını kullanan kişiler cezai takibe uğramış, bunlardan bazıları
tamamen siyasi ve ağır suçlamalarla karşı karşıya kalmıştır.
Kolluğun gereksiz ve ölçüsüz güç ve şiddet kullanımı sonucu yaşam kayıpları, sakatlanmalar ve
yaralanmalar meydana gelmiştir. Bununla birlikte, işlenen suçlar ve gerçekleşen hak ihlalleri etkili bir şekilde
soruşturulmamış, sorumlu kamu görevlileri yargılanmamış ve cezalandırılmamıştır. Cezasızlık kural,
cezalandırma istisna olmuştur.
Toplumsal muhalefetin tekrar canlanmasını önlemek amacıyla ifade ve örgütlenme özgürlüklerini
kısıtlayıcı yeni düzenlemelere ivme kazandırılmıştır. Özgürlükler alanı daralırken, yasalaşma aşamasında olan
iç güvenlik paketiyle kolluğun yetkileri genişletilmek istenmektedir.
II. HUKUKİ DEĞERLENDİRME
Rapor’un konusunu oluşturan olaylar, hukuki açıdan nasıl değerlendirilebilir?
A) Öncelikle, öne çıkan çevresel haklar (kentli olma hakkı dahil), dayanağını birçok Anayasa
maddesinde bulur:
-Sağlıklı ve düzenli kentleşmek (md.23),
-Kıyılardan yararlanma ve kıyıları koruma (md.43),
-Sağlık hizmetleri ve çevrenin korunması (md. 56),
-Şehirlerin özelliklerini ve çevre şartlarını gözeten bir planlama (md.57),
-Tarih, kültür ve tabiat varlıklarını korumak (md.63),
-Doğal zenginlikler ve kaynakların korunması (md.168),
-Ormanların korunması ve geliştirilmesi (md.169),
-Orman köylüsünün korunması (md.170).
Bu maddelerin öncelikli muhatabı Devlettir: Anayasa’nın düzenlediği bu alanlar, ilgili maddeler ve 56.
madde gereği, önleme, düzenleme, planlama, koruma, örgütleme ve geliştirme şeklinde, “devletin
yükümlülüğü” nü öngörmektedir. Devlet organlarının bu yükümlülüklerini yerine getirmemeleri Anayasa
ihlalidir; anayasal hak ve ödevlerini yerine getirmeye çaba gösteren yurttaşlara kolluk güçleri ile müdahale
etmeleri ise, konusu suç teşkil eden kanunsuz emirdir (Anayasa, md.137).
B) Sonra, araçlar bakımından; anayasal düzenleme konularına ilişkin bilgilenme, izleme, katılım, karşı
çıkma ve gerekli başvuru yollarına başvurma, yurttaşlar için hem ödev hem de haktır.
“Anayasal araçlar”, bunların dayanaklarını sunmaktadır:
-Bilgilenme hakkı, düşünce ve ifade özgürlüğü (md.25, 26),
-Toplanma, gösteri ve örgütlenme özgürlükleri (md.34, 33),
-Hak arama özgürlüğü (md.36).
C) Nihayet, konuya, devlet ve yurttaşlar açısından yaklaşılarak, yükümlülük ve hak diyalektiği ortaya
konulmalıdır: Madde 56’nın gerekleri, Anayasa’nın değinilen maddelerinin etkili bir biçimde kullanılmasıyla
yerine getirilebilir ancak.
Tarihi, kültürel ve doğal değerler olarak çevresel hakların gerçekleşmesi, devlet tarafında, “yükümlülük,
görev ve sorumluluk”; yurttaş tarafında ise, “hak ve ödev” gereklerinin yerine getirilmesi ölçüsünde
mümkündür.
1) Siyasal toplum (devlet) tarafında muhataplar (artan sorumluluk halkalarına göre);
2) Sivil toplum (yurttaş) tarafında muhataplar ( artan sorumluluk derecelerine göre);
3) Doğal alanlar açısından konunun anlamı:
142
a.- Anayasa madde 36 çerçevesinde hak arama özgürlüğü; meşru araçla, toplu olarak, meşru amaç için
kullanılıyor.
b.- Meşru amaç; yaşam mekanları ve bileşenlerinin korunmasıdır: İnsan, Hayvan (fauna), Bitki (flora).
c.- Eylemli toplu hak kullanımı: Burada yapılan, Anayasa madde 56 gerekleri doğrultusunda, görev +
sorumluluk destekli eylemli bir toplu hak kullanımıdır.
III. ÖNERİLER
Bu duyarlılık halkalarını genişletmek, sadece bizlerin nitelikli bir ülkede yaşama hakkının bir gereği
olmayıp, aynı zamanda gelecek kuşaklara karşı onurlu bir ödevdir. Çevresel ve kentsel haklar üzerine yapılan
hukuki değerledirme, iki yönden geliştirilmeli ve tamamlanmalıdır:
- Hem kişi hak ve özgürlükleri, hem ifade ve toplu özgürlükler için aslında asgari bir anayasal çerçeve
mevcuttur. Ne var ki yasalar, Anayasa’nın gerisinde kaldığı gibi, uygulama da çoğu zaman açık yasal
düzenlemeleri ihlal etmektedir. Bu üçlü ilişki ve çelişkiyi sürekli teşhir etmek gerekiyor. (Kuşkusuz bu
yaklaşım, özgürlükleri ve demokratik süreci pekiştirici, iktidarı ise sınırlayıcı –fern ve denge mekanizmaları
eşliğinde- yeni bir anayasa gereğini göz ardı ettirmemektedir).
- Türkiye’nin taraf olduğu uluslararası sözleşmeler ve onların devlet organları için doğurduğu
yükümlülük ve yurttaşlar için öngördüğü hakları da unutmamak gerekir. Türkiye’de hak ve özgürlüklerin,
demokratik rejimin alt yapısı olarak algılanabilmesi, başta İnsan Hakları Avrupa Sözleşmesi (İHAS) koruma 143
sistemi gelmek üzere, taraf olduğumuz diğer sözleşme düzeneklerinin de etkili bir biçimde işletilmesini
gerekli kılıyor.
Bu ön saptamalar ışığında;
Öncelikle, Türkiye’de hak ve özgürlüklerin kullanımına karşı uygulanan “kümülatif yaptırım”,
güvenceler bakımından, İnsan Hakları Avrupa Hukukunda geçerli “kümülatif güvence” ye dönüştürülmesi
yönünde çaba gösterilmelidir. Hak ve özgürlükleri ihlalde tereddüt etmeyen (kanunsuz emirleri yerine
getirmeyi alışkanlık haline getiren) kamu görevlilerine yaptırım uygulanması, bu sürecin etkili bir biçimde
işletilmesine bağlıdır. Başka bir deyişle, ilk başvuru anından itibaren “başvuru yolları zinciri”nin açıkça
sergilenmesi ve etkililiği için mücadele edilmesi, cezasızlığın aşılması için önem taşımaktadır.
Sonra, insan hakları sorunlarını çözmede, sorunlara, niceliksel önlemler yerine nitelik açısından
yaklaşma ve insan haklarına bir bütün olarak göz önüne alma gereği vardır.
Üçüncü olarak, demokrasi anlayışı bakımından; demokrasi, sadece çoğunlukçu anlayışa indirgenemez;
çoğulcu özelliği kabul edilmez ise, hukuka saygı sağlanamayacağı gibi hak ve özgürlükler de güvence altına
alınamaz. Demokrasinin sayısal yönünü öne çıkarmak,“siyasal münavebe” (iktidarın serbest seçimler yoluyla
eldeğiştirmesi) yollarını engelleyici ortam hazırlar.
Dördüncü olarak, hukuk-siyaset diyalektiği sağlanmalıdır. Şöyle ki, hukuk kuralları, demokratik
mekanizmalar yoluyla siyaset tarafından üretilir. Fakat burada iki önemli sınır vardır: Birincisi, yürürlüğe
konan yasalar, Anayasa’ya, uluslararası sözleşmelere, hukukun genel ilkelerine ve kazanılmış haklara uygun
olmalıdır. İkincisi ise, kuralı koyan siyasal aktörler, bunlara öncelikle riayet etmelidirler. Unutmamak gerekir
ki, seçimlerle gelen iktidar, işlem ve eylemleri hukuka saygılı olması ölçüsünde meşru olabilir.
Beşinci olarak, insan ve çevresine zarar verici, onarılmaz etki bırakıcı ve öldürücü maddelerle “kamu
düzeni”ni sağlama yol ve yöntemleri terk edilmeli; biber gazı yasaklanmalıdır.
Altıncı olarak, insan haklarını korumak ve geliştirmek amacıyla kurulan birimler, uzman-özerk yapılara
dönüştürülmeli; siyasal çoğunluk politikalarını meşrulaştırma aracı olmaktan çıkarılmalıdır. İnsan hakları,
sadece resmi yapı ile korunmamaz; hak öznelerinin girişimleri ve çeşitli sivil toplum örgütlerinin etkinlikleri,
haklar toplumunun oluşumu için vazgeçilmezdir.
Yedinci olarak, insan hakları uluslararası kuruluşlarının eleştirileri, “dışarıdan yönelen saldırılar”
şeklinde görülmemeli. İnsan haklarının temellenmesinde, fikir-eylem birlikteliği nasıl ki vazgeçilmez ikili ise,
iç dinamik-dış dinamik birlikteliği de öyledir. İnsan Hakları Avrupa Mahkemesi de, bu birleşme çizgisinde yer
almaktadır.
Sekizinci olarak, özellikle doğal, kültürel ve tarihi mirasın korunmasında yurttaşların bilgilenme,
önerilerde bulunma ve karar süreçlerine katılım hakları kabul edilmelidir.
Dokuzuncu olarak, özellikle hak ve özgürlükler alanında “torba kanun” uygulamasından vazgeçilmeli;
kamu düzeninin, özgürlükleri sürekli sınırlamakla değil, demokratik hakların kullanılması ölçüsünde
sağlanabileceği kabul edilmelidir.
Onuncu olarak, hukuk devletinin temellendirilmesi için önkoşul olan devlet erklerinin hukuka
saygısının sağlanması için anayasal denge ve denetim mekanizmalarının işletilmesinde yurttaşların sürekli bir
biçimde uyanık olmalarının gerekliliği vurgulanmalıdır. Denge ve denetim mekanizmaları, ademimerkezileşme yelpazesini de içerecek boyutlarda tasarlanmaldır. Unutmamak gerekir ki, yerel
deomrasi,çevresel demokrasinin önkoşuludur.
Gezi Hukuki İzleme Grubu Raporu, Gezi protestoları sırasında yaşamını kaybedenlere ithaf olunur.
144
RAPORA KATKI SUNANLAR
Prof. Dr. İbrahim Ö. Kaboğlu
Prof. Dr. Beyza Üstün
Prof. Dr. M. Taner Gören
Av. Arzu Becerik
Av. Yeşinil Yeşilyurt
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Öznur Sevdiren
Dr. Erkan Duymaz
Dr. F. Ceren Akçabay
Dr. Evra Çetin
Dr. Tolga Şirin
Arş. Gör. Seda Yurtcanlı
Av. Dicle Matur Çökelek
Av. Özgür Eryılmaz
Av. K. Erkut Güzel
Av. Aziz Aytaç
Av. Özlem Ayata
Av.Tonguç Candaş
Dr. Ali Çerkezoğlu
Menderes Tutuş
Türkiye Barolar Birliği
İstanbul Tabip Odası
Çevre Mühendisleri Odası
DİSK
145
EK
GÖZ YAŞARTICI GAZLAR VE İNSAN SAĞLIĞINA ETKİLERİ
- Biber gazının öldürücü bazı kimyasallar ile karşılaştırılması mümkün mü? (örneğin, hardal
gazı, sarin gazı vs. ile içerik bakımından karşılaştırmak mümkün müdür? Kimyasal silah olarak
tanımlanabilir mi, bunların etkilerinin karşılaştırılması mümkün müdür? )
Göz yaşartıcı bomba ya da gösteri kontrol ajanlarının 15’in üzerinde türü vardır. Biber gazı olarak da
bilinen gösteri kontrol ajanları esas olarak göz yaşartıcı gaz adı ile anılır. Göz yaşartıcı gaz olarak kullanılan
başlıca maddeler oleoresinkapsikum (OC), o-klorobenzilidenmalononitril (CS), dibenzoxazepin (CR),
difenilaminoklorarsin (DM) ve 2 kloroasetofenon (CN) isimli ajanlardır. Bu maddelerden hazırlanan göz
yaşartıcı gazlar bazı çözücüler içermektedir. Göz yaşartıcı gaz olarak OC, CN ve CS ile birlikte
kullanılabilmektedirler. Bu bileşiklerin ciddi sistemik toksik etkileri kapalı alanlarda ve yüksek
konsantrasyonlarda kullanıldıklarında, özellikle de CN bileşiği ile ortaya çıkmaktır. İçlerinde en toksik olanı
CN’dir. Bu koşullarda kornea epitelinde hasar ve konjunktivada ödeme neden olduğu bildirilmektedir. Bu
bileşiklere açık havada maruz kalma sonucunda sağlıklı bireylerde kronik toksisiteye neden olduğuna dair
herhangi bir veri yoktur.
Bu ajanların bugüne kadar hardal gazı, sarin gazı gibi sinir gazlarıyla kullanıldığına dair bir yayın
yoktur. Bu mümkün de değil çünkü bu gazlar çok toksik ve ölümcüldür.
Biber gazının öldürücü olmasında birlikte kullanılan inorganik çözücülerin rolü vardır; bunlar çok
toksik olup ani solunum ve dolaşım problemlerine neden olabiliyorlar. Kullanılan doz, kapalı ortamda
kullanılması, dakika solunum sayısı, maruz kalan kişinin kronik bir hastalığının olup olmaması etili oluyor.
Çocuk ve yaşlılarda çok daha toksik ve ölümcül olabiliyor.
- Biber gazının zarar vermeyen kullanımı tartışması yapılabilir mi, zararsız biber gazı kullanımı
olur mu?
Biber gazının ve diğer göz yaşartıcıların ortak özelliği etkilerinin çok kısa sürede başlaması, kısa
sürmesi ve öldürücü olmamaları olarak yansıtılıyor. Ancak hem bizden hem de dünyadan örneklerle biliyoruz
ki ölümlere neden oldu; burada kullanım kastı önemli. İnsan Hakları savunucuları tarafından kullanım dozu,
kullanım kastı, kullanım şekli bakımından bazı uygulamaların işkence kapsamında değerlendirilmesi gerektiği
düşünülüyor
Halen geç dönem etkilerinin neler olduğu tam olarak bilinmiyor. Bu konuda araştırmalar yapılıyor; yeni
araştırmalara gereksinim var. İşte biz bu yüzden hem yarattığı sağlık sorunları hem de geç dönem etkilerinin
neler olduğunun bilinmemesi nedeniyle yasaklanması gerekiyor. Bilimsel olarak birçok maddenin uzun vadeli
ölümcül zararlar verebildiği çok geç araştırmalarla kanıtlanmıştı.
- Sık maruz kalışta az miktarda bile olsa kalıcı başka hastalıklara kaynaklık edebilecek etkiler
olabilir mi?
146
Tam olarak bilinmiyor. Araştırmalar devam ediyor. Bazı göz yaşartıcıların kanserojen olduğu ve
genetik bozukluk yarattığı söyleniyor; kullanılan çözücüler de oldukça toksik ve kanserojen; o nedenle bu
konuda hassas olunması ve insan yaşamı öncelenerek davranılması savunulmaktadır.
- Çocuklarda biber gazı etkisi
Herkeste ne etki yapıyorsa aynı, ayrı bir çalışma bulunmuyor. Zaten bu ajanların doğası gereği insan
deneyleri yapılamıyor; her şey hayvan deneyleri üzerinden söyleniyor. Ama çocuklarda immun sistem zayıfsa,
daha hassas olmaları nedeniyle daha kötü sonuçlar çıkabileceği söylenebilir.
- Hamile kadınlarda biber gazı etkisi
Sadece bir yayında düşüklere neden olabileceği belirtilmiş. Ancak kesin bir kanıta ulaşılabilmiş değil.
Kanserojen etkilerinden bahsedildiğine göre geç dönemde zararının olamayacağı söylenemez.
- Biber gazının fişek kanalı ile atıldığındaki etkisi
Bizde ve tüm Dünyada göz yaşartıcı gazlar polis tarafından özel tüfeklerle atılan gaz kapsülleri aracılığı
ile yaygın olarak kullanılmaktadır. Bu şekilde kullanılması, pencerelerden camların kırılarak kapaklı
mekânlarda fazla miktarda gaza maruz kalma sonucunu doğurabilmektedir; bu durumda öldürücü etki olasılığı
mevcuttur. Ülkemizde ne yazık ki bu konuda çok fazla ölüm yaşanmış durumdadır. Ayrıca gaz kapsülü
silahının insanları hedef alarak kullanılması ölümcül veya ağır sekel bırakan yaralanmalara, özellikle kafatası
yaralanmaları ve göz kayıplarına neden olabilmektedir.
- Biber gazının sprey şeklinde kullanımı halinde etkisi
Burada sprey formunda kullanılan çözücüler de işin içine giriyor. Çünkü tüm göz yaşartıcılar oda
ısısında katı halde bulunuyor; onları gaz formuna dönüştürmek için birtakım çözücülerle birlikte kullanmak
gerekiyor. Kullanılan çözücüler şunlar;
- Diklorometan (Metilenklorit) – kanserojen- Dibenzoksazepin
- Formaldehit
- Trikloroetan– SSS depresanı, baş dönmesi, konfüzyon, bilinç kaybı, ölüm
- Metil izobutil keton - kimyasal pnömoni
- Eterbazlı solüsyonlar; izopropil alkol, etanol, propilenglikol-anti friz- korneaya penetranGöz yaşartıcı olarak kullanılan maddelerin toksisitesini etkileyen faktörler arasında, yukarıda
bahsedilen çözücü olarak kullanılan maddeler ve konsantrasyonlarının yanı sıra;
- Doz/aktif madde konsantrasyonu,
- Süre,
- Aeresol veya sprey şeklinde kullanımı,
147
- Uygulandığı ortam (kapalı, açık, ısı, nem..),
- Çözücü maddenin fizikokimyasal özellikleri,
- İtici gazın özellikleri ve püskürtücü gücü,
- Bireysel faktörler (solunum sayısı, ek hastalık) rol oynamaktadır.
- Biber gazının göz üzerine etkisi
Gözde ağrı, batma, yanma, gözyaşı salgısında artma, blefarospazm, geçici körlük, ışık hassasiyetine
neden olurlar.
Tekrarlayan maruziyet durumunda kornea duyarlılığında uzun dönemli değişiklikler gerçekleşebilir. Bu
durum, capsaicin maddesinin miyelinsiz ve ince miyelinliafferent sinir liflerini tercihan etkilemesi, hızlı bir
depolarizasyon ardından daha ileri nöronal iletimin blokajı ile açıklanabilmektedir.
Çoğu olguda kalıcı görme kaybı olmasa da, göz kuruluğu şikâyeti devam edebilmektedir. Ayrıca, biber
gazı maruziyeti sonrası % 7-22 oranında kornea abrazyonu meydana gelebilmektedir.
Invivokonfokalmikroskopide kornea epitelindepunktatepitel düzensizlikleri gösterilmiştir. Ayrıca,
stromada artmış reflektivite, keratosit aktivasyonu ve kanat hücrelerinde artış gösterilmiştir.
Kornea epitelinde % 100’e varan genişlikte defekt ve kornea ödemi, limbus ve konjunktivada yaygın
iskemi, sirküler konjunktivalkemozis, ileri dönemde nörotrofikkeratit ve derin stromaskarı gelişmesi
bildirilmiştir. Bu yaygın göz hasarından capsaicin/ benzil alkol karışımı veya sprey içindeki ilave kimyasallar 148
sorumlu olabilmektedir.
- Biber gazının ağız mukozasına etkisi
Diğer mukozalarda olduğu gibi tahriş etkisi vardır. Mevcut bir tıbbi tabloyu hızlandırıcı etkisinden
rahatlıkla söz edilebilir.
- İlaçlı, boyalı, basınçlı su etkileri (cilde etkisi, yutulması halinde etki)
Basınçlı su, direk basınç etkisiyle, düşmelere, sürüklenmelerle yol açarak çeşitli yaralanmalara neden
olabiliyor. Yumuşak doku yaralanmasından kemik kırıklarına kadar ya da göze denk gelirse görme kayıplarına
kadar ciddi travmalara neden olabilir. Ayrıca suya karıştırılan biber gazı maddesi ciltte yanıklara neden
olabilir.
- Biber gazının cilt üzerinde etkisi
En çok bilinen etkileri deri ve mukozalar üzerine irritan etkidir. Vücuda alınması solunum, cilt ve
sindirim yolu ile olur. Belirtiler, maruziyetten sonra 3-5 saniye içinde başlar. Sonraki 15-60 dakika içinde
yavaş yavaş azalarak kaybolur. Deriden emilip sinir uçlarında biriktiğinden, kişinin maddenin etkisinden
kurtulması saatler alabilmektedir. Derideeritem, yanma, tahriş hissi, alerjik dermatit, vezikül, bül, yüksek
dozlara maruziyette ikinci /üçüncü derece cilt yanığına neden oldukları görülmüştür. Alerjik reaksiyonlar
biber ya da biber özlerine maruziyetin direkt etkisinden ziyade, gecikmiş allerjik reaksiyon ile
ilişkilendirilmiştir. CN ve CS maruziyetinden kaynaklanan kimyasal yanma, derinin nemle temasında daha
çok şiddetlenme eğiliminde bulunur; bu, molekülden salınan klor atomlarının nemle reaksiyona girerek
hidroklorik aside dönüşmesinden kaynaklanır. Bu nedenle su ile karşılaşma her ne kadar yanma hissini arttırsa
da partiküllerin uzaklaştırılması için de önemlidir.
- Biber gazının solunum sistemine etkisi
Burun ve boğazda yanma hissi, burun akıntısı, aşırı tükürük salgısı, göğüste sıkışıklık hissi, öksürük
semptomları ile kendisini gösterir. Nefes borularında ani daralmaya neden olabilir. Bu nedenle özellikle astım
hastalarında solunum yetmezliğine yol açma olasılığı bulunmaktadır.
Göz yaşartıcı olarak kullanılan bu maddelerden, OC (0.05%) ve CS ( 0.01 %)’in fare trakeal
epitelyumunda siliyer vuruş frekansında progresif düşüşe neden olduğu gösterilmiştir. CS maruziyetinden
sonra dakikada gözlemlenen ventilasyondaki azalışın OC’ye maruz kaldıktan sonrakine göre daha fazla
olduğu saptanmıştır. Ayrıca göz yaşartıcı gazların çözücülerine ilişkin gözlemlenen ventilasyondaki azalışın
göz yaşartıcı maddelerin doğrudan kendilerine ilişkin gözlemlenen azalışla aynı şekilde olduğu gösterilmiştir.
Solunum
sisteminin
önemli
bir
savunucusu
olan
mukosiliyer
aktiviteyi
azaltan
kimyasal
bileşikler,partiküllerin hava yolunda birikmesine izin verir ve solunum problemlerinin kötüleşmesine neden
olur.
CN, CS ve OC/kapsaisinin akut solunmasına maruz kalma hakkındaki nicel veriler, üç aktif bileşenin
solunum sistemi üzerinde toksik etkilere neden olabileceğini göstermiştir. Üç içerik de solunduğunda,
insanlarda ve laboratuvar hayvanlarında boğaz ağrısı, irritasyon, öksürük, sekresyon artışı, nefes darlığı, 149
solunum durması, akciğer ödemine sebep olabilir. Kapsaisinin akut solunum toksisitesini incelemek amacıyla
yapılan, bazı insan çalışmalarında geçici solunum yolu daralması (bir dakikadan az) ve bazı hayvan
çalışmalarında daha uzun süren solunum yolu daralması gösterilmiştir; astım atağını tetikleyebilir. Özetle
solunum sisteminde meydana gelen etkiler; ağız-burunda yanma, geçici yutma kaybı, boğazda yanma hissi,
öksürük, hapşırma, tükürük salgısında artış, burun akıntısı, hapşırma, boğulma hissi, nefes almada zorluk,
bronkokonstriksiyon/spazm, özellikle astım hastalarında solunum yetersizliği riski, kısa soluma sendromu
olarak bildirilmiştir. Akut pulmoner ödem ve asidoz ise temel ölüm nedenidir.
- Biber gazının Dolaşım sistemine etkisi
Sempatik sinir sitemi deşarjına bağlı olarak, ani kan basıncı yükselmesi, nabızda hızlanma şeklinde
başlar. Yoğun gaza maruz kalma sonucu, aşırı nefes alma zorluğu sürerse, akciğer ödemi olarak bilinen ani sol
kalp yetersizliği gelişebilir. Etkilenme devam ettiği takdirde, nabızda yavaşlama, kan basıncında düşme
meydana gelebilir. Yüksek dozlarda, kalpte tehlikeli ritim bozuklukları gelişebilir. Özellikle koroner kalp
hastalığı bulunan insanlarda, en tehlikeli ritim bozukluğu olan ve ventrikülerfibrilasyon olarak bilinen, ani
ölüme yol açan ritim bozukluğu gelişebilir. Vücutta aşırı sempatik aktivite, hipertansiyon, şeker hastalığı gibi
önemli risk faktörleri bulunan insanlarda kalp krizini(miyokardinfarktüsü) tetikleyebilir.
Gezi parkı olayları sırasında, biber gazı sadece gaz bombası olarak değil, TOMA’lardan fışkırtılan
tazyikli suyun içine konsantre biber gaz karıştırılarak da kullanılmıştır. Biber gazı karıştırılmış suya maruz
kalanlarda, ciltte 2. dereceye kadar olan yanık etkisi görülmüştür.
Yapılan hayvan deneylerinde göz yaşartıcı gazların dakikada 25000 - 150000 mg/m3 solunması sağlıklı
yetişkinlerin % 50’sinde ölüme neden olduğu gözlenmiştir. Capsaicin’in öldürme dozu (ağız yolu ile alımda)
insanlar için 0.5-5 g/kg arasında değişmektedir. Astımlı bir hastada ve bronşioliti olan bir erişkinde hızlı
gelişen ölümün nedeni olarak biber gazı bildirilmiştir.
AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion of Southern California – ACLU’nun (Güney Kaliforniya Sivil
Özgürlükler Birliği) hazırladığı bir raporda 1993- 1995 yılları arasında, biber gazına maruziyet sonucu 26
ölüm olgusu kaydedilmiştir. Bu kimyasalların toksik etkileri üzerine birçok çalışma yapılmış ve halen
yapılmaya devam ederken, yayınlanan birçok bilimsel makalede de ölüme neden olduğu bildirilmiştir.
19 Aralık 2000 tarihinde, 20 cezaevine birden yapılan, 30’u tutuklu 32 kişinin öldüğü, yüzlerce kişinin
yaralandığı operasyonlarda da bilirkişi raporlarına göre öldürücü dozda gaz bombası kullanıldığı ortaya
konmuştur.
Ülkemizde bu gazlarla ilgili bilimsel çalışmalar vardır. Bir toplumsal gösteri sonrası Türkiye İnsan
Hakları Vakfı (TİHV) İstanbul temsilciliğine başvuran biber gazına maruz kalmış 64 olgunun erken dönem
bulguları üzerine yapılan çalışmada, olguların % 72’sinde tespit edilen sağlık sorunlarının literatürde bildirilen
biber gazı ve diğer göz yaşartıcı gazların meydana getirdiği erken dönem bulgularla uyumlu olduğu
bulunmuştur (Ünüvar ve ark, 2011).
Türk Toraks Derneği’nin desteklediği ve Prof. Dr. Peri Arbak tarafından yürütülen, “Göz Yaşartıcı
Gazla Karşılaşan Bireylerin Solunum Sistemi Yakınmaları ve Bulguları” başlıklı bilimsel araştırma projesi,
2012 yılının Mart ve Nisan aylarında, İstanbul’da Birleşik Metal-İş, Ankara’da ise Sağlık ve Sosyal Hizmet
Emekçileri Sendikası üyeleri arasında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Tümü erkek 120 bireye, mesleki astım anketi
(NIOSH), solunum fonksiyon testleri ve arteryel tansiyon ölçümleri uygulanmış, göz yaşartıcı gazla
karşılaşma öyküleri alınmış ve istekli olanlara akciğer filmleri çekilmiştir. Olguların tüm yaşamları boyunca
gazla karşılaşma sayıları ortalama 8.5, son iki yılda 5.6'dır. Özetle bu çalışmanın bulguları, gazla
karşılaşmanın solunum fonksiyonları üstünde neredeyse sigara kadar olumsuz ve kalıcı etkileri olduğunu
göstermiştir.
- Diğer sistem etkileri
- Midede irritasyon ile bulantı kusma, diare,
- Hipertansiyon atağı
- Kan basıncında ani iniş çıkışlar
- Asidoz
- Hipotermi
- Kalp yetmezliği/karaciğer hasarı
150
- Kardiyak ve solunum semptomlarınınanksiyete ve panik atağa neden olduğu bildirilmektedir.
- Motor kontrol kaybı ve Santral Sinir Sisteminde de hasarlar bildirilmiştir
- Biber gazına bağlanan bazı ölümler:
 1 Mayıs 2007- İbrahim Sevindik, 75 yaş, toksik etki ile öldü, (medyada havasız kalarak diye yansıdı)
 4 Nisan 2009- Mustafa Dağ, gaz kanisterinin (bombası) kafasına çarpmasıyla öldü,
 12 Haziran 2009- Hatice İdin (54) toksik etki ile öldü (medyada hipertansiyon hastasıydı şeklinde yer
aldı).
 9 Ekim 2009- Mehmet Uytun (18 aylık) gaz kanisterinin (bombası) kafasına çarpmasıyla öldü,
 27 Nisan 2011/Kazım Şeker (60) toksik etki ile öldü (medyada kalp krizi geçirerek öldü şeklinde yer
aldı)
 31 Mayıs 2011/ Metin Lokumcu (54) toksik etki ile öldü (medyada kalp krizi geçirerek öldü şeklinde
yer aldı)
 28 Ağustos 2011/ Yıldırım Ayhan (40) gaz bombasının göğsüne çarpmasıyla öldü
 21 Mart 2012/ Hacı Zengin (55) toksik etki ile öldü, (medyada solunum rahatsızlığına bağlı
olarak ölüm bildirildi)
 30 Mayıs 2012 / Çayan Birben (30) toksik etki ile öldü (medyada astım krizine neden olduğu şeklinde 151
yer aldı).
Tedavi:
 Biber gazına maruz kalındığında hemen ortamdan uzaklaşılmalı, temiz havaya çıkılmalıdır. Giysiler
çıkarılarak maruz kalan bölge ılık su ve sabunla bolca yıkanmalıdır.
 CS’ye maruz kalındığında su ile temas deri bulgularını alevlendirir; bu nedenle hafif alkali bir
solüsyon kullanılabilir (% 6 sodyum bikarbonat, % 3 sodyum karbonat, % 1 benzalkoniumklorid).
 Biber gazına maruz kalındığında gözler hızla ve bol suyla ya da % 0.9’luk sodyum klorür ile en az 15
dakika süreyle yıkanarak kimyasal madde gözden uzaklaştırılmalıdır. Maruz kalan gözde kontakt lens var ise
hemen çıkarılmalıdır. Müteakip değerlendirme ve tedavi için göz hekimine başvurulmalıdır.
Biber gazı etkileri konusunda Türkiye dışında birçok araştırma yapılmış ve biber gazının yaşamı tehdit
eden ve ölüm meydana geldiğini rapor eden yayınların başlıcaları şu şekildedir.
- Steffee CH, Lantz PE, Flannagan LM, Thompson RL, Jason DR. Oleoresin capsicum (pepper) spray
and "in-custody deaths".Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 1995
- Pepper spray and In-Custody deaths. In science and technology.Granfield J, International
association of Chiefs of Police, Alexandria, VA, 1994
- Oleoresin capsicum (pepper) spray and "In Custody Deaths." SteffeeCH, Am J Forensic Med Pathol
1995
- Toxicologic evaluation of pepper spray as a possible weapon for the Dutch police forces. Risk
assessment and efficacy. Busker RW, Am J Forensic Med Pathol 1998
- Unexpected death related to restraint for excited delirium: a retrospective study of deaths in police
custody and in the community. Pollanen MS, CMAJ 1998
-
Sudden death caused by an oleoresin capsicum spray. Niemcunowicz J A, Arch Med
SadowejKryminol. 2009
- Pepper-spray induced respiratory failure treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
Billmire DF, Pediatrics 1996
- Accidental pepper spray discharge in a emergency department. Heck A, J EmergNurs 1995
152
GİRİŞ
TÜRKİYE’NİN GENEL GÖRÜNÜMÜ:
HUKUK/DEVLET VE TOPLUM ........................................... HATA! YER İŞARETİ TANIMLANMAMIŞ.
I. ÇOĞUNLUKÇU ANLAYIŞ VE SONUÇLARI ........................................................................................10
II. ÇOĞULCU TOPLUM: DEMOKRASININ ALTYAPISI OLARAK İNSAN HAKLARI......... Hata! Yer
işareti tanımlanmamış.
A) Avrupa Sözleşmesi ve anayasal düzen ...................................................................................................11
B) Siyaset ve uygulama: Avrupa ile derin ayrışma ....................................................................................12
III. YARGI VE DEMOKRASİ ......................................................................................................................14
A) Darbe ve hukuk ......................................................................................................................................15
B) “İktidar bozar, mutlak iktidar ise mutlaka bozar” ................................................................................16
C) Üniversiteye yönelik baskılar ................................................................................................................17
IV. DİN ÖZGÜRLÜĞÜ-LAİKLİK ...............................................................................................................17
V. “GERÇEKTEN DEMOKRATİK REJİM” VE “HUKUKUN ÜSTÜNLÜĞÜ”: TÜRKİYE
NERESİNDE? ................................................................................................................................................18
BİRİNCİ BÖLÜM
GEZİ PARKI’NI SAHİPLENEN TOPLUMSAL MUHALEFETİ BESLEYEN SÜREÇ ...... HATA! YER
İŞARETİ TANIMLANMAMIŞ.
I. YAŞAM VE BİLEŞENLERiNİ ZEDELEYİCİ POLİTİKA VE UYGULAMALAR ................................20
A) Anayasal hak ve yükümlülükler ............................................................................................................20
B) Beyoğlu Kentsel Sit Alanı’nın bir parçası olan Gezi Parkı’nın korunması, anayasal bir hak ve ödevdir
....................................................................................................................................................................22
1. Beyoğlu Kentsel Sit Alanı ile ilgili gelişmeler 22
2. İdarenin Gezi Parkı üzerindeki tasarruflarını çevresel ve kentsel usuli haklar açısından
değerlendirilmesi
26
C) Gezi’yi besleyen toplumsal muhalefetin bir bileşeni çevresel ve kentsel hak mücadelesidir ................27
II. KİŞİ HAK VE ÖZGÜRLÜKLERİNE GİDEREK ARTAN MÜDAHALELER ......................................30
A) Alkol düzenlemesi ..................................................................................................................................30
B) Sigara düzenlemesi ................................................................................................................................31
C) Üç çocuk ve ötesi ...................................................................................................................................32
D) Kürtaj ....................................................................................................................................................33
E) Gizli dinleme ve izleme ..........................................................................................................................34
153
F) Ahlak Kuralları Dayatması ....................................................................................................................35
III. GEZİ ÖNCESİ KOLLUK ŞİDDETİ .......................................................................................................35
A) HES Protestoları ve Hopa olayı ............................................................................................................35
B) 1 Mayıs müdahaleleri ............................................................................................................................36
C) Avrupa Mahkemesi’nin Taksim kararı ..................................................................................................38
IV. GEZI EYLEMLERI KRONOLOJISI ......................................................................................................39
İKINCI BÖLÜM
GEZİ PARKI’NI SAHİPLENEN BAŞLICA TOPLUMSAL KATMANLAR ......... HATA! YER İŞARETİ
TANIMLANMAMIŞ.
I. PLATFORM VE TOPLUMSAL KATEGORİLER ...................................................................................45
II. SOSYAL MEDYA ....................................................................................................................................56
ÜÇÜNCÜ BÖLÜM
POLİS ŞİDDETİ VE SONUÇLARINA GÖRE YAPILAN SORUŞTURMALAR .. HATA! YER İŞARETİ
TANIMLANMAMIŞ.
I. ÖLÜMLER .................................................................................................................................................65
A) Haziran öncesi ilk ölüm .........................................................................................................................65
B) Gezi ölümleri .........................................................................................................................................65
II. YARALANMALAR .................................................................................................................................71
A) Gezi protestolarında polis şiddeti ile yaralananlar ...............................................................................72
B) Göz Kayıpları.........................................................................................................................................73
III. SORUŞTURMA / DAVALAR VE GÖZALTILAR ................................................................................75
A) Soruşturmalar/Davalar..........................................................................................................................75
B) Gözaltılar ve Tutuklamalar ....................................................................................................................88
DÖRDÜNCÜ BÖLÜM
GEZİ EYLEMLERİ SÜRESİNCE YAŞANAN HAK İHLALLERİ ......................... HATA! YER İŞARETİ
TANIMLANMAMIŞ.
I. İFADE, ÖRGÜTLENME, TOPLANTI VE GÖSTERI YÜRÜYÜŞÜ DÜZENLEME
HAKKI/ÖZGÜRLÜĞÜ .................................................................................................................................91
A) Anayasal Barışçıl Toplantı ve Gösteri Yürüyüşü Düzenleme Hakkının Keyfi ve Sistematik Biçimde
İhlali ...........................................................................................................................................................92
154
B) İfade Özgürlüğünün Kolektif Niteliğinin Asli Unsurlarından Örgütlenme Özgürlüğünün İhlali ........100
C) Bireysel İfade Özgürlüğü ve Basın Hürriyetinin İhlali........................................................................100
II. KÖTÜ MUAMELE VE İŞKENCE YASAĞI, YAŞAM HAKKI ...........................................................102
III. SAĞLIK HAKKI....................................................................................................................................105
A) Genel Olarak .......................................................................................................................................105
B) Hekimlerin, Tabip Odalarının Hak ve Yetkilerini Kısıtlayacak Yasa Değişiklikleri ...........................107
C) Doktorlara ve Meslek Odalarına Yapılan Baskılar ve Açılan Davalar...............................................108
IV. GEZI PARKI EYLEMLERINE KATILAN VE DESTEK VEREN KIŞILERIN .................................108
ÇALIŞMA YAŞAMINDA KARŞILAŞTIĞI MÜDAHALELER ...............................................................108
A) Kamu çalışanları bakımından ..............................................................................................................111
B) Özel sektör çalışanları bakımından .....................................................................................................113
V. AKADEMIK ÖZGÜRLÜKLER .............................................................................................................114
BEŞİNCİ BÖLÜM
GEZI, POLIS ŞIDDETI VE CEZASIZLIK ................................................................................................116
I. GİRİŞ ........................................................................................................................................................116
II. ŞIDDETIN ‘ENVANTERI’.....................................................................................................................117 155
III. POLIS ŞIDDETINE İLIŞKIN SORUŞTURMALARA DAIR SORUNLAR .......................................125
IV. YARGILAMA KONUSU SUÇUN NITELENDIRILMESINE/TAVSIFINE ......................................132
İLIŞKIN SORUNLAR .................................................................................................................................132
V. YARGILAMAYA İLIŞKIN SORUN BAŞLIKLARI ............................................................................134
VI. TANIK VE MAĞDURLARA İLIŞKIN YÜRÜTÜLEN .......................................................................136
SORUŞTURMALAR / KARŞI DAVALAR ...............................................................................................136
ALTINCI BÖLÜM
GEZI PARKI EYLEMLERININ MEVZUATTA YARATTIĞI OTORITER DEĞIŞIKLIKLER.......138
DEĞERLENDİRME VE ÖNERİLER .........................................................................................................141
I. ÖZET ........................................................................................................................................................141
II. HUKUKİ DEĞERLENDİRME ...............................................................................................................142
III. ÖNERİLER ............................................................................................................................................143
EK
GÖZ YAŞARTICI GAZLAR VE İNSAN SAĞLIĞINA ETKİLERİ .......................................................146
156