Ministry of Justice defended Imrali isolation by falsifying the ECtHR decision 

2023-05-09 12:17:32


	 

	ISTANBUL - The Ministry of Justice presented the arguments in the government's "Öcalan No.2" decision to the Constitutional Court as "decisions of the ECtHR" in order to defend the post-OHAL obstructions in Imrali. Lawyers stated that the ministry falsified the ECtHR decision to legitimize the isolation.

	 

	PKK Leader Abdullah Öcalan, who was brought to Turkey as a result of an international conspiracy on February 15, 1999, has been in heavy isolation in Imrali Type F High Security Prison for 24 years. Since the "interrupted" phone call he had with his brother Mehmet Öcalan on March 25, 2021, neither Abdullah Öcalan nor the other prisoners in prison Veysi Aktaş, Ömer Hayri Konar and Hamili Yıldırım have been heard from. All applications made by Asrın Law Firm's lawyers on the subject are rejected.

	 

	Lawyers have made numerous applications to the Constitutional Court (AYM) regarding various violations in 8 years. One of these applications was the application made regarding the fact that Abdullah Öcalan was not allowed to meet with his lawyer, family and guardian, all communication with the outside was cut off, as well as many violations within the scope of the State of Emergency (OHAL) declared after July 15, 2016, which is described as a coup attempt. After 8 years, the Constitutional Court asked the Ministry of Justice for an opinion on this and 22 other applications on January 23. The Ministry, on the other hand, submitted an opinion to the Constitutional Court on March 24.

	 

	THERE ARE NO VIOLATIONS OF RIGHTS IN IMRALI!

	 

	In its opinion regarding the violations experienced under the state of emergency, the Ministry of Justice stated that the Bursa Chief Public Prosecutor's Office requested that Abdullah Öcalan's all communication with the outside be cut off one day after the declaration of the state of emergency, and that the Bursa 1st Execution Judgeship accepted the prosecutor's request on the same day. Evaluating the objection, he stated that the Bursa 2nd High Criminal Court rejected the objection on August 1. Noting that the lawyers applied to the Constitutional Court on October 27, 2016, stating that the individual "Prohibition of Torture", "Right to respect for private and family life", "Right to a fair trial" and "Right to an effective application" had been violated, the ministry said in its opinion that ill-treatment and argued that there were no rights violations.

	 

	'IT IS TORTURE'

	 

	The lawyers continued as follows: “As a result of the decision subject to the application, an indefinite social and sensory isolation has been caused. This absolute lack of communication and the duration of the bans, motive, violence, the applicant's subjective detention conditions, age, and health conditions are also factors that aggravate the current conditions; therefore, the minimum violence threshold sought for the violation of the prohibition of torture in all respects has been exceeded for a long time. The current conditions range from inhumane treatment to torture.”

	 

	The lawyers demanded that a decision be made in line with their requests.

	 

	MA / Mehmet Aslan