NEWS CENTER - Stating that 11 women prisoners in Sincan Prison were not given the right to conditional release, DEM Party Bedlîs Deputy Semra Çağlar Gökalp submitted a parliamentary question to the Minister of Justice Yılmaz Tunç.

 

Semra Çağlar Gökalp, Bedlîs (Bitlis) Deputy of the People's Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party), made an application to the Parliament's Human Rights Investigation Commission regarding the women prisoners who were not granted the right to conditional release in Sincan Prison. Gökalp submitted a parliamentary question to the Speaker of the Parliament, demanding that the Minister of Justice Yılmaz Tunç respond to it.

 

In her application to the Parliamentary Human Rights Commission, Gökalp stated that 11 women prisoners were not benefited from this by the decision of the Administration Observation Board, even though they completed their release, and demanded that the issue be investigated.

 

Bedlîs Deputy Semra Çağlar Gökalp

 

'THIS ATTITUDE APPLIED TO POLITICAL PRISONERS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED'

 

Gökalp's application petition included the following statements: "Nedime Yaklan and Sermin Demirbağ, who have been in prison for 30 years, Zeynep Bingöl and Mukaddes Kubilay, who are in their 70s and sick and have been in prison for 10 years, as well as Jiyan Ateş, Sabite Ekinci, Necla Yıldız, Rozerin Kurt, Özlem Demir, Dilan Oyunş and Sedef Demir The releases of prisoners named are postponed by the Administration Observation Board on subjective grounds such as 'they are not of good behavior' and 'they are not ready to integrate into society'. Since January 1, 2021, when it started to be implemented, the right to hope of hundreds of prisoners, including seriously ill prisoners, has been taken away by the unlawful and arbitrary decisions of the Administration Observation Boards. With this practice, which only applies to judicial convicts in prison for murder, rape and similar crimes are released, while political prisoners are discriminated against and their releases are postponed, contrary to the principle of equality. In this context; I demand that the Convict and Detainee Rights Sub-Committee within your commission investigate the situation in order to determine the causes and consequences of this discriminatory attitude applied only to political prisoners in Sincan Women's Closed Penitentiary Institution."

 

A PROPOSAL OF QUESTIONS WAS GIVEN TO THE MINISTRY

 

Gökalp submitted a written question to the Presidency of the Parliament on the same issue, demanding the Minister of Justice Yılmaz Tunç to answer. In the proposal, the following questions were asked to Minister Tunç: "What is the reason why 11 women were not given the right to conditional release with the decision made by the Administration Observation Board? Is it in line with the ordinary flow of life that no prisoner in Sincan Women's Closed Prison has been granted the right to conditional release since the date when the Administration Observation Board came into force? Is it in accordance with the rules of universal law for the Administration Observation Board to postpone the releases of prisoners on subjective grounds such as 'not behaving well'? Is the legality of the decisions taken by the Administration Observation Board inspected? If these decisions are not subject to supervision, how can arbitrariness be prevented? While those convicted of murder, rape and similar criminal offenses can benefit from the right to conditional release with the decisions of the Administrative Observation Board, isn't it against the law and the principle of equality of the constitution for those in prison for political reasons not to benefit from this right? Why do they insist on making unconstitutional decisions just for the sake of holding political prisoners in prison? Doesn't this situation also undermine the principle of legal security? If you argue that the Administration Monitoring Board's deprivation of the right to hope of hundreds of prisoners, including seriously ill prisoners, is in line with human rights and principles of justice, what legitimate justification do you rely on in this regard? If there is no legitimate basis, why do you insist on unlawfulness?"