ANKARA - Ankara State Security Court (DGM) has continued to hear re-trial of Leyla Zana, Hatip Dicle, Orhan Dogan and Selim Sadak, the former deputies of the Democracy Party (DEP) which was banned by the Constitutional Court.
Zana, Dicle, Dogan and Sadak did not attend the hearing on Friday.
Also, they presented a petition to the court saying that they would not attend the following hearings to protest statements of Justice Minister Cemil Cicek and the government's policies under the light of its relations with the European Union (EU).
Speaking at the hearing, lawyer Yusuf Alatas said, ''during the re-trial process, state and government officials said that necessary laws were adopted to adjust to the European Union (EU) norms and that it was the purview of independent jurisdiction. However, they insisted on saying that our clients were not thought criminals, but members of the terrorist organizations. A person should be considered innocent until proven guilty, shouldn't he?''
Alatas said, ''during the re-trial process, we have refrained from statements and behaviors that could affect the independence of the court. However, Justice Minister Cicek said that my clients insulted the court. In fact, my clients did not say a single word in many of the hearings. Therefore, they decided not to attend the hearings henceforth. My clients thinks that the decision about them had already been taken before the trial process. They have lost their confidence.''
Relatives of former DEP deputies, some European parliamentarians and representatives of some embassies in Ankara watched the hearing.
Tight security measures were taken in and around the court building.
After the law envisaging amendments to some laws, which is known as the second European Union (EU) adjustment package in the public opinion, came into force on February 4, Yusuf Alatas, the lawyer of former deputies of the DEP, submitted a petition to the Ankara DGM for retrial of his clients.
Previously, Ankara DGM sentenced Dicle, Zana, Dogan and Sadak to 15 years in prison in accordance with Article 168-2 of the Turkish Penal Code and Article 3713 of the Anti-Terrorism Law on charges of ''staging separatist activities both in Turkey and abroad in line with orders and directives of leaders of the terrorist organization PKK''.
All four defendants were stripped of their parliamentary immunity, arrested and convicted in 1994 of having links to the terrorist organization of PKK.
PROSECUTOR KAHVECI REQUESTS COURT TO RATIFY THE FIRST DECISION
Speaking at the hearing, lawyers of former DEP deputies explained their views and requested the court to release their clients from prison.
Later, Prosecutor Kahveci explained his opinion about merits of the case.
''A lawsuit was filed in 1994 against Zana, Dicle, Dogan and Sadak on charges of opposing to the Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK). As a result of the trial process, they were sentenced to 15 years in prison in accordance with Article 5 of Anti-Terrorism Law envisaging 'increase in punishment' and article 168-2 of the TCK about 'leading an illegal organization'. Their imprisonment was approved by the Supreme Court of Appeals Criminal Department no: 9. Former DEP deputies applied to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upon decision of the court. The ECHR sentenced Turkey to pay compensation since presence of a military judge in the DGMs, failure to listen to eyewitness in the presence of the court, changes in accusation against former DEP deputies, and failure to give sufficient period to lawyers of former DEP deputies. Under Turkey's EU membership process and its efforts to further strengthen its democracy, Article 327 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CMUK) about re-trial was amended. The amendment allows re-trial of suspects in case of an opposition to the European Convention on Human Rights,'' he recalled.
Kahveci said, ''the re-trial process, which was started upon application of former DEP deputies, has been proceeding in line with assessments of the ECHR. There is not any military member in the court delegation. The convicts and their lawyers were given more time than the reasonable period. Most of the eyewitnesses were listened to in the presence of the court delegation. The convicts and their lawyers were enabled to ask questions to eyewitnesses.''
''As a result of re-assessment of statements of eyewitnesses, documents presented to the court by the convicts and their lawyers, and the other documents and statements in the file during the re-trial process which was held under the decision of the ECHR in line with Article 327/6 of the CMUK, any situation could not be determined to change the first decision taken by the court and approved by the Supreme Court of Appeals. Therefore, the first decision should be ratified, and the convicts' request for annulment of their imprisonment sentence should be rejected.''
Meanwhile, lawyer Yusuf Alatas requested the court to determine whether Zana went abroad in October of 1991 and whether audio tapes in the file of the case belonged to his clients.
The court delegation rejected these requests saying that they would not affect merits of the case.
The court delegation also rejected the convicts' request for annulment of their imprisonment sentence.
The court delegation also decided to warn the convicts that the re-trial process would be completed in their absentia if they failed to attend the hearings.
The hearing was adjourned to April 2, 2004.
Meanwhile, lawyer Alatas told reporters following the hearing, ''we are not surprised at the opinion about merits of the case. Prosecutor's request for ratification of the first decision has revealed that law did not work and Turkey did not abide by decisions of the ECHR. Many things have changed in Turkey and a series of adjustment packages were adopted. However, jurisdiction has remained behind the situation in 1994.''

(UK-AÖ) 12.03.2004