Different Prosecutor, Same Demands in Torture Trial

Prosecutor Erdal Şenol presented his legal opinion as to the accusations in the fifth hearing of the trial on Engin Çeber, a journalist tortured to death under police custody in 2008, requesting aggravated life imprisonment for arrested suspects Selahattin Apaydın and Sami Ergazi on the charge of "aggravated torture by virtue of consequences."

Suspects Apaydın, Ergazi, Fuat Karaosmanoğlu and Nihat Kızılkaya attended the trial at the Istanbul 14th High Criminal Court in the district of Bakırköy, as well as Çeber's father Ali Tekin and his sister Şerife Çeber.

Prosecutor Şenol also requested between three and 12 years in prison for suspect Kızılkaya on the charge of "torture" and between six months to a year in prison for suspect Karaosmanoğlu for "misconduct in office."

The prosecution requested further penalties for suspects Mehmet Pek, Abdülmuttalip Bozyel, Murat Çise and Yavuz Uzun who were released pending trial, demanding between three to 12 years of imprisonment three times over for them on the charge of "torture."

Prosecutor Şenol then requested another sentence for Prison Doctor Yemliha Söylemez between three and eight years of imprisonment but demanded the release of all other suspects on the grounds of "insufficient evidence."

"Trying to deliver the suspects from punishment"

The prosecutor has merely repeated the initial legal opinion delivered on April 16, 2010, according to lawyer Taylan Tanay.

"The previous court had accepted our criticism and decided not to pass a verdict in this vein, but the prosecutor's repetition of the previous legal opinion amounts to protecting the torturers, as [officials examined the crime scene] and listened to the witnesses in the meantime. The Forensics Institute then made another assesment. They are trying to wrap up the Çeber case by [penalizing merely] two suspects," lawyer Tanay told bianet.

Reports have also confirmed that the police had tortured Çeber incessantly for ten consecutive days, he said, adding that the authorities were trying to deliver suspects Kızılkaya and Karaosmanoğlu, who had received aggravated life imprisonment sentences in the first trial, from punishment.

"With this trial, people who did not [personally] partake in torture [sessions] but headed the mechanism and were thus responsible for [such a] death had received penalties for the first time. It was significant that civil servants who did not torture but were found responsible for it in view of their duties had received the same sentences as the murderers [themselves,]" Tanay said.

The court delegation consequently ruled to adjourn the trial for Oct. 1, 2012.

Background

Law enforcement officials first took Engin Çeber under custody on the grounds that he was distributing the Yürüyüş magazine and because he had attended a press declaration. He was tortured incessantly at the İstinye Şehit Muhsin Bodur Police Department and the Metris Prison in Istanbul until Oct. 7, 2008.

He finally passed away in the Şişli Etfal Hospital on Oct. 10, 2008, while expert reports have confirmed of his death by torture.

A suit was consequently filed at the Bakırköy 14th High Criminal Court against 60 suspects, including 39 prison officers, three prison wardens, 13 police officers, four gendarmerie troops and a prison doctor.

Metris Prison's Deputy Warden Karaosmanoğlu and correction officers Apaydın, Ergazi and Kızılkaya received life imprisonment sentences on June 1, 2010 on torture murder charges.

The court also sentenced correction officers Yavuz Uzun and Murat Çise, as well as police officers Abdülmuttalip Bozyel and Mehmet Pek, to seven and a half years in prison, while police officer Aliye Uçak received two and a half years behind bars. The court convicted them of torture, intentional injury, dereliction of duty and for not reporting a crime.

Prison Doctor Yemliha Söylemez also received a sentence of three years and nine months for forging fake documents.

The Eighth Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, however, overturned those verdicts on Sept. 28, 2011, and the first subsequent hearing was then scheduled for Feb. 20, 2012, some 16 months after the appeals court's decision. (AS)