Lack of Jurisdiction?

The first hearing of the trial related to the violent death of Uğur Kantar was held on Friday (18 November) before the Girne Military Court in Northern Cyprus where Kantar was doing his military service. He died in intensive care on 12 October 2011 as the result of severe torture that had been inflicted on him at the disciplinary ward. The trial was adjourned to 16 December 2011.

The first hearing of the case was attended by detained defendants Ayhan Aslan and Fırat Keser. Un-detained defendants Prison Director Ayhan Şentürk and a prison guard failed to appear at court.

The other defendants and also the witnesses were present at the hearing as well as Kantar's father, his uncle and other relatives.

"We filed a motion for lack of jurisdiction"

Teoman Özkan, joint attorney of the Kantar family, talked to bianet about the first session at court. He summarized the procedures as follows:

* The court deemed itself competent since in fact the witnesses, defendants and the bereaved had all been summoned. Otherwise, there would have been no point in summoning all parties.

* We filed a motion for lack of jurisdiction. We said that this was a crime against humanity and not a military offence. Therefore, we put forward that the court should decide for "lack of jurisdiction" to have the case tried before a civil court.

* We presented two related precedents to court and requested not to hear any of the defendants and witnesses.

"The Kantar family is even-tempered"

Lawyer Özkan said that the court accepted the demand not to hear any of the defendants and witnesses upon the insistent requests of the plaintiff party. The case was adjourned to 16 December. The court will evaluate the motion for lack of jurisdiction in the meantime and announce a decision at the coming hearing, Özkan told bianet.

He mentioned that it was very difficult for the Kantar family to be in the same court room with the soldiers who allegedly tortured Uğur Kantar. Nevertheless, they did not show any negative behaviour. Özkan indicated that their only aim was not influence the trial in a negative way. (EKN/VK)