Police Harrasses Police Violence Victim's Father

Eighteen-year-old Çağdaş Gemik had been shot dead by police officer Mehmet Ergin in Antalya on 27 October 2008 because he had not obeyed the stop warning.

In the latest hearing of the case, the Gemik family's lawyer Münip Ermiş, head of the Antalya Branch of the Contemporary Jurists' Association (ÇHD), qualified the police's interventions against Gemik's friends and family members as illegal.

Cased postponed to 20 August

The Antalya 3^rd Heavy Penal Court postponed the next hearing to 20 August in order to wait for the Forensic Medical Institute's report. According to Ermiş, arrested suspect Ergin gave the following statement at the end of today's hearing: "I don't regret what I did, I would do the same again. I just did my job." Having said that, friends of Gemik following the hearing in the courtroom called him a "murderer".

"Judge and police took unlawful measures"

Lawyer Ermiş criticised the judge's decision to take people close to Gemik into custody following their outrage. Emiş explained: "If there was any guilt, the judge would have had to write a protocol. Of course he could also have had the courtroom emptied. Without a protocol it is illegal to take someone into custody. This against Articles 203 and 204 of the Anti-Terrorism Law." 

Ermiş reported that the police threw a radio transceiver at the head of Haşim Gemik, father of the victim; they furthermore resorted to violence against other family members. Members of the ÇHD were also exposed to violence by the police.

Seven people were released from detention the following day (27 June). Ermiş explained that they have filed a criminal complaint because of maltreatment and their illegal detention.

Ermiş: "The police didn't show the slightest tolerance to the aggrieved relatives. They shoot their son and throw a radio at the father's head."

Confidential investigation

"Moreover, for the first time an investigation was kept confidential for the reason of resistance against the police. However, a classified investigation can only be justified if there is danger of crucial evidence being obscured in heavy penal cases. Resistance against the police seems quite funny as legal grounds."  Ermiş has objected against this decision as well.

During today's hearing Ermiş referred to the disciplinary investigation report of the Police General Directorate Review Committee.

The report mentions that the evader could have been caught in a short time without the use of a weapon, and that no communication over the radio transceiver had been recorded. Based on the report, Ermiş pointed out that though the police officer might not have had the intention to kill Gemik, the shooting was not even a case of legitimate self-defence. He stated that the defendant police officer applied disproportional force beyond his authority, acting carelessly, imprudently, and negligently. (EZÖ/VK/AG)