'Witness' police in Gezi trial: They were carrying a lot of lemons

2019-12-24 13:14:49


	İSTANBUL - The fourth hearing of Gezi trial has started today, in the wake of an ECtHR verdict of right violation given for Anadolu Kültür Executive Board Chair Osman Kavala, the only arrested defendant of the case.

	The fourth hearing of the lawsuit filed into the Gezi Park protests continue at the İstanbul 30th Heavy Penal Court in Silivri Prison Campus today and tomorrow (December 24-25).

	 

	16 people including Anadolu Kültür Executive Board Chair Osman Kavala, the only arrested defendant of the case, are facing aggravated life sentence on charge of "attempting to overthrow the government" for allegedly having organized the Gezi Park protests in 2013.

	 

	Kavala is also accused of "funding the protests".

	In the fourth hearing of the case to be held today and tomorrow, the people alleging that they came to harm due to Gezi protests are also heard.

	 

	Referring to the verdict of right violation given by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on December 10, the attorneys of Kavala have requested the release of the arrested businessperson and rights defender.

	 

	Today's hearing started with the Presiding Judge's remarks on his decision to remove courtroom artists Tarık Tolunay and Murat Başol from the court in the previous hearing. The Judge said, "We did say that it was prohibited to make courtroom illustrations, but we did not have anyone removed from the courtroom. They said they were removed but that is not true."

	 

	After the hearing started, the defendants took the floor. Speaking first in the hearing, witness Ercan Orhan Aydın, the Chief of Security Branch, said that they were "were assigned to various positions, at streets leading to Taksim, Talimhane and the German Hospital" and added that "the protesters were throwing them burning things with a catapult system."

	 

	When the Presiding Judge asked "what they knew about the defendants", witness Aydın stated the following in brief: "They showed me their photographs, I indicated the ones I knew. We followed orders.

	 

	"I know about how the Gezi Park events began from the press. The trees were to be cut down, then groups arrived. As the security branch and the riot squad we followed orders. In terms of ideology, it was complex.

	 

	"There were no negotiations. I did make announcements for them to disperse. I may have seen them in detention. But I can't say that any one of them carried out a violent act."

	 

	The Presiding Judge also asked the witness, "Did any defendant in our case file hold a press statement or meeting to expand these actions? Were you witness to any statement by them to attack or resist the police intervention?"

	 

	Ercan Orhan Aydın answered this question as follows: "There were police vehicles on the steps of Gezi Park. We made announcements, but they didn't disperse. That shows that the action has crossed the line. But it was everywhere. Everyone was making detentions, not only our team.

	 

	"Protestors were firmly organized. For instance, we would intervene in a group of 20 wearing masks at Mis Sokak, then a short time later the same group would reappear in Galatasaray. They dispersed, but gathered again.

	 

	"Where does Osman Kavala stand in all this... What did he do in the background... I wish I knew. The protestors were organizing so easily."

	 

	to the question of the Presiding Judge, "Which defendant was among the organizers, who was there?", the witness answered, "There was Twitter. I didn't use social media then, I still don't. We followed things on WhatsApp. We have a social media desk, they kept track of calls to action."

	 

	Osman Kavala's lawyer İlkan Koyuncu asked the witness, "Did you see Osman Kavala organizing these events?", to which he answered, "It was here in the courtroom that I saw Osman Kavala for the first time."

	 

	When Koyuncu further asked, "Did you see Osman Kavala involved in violence against police?", the witness again answered, "No, I didn't."

	 

	Directing a question to the witness, lawyer Bahri Belen asked, "Mr. Ercan you mentioned certain press statements. Did you see anyone at these press statements who provoked the crowd to carry out action against the police?" The witness answered, "No, I didn't. Those who did this weren't the people holding statements, they hid at the back."

	 

	Afterwards, witness Hasan Gül from the İstanbul Security Branch was called to the witness stand. When he was asked, "Do you have any knowledge about which defendants took part in attacks on the police or public property or the organization of this?", he answered as follows:

	 

	"The unit I work at does not have access to such information. We were assigned to follow actions in view of info gathered from social media.

	 

	"Security branch follows visible social events, and calls on the riot squad if it observes criminal activity. It seeks to end such events without a problem. It negotiates. I know about the defendants only in the context of indictment.

	 

	"I know Osman Kavala's name not from actions, but from general knowledge. I have worked at the security branch for many years and I am aware of his involvement in NGOs. I don't know where he was during Gezi. I have definitely not seen him involved in any violent action."

	 

	"I negotiated with Can Atalay both during Gezi and after. One of the most crowded funerals was Berkin Elvan's funeral. I can say that he was determined in his stance to follow our negotiations then, to end events without a problem. That was very important during that period."

	 

	When Osman Kavala's lawyer, İlkan Koyuncu asked, "You said you witnessed individuals carrying out violent acts. Was Osman Kavala one of them?", witness Gül answered, "No."

	 

	After the witness statements were heard, the defendants responded to their statements. Osman Kavala said, "The witnesses have provided no information indicating that I took part in any act of violence, that I provoked any such act, or that I was a director of the Gezi Events."

	 

	Mücella Yapıcı also stated, "The press statements we made were about our most basic rights. I was already acquitted on those. But I couldn't help feel that the witnesses had been oriented. Nevertheless their statements show that the indictment is groundless."

	 

	Çiğdem Mater Utku also said, "As far as I can understand, the issue does not have anything to do with us."