Share this
Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) co-chairs Pervin Buldan and Mithat Sancar met with a group of lawyers on Monday in Istanbul to further discuss the details of the closure case against their party in Turkey.
In an opening speech, HDP co-chair Pervin Buldan stated that the closure case that the HDP faces is a “historical” case. “Party bans have been a random phenomena in Turkey’s history. We have experienced such processes as the carriers of a tradition, which suffered most from such bans. I would like to stress that this case is a historical one. This case is a political case, yet we know that there are many things that we can do legally,” she said.
Speaking afterwards, HDP co-chair Mithat Sancar defined the campaign of the Turkish government against the HDP as one of “blackmail.”
“The campaign they have launched way before the closure case showed us all that the spokespeople of this government and their little partners have been demanding a ban on the HDP at every opportunity. They have not only conducted a political campaign, but they have conducted a policy of blackmail against the Chief Public Prosecutor of the Court of Cassation and against society,” he said.
Sancar highlighted the problems of the indictment that had been prepared by the prosecutor that had been rejected by the Constitutional Court on the first occasion when the prosecutor had forwarded the indictment: “The Constitutional Court stated when they rejected the indictment that there was no relation between the demand to ban the HDP and the evidence provided for such a demand. The so-called evidence listed by the prosecutor did not present convincing grounds upon which to ban the HDP. He could not show any connection between his evidence and his demand, because there was and is none. It is not possible to find grounds to accuse the HDP of separatism and violence. The HDP is the party which defends co-existence, peace and democracy, in the most determined way.”
Despite the fact the the prosecutor did not really revise the problems addressed by the Constitutional Court, Sancar further added that the indictment was accepted by the Court on the second occasion that the prosecutor applied to the Court.
“The Contitutional Court was supposed to principally reject the second indictment. If they had done that, they would have presented a historical opportunity but by not doing that, they have wasted a historical chance. The Court is supposed to abide by the Constitution, but it did not,” he said.
Sancar stressed that the biggest defence of the HDP lies in the path of social struggle. “We need a joint struggle: we need a unified struggle of all democratic forces. The de facto prosecutor of this case is the government and the defence lawyers are the people,” he said.
Noting that they have no doubt that the HDP will be successful in achieving this first and most important step to defend the party, Sancar also shared information about the legal steps and perspectives of the HDP for the defence they have begun to prepare.
“We are decided to carry out a strong legal struggle as well. The indictment is rotten, it is a piece of garbage. Our defence will pass beyond such a badly written document in terms of its quality. It will not be hard for us to negate such an indictment. Our defence should be one of the most basic documents of the legal struggle for democracy. We will prepare this document together and we will make sure that our struggle for justice will leave its mark in history,” he said.
“Our defence will not only be within the walls of a court room, but it will be inherited by following generations to show them how to lead a democratic struggle by means of the practice of law.”
