The prosecutor’s summary in the ‘Kobane case’, under which many Kurdish politicians are on trial in Turkey, contains an absolution of the Islamic State (ISIS), former Peoples Democratic Party (HDP) central executive committee member Alp Altınörs said at Monday’s hearing.
“According to the summary, ISIS is not a terrorist organisation. On page 79, the names of Islamic terrorist organisations are listed, but ISIS is not included,” Altınörs said, reiterating that the Kobane case defendants have been imprisoned for three years over making a call against ISIS.
The former HDP exec, one of the jailed defendants, added that neither was there mention in the summary of the massacre committed by ISIS in Sinjar (Şengal) in northern Iraq, which is recognised by the United Nations as the Yazidi genocide.
The prosecution presented the case summary to the court in April, requesting “aggravated life sentences” for 36 defendants. This severe punishment, which replaced the death penalty in Turkish criminal law, entails no possibility of early release and imposes strict restrictions on movement within prison, potentially leading to prolonged solitary confinement.
HDP politicians seek extension for defence amidst detailed prosecutor’s summary
In light of the prosecutor’s summary, the HDP politicians implicated in the case, pertaining to the “Kobane incidents” or the “6-8 October incidents” in Turkey’s predominantly Kurdish southeastern provinces in 2014, have requested additional time to adequately prepare a defence.
Altınörs pointed out that the summary possesses a greater level of detail than the indictment itself, making it challenging to respond effectively. “It is impossible to respond to a case summary that the prosecution was able to compile in four and a half months despite the extraordinary personnel resources in two and a half months,” he said.
Former HDP central executive committee member Nazmi Gür emphasised that the lawsuit revolves around a single Twitter post from the HDP’s account, which was merely a call against ISIS violence.
Gür contended that the case represents a conspiracy, highlighting the disregard for the principle of presumption of innocence by the government. He further alleged that government officials exploited the case as a means of propaganda during the election period, ultimately securing their victory in the May elections.
European Court verdict undermines Kobane trial
Following the prosecutor’s presentation of a 5,000-page summary to the court in April, the HDP issued a statement asserting that the Kobane case was intricately tied to the ongoing closure case filed against the party, suggesting it served as a pretext. The HDP emphasised that the closure case predominantly hinges on allegations of the HDP’s role and responsibility in the murders that occurred during the Kobanê protests in 2014.
Notably, the HDP underscored that the European Court of Human Rights’ Grand Chamber had already examined these allegations in the case of Selahattin Demirtaş and concluded that neither Demirtaş nor the HDP bore any responsibility for the said killings.
Unfolding the Kobane trial
Finding themselves embroiled in a legal battle, 108 HDP members faced charges for involvement in urging protests against the ISIS siege on the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobanê and demonstrating solidarity with the Kurdish population. The events unfolded on 6-7 October 2014, primarily in Turkey’s Kurdish-majority cities, killing dozens of people, many of whom were HDP supporters.
The investigation into the protests began in 2014 but the indictment was not presented to the court until December 2020, and the trial itself started in April 2021.
Spanning a staggering 3,530 pages, the indictment levelled against the HDP members relies on the party’s social media posts, alleged to have instigated the events. Within the indictment, the prosecutor sought aggravated life imprisonment for the defendants, charging them with 29 different offences, including “murder”, “looting”, “assault on a public official with a firearm”, “burning flags”, and, “undermining national unity and territorial integrity”.
