Today, the same wall of impunity stretches before the police who assault journalists in the street and use their shields to prevent them from doing their jobs, as well as those who will not even allow investigations into those assaults

 

MELTEM AKYOL, İSTANBUL

 

Kurdish journalist and writer Musa Anter was murdered in an armed attack in the street in predominantly Kurdish city of Diyarbakır 30 years ago. Those involved in the murder “confessed” to the crime, but the court was not convinced. In the 30 years since, no deposition was taken, perhaps could not be taken, from Abdulkadir Aygan, who confessed to the murder and Mahmut Yıldırım, codename “Yeşil,” who planned the murder “vanished” into thin air. Yet another intellectual’s murder was chalked up to unknown assailants.

 

The same wall of impunity that has left the murder of Musa Anter 30 years ago unresolved, today stretches before the police who assault journalists in the street and use their shields to prevent them from working to those who will not even allow investigations.

 

Perpetrators known for 30 years

 

Musa Anter, also known as Apê Musa (Uncle Musa), who spent 11.5 years of his life in prison was gunned down in Diyarbakır, where he had gone to attend a festival of culture and arts, on 20 September 1992. 13 bullets were recovered from the scene and four were found in his body. Orhan Miroğlu, who accompanied Anter that evening and later became an MP for the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) was gravely injured in the attack.

 

According to the investigation the Diyarbakır State Security Court launched into the murder, the perpetrator(s) “was uncertain.” That is, the perpetrator(s) had not been identified, or were “unknown” in the usage that became all too regular in the 90s. The 1992/2598 case file for the Anter murder remained marked “perpetrator(s) uncertain” for many years to come.

 

The well-known “perpetrator” named in a Parliamentary report in 1995

The well-known truth was stated in a report for the first time on 12 October 1995, in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey’s “Report (10/90) of the Parliamentary Inquiry Commission on Political Murders Committed by Unknown Perpetrators in Various Regions of the Country.” Although the report stated that investigations had not yielded result into the murders, there was a part that caught the attention. The section titled “Murders by Unknown Perpetrators of a Nature that Could Cause Societal Unrest and Result in Societal Conflict” narrated details of the murder of Retired Major Cem Ersever. According to a 16 February 1994 official statement by Aydınlık newspaper Ankara news editor Soner Yalçın presented in that section of the parliamentary report, Cem Ersever had told Yalçın that the murder of Musa Anter had been perpetrated by an individual known by the codename “Yeşil.”

 

Also according to Soner Yalçın’s statement the gendarmerie and the police used “Yeşil” as an intelligence source. Yalçın had stated that the political murders, especially in the region covering Diyarbakır, Elâzığ, Tunceli and Bingöl, had been committed by a group of four or five individuals who worked under “Yeşil,” who was later named as Mahmut Yıldırım in the press. However, no court has asked Yalçın about his claims since then.

 

The Susurluk Report: “Killing was the wrong decision”

 

The Susurluk Report appeared in 1997, causing uproar in Turkey. Prepared by the Prime Ministerial Board of Inspection President Kutlu Savaş upon the request of then Prime Minister Mesut Yılmaz and submitted to the prime minister on 22 January 1997, the Susurluk Report touched on significant points. According to the report, the National Intelligence Agency (MİT) did not deny its contact with Mahmut Yıldırım (Yeşil) named in connection with the murder of Anter. The report also included information that the MİT had provided treatment for Mahmut Yıldırım, whose rib bone was broken during interrogation in the custody of Ankara Security Directorate in January 1995. The following statement from the section of the report that lists statements by the MİT is worth noting: “Muhsin Gül (codename: Kekeç-Pepe-Metin), imprisoned in Diyarbakır Prison as of 1994 claimed in statements made to the Diyarbakır Homicide Branch Office from 22 July 1994 to 16 August 1994 (…) that A. Demir (code Yeşil) had personally planned and put in effect the killings of Vedat Aydın and Musa Anter.”

 

That is not all. According to the report, those who decided to kill Anter accepted that it was a mistake. “Even those who approve of all events were found to have regretted the killing of Musa Anter. Musa Anter was not involved in armed action, that he was more occupied with the philosophy of the matter, that the impact of his killing had surpassed his personal influence and that the killing decision was a mistake.”

 

So, who were the people who made this assessment? As yet another “state secret,” their identity was not disclosed. The Anter family, who filed an application for the Chief Prosecutor’s Office to deepen the investigation requested an investigation into who had committed the “mistake” mentioned in the report and Kutlu Savaş being called as a witness. However, their application yielded no results.

 

In 2000, Mehmet Eymür, former Counter-Terrorism Office President of the MİT, made some statements on a website recounting that after his interrogation at the Ankara Security Directorate, “Yeşil” had been taken over by the MİT and the MİT had “obtained information” from “Yeşil.” Eymür wrote that when “Yeşil” recounted the undertakings he carried out using persons connected with the PKK, he gave the murder of Musa Anter as an example: “For example, in the Musa Anter affair, one of the nicest guys in the [outlawed] Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) was used and Musa was made to come to Diyarbakır.” According to this information, “Yeşil” had admitted to planning the murder, but once more neither the statements nor the reports sufficed to deepen the investigation.

 

“The murder of Anter is a JİTEM killing”

 

As the investigation in Turkey did not lead to any results, the Anter family applied to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in 2000. In 2004, as the ECtHR process was underway, there was another astounding development. Abdülkadir Aygan, who was then residing in Sweden, confessed to many points relevant to many murders with unknown perpetrators and the structure of the Gendarmerie Intelligence and Anti-Terror Unit (JİTEM). The confessions published by the Ülkede Özgür Gündem over 10 days were supplemented by copies of payrolls which listed Aygan’s assignment as a civilian officer at JİTEM and a photo of Aygan with the then Gendarmerie Public Order Commander Four Star General Necati Özgen at dinner at the Diyarbakır Officers’ Club. In 2004, Aygan also published a book titled İtirafçı Bir JİTEM’ci Anlattı (“A JİTEM Officer Confesses”).

 

In the series published in the Ülkede Özgür Gündem newspaper and in his book, Abdülkadir Aygan recounted being a member of the JİTEM team that carried out the killing of Musa Anter and stated that the murder had been planned by Mahmut Yıldırım. Stating that he and Cemil Işık, codename “Hogir,” were present in the area during the murder, Aygan also named the shooter as Şırnaklı Hamid (Hamid “of Şırnak”).

 

 

Shielding the murderers, suing journalists

 

Under the rule of the law, such confessions would have been enough to deepen the investigation. That was not the case. On the contrary, a criminal case was filed against the owner and managing editor of the Ülkede Özgür Gündem newspaper, which had reported on Abdülkadir Aygan’s confessions about the murder of Musa Anter with the headline “İşte Apê Musa’yı Öldüren Tim” (“The Team that Killed Apê Musa”) on charges of “disclosing the names of those taking part in counter-terorrism and presenting them as targets for terrorist organisations.” The case filed with the İstanbul 14th High Criminal Court demanded aggravated fines for the defendants. Another case with the same charges was filed against the owner of Aram Publishing, which had released Abdülkadir Aygan’s book.

 

Murderers’ confessions do not convince court, case dropped on statute of limitations

 

Meanwhile, in 2006, the ECtHR decided against Turkey and ruled for compensation of EUR 28,500 to be paid to the Anter family. In 2009, five years after he went on record, the Diyarbakır Specially Authorized Chief Prosecutor’s Office remembered Abdülkadir Aygan’s confessions. The prosecutor’s office took the confessions to be a report of crime. It re-initiated the investigation 17 years after the murder, with three years to go until the statute of limitations would run out. On 29 June 2012, the Sabah newspaper published an item titled “The Shooter!” According to the news item, the shooter named as “Şırnaklı Hamid” in Aygan’s confessions was Hamit Yıldırım.

 

The reporting stated that Yıldırım had been tailed for six months, images of him were taken, his addresses of residence were identified and his photos from 20 years earlier and current photos had been identified by Orhan Miroğlu and Abdülkadir Aygan. After this news item was published, the Diyarbakır Specially Authorized Chief Prosecutor’s Office acted to arrest the alleged shooter Hamit Yıldırım at his house in Kumçatı, Şırnak with three months left until the statute of limitations ran out.

 

An indictment calling for aggravated life and 20 years of imprisonment respectively on charges of “premeditated murder and acting as accomplice to premeditated murder” and “inciting the people to armed uprising” was prepared for Mahmut Yıldırım, Abdülkadir Aygan (Aziz Turan), Savaş Gevrekçi and Hamit Yıldırım in 2012. The court case was filed in 2013.

 

There was already a history of relevant trials. A case against JİTEM shooters had already been field against six defendants in 1999. In 2000, a case with five defendants was merged with the former file, bringing the number of defendants up to 11. In 2005, another case was filed against eight defendants. When military courts were ordered to try three of the defendants in that trial, the number of defendants dropped to five. In 2010, the third trial was merged with the JİTEM file with 11 defendants. As the hearings continued, various merger decisions on separate dates led to two more cases being added to the JİTEM case. In 2014, the Musa Anter case was merged with the JİTEM main case. The trial could only begin in 2016. In 2019, the case of Ayten Öztürk, who was abducted, tortured and killed in Elazığ in 1992 was merged with the former cases.

 

All these merger decisions further strengthened concerns that the trial continuing on paper would be a sham and would result in impunity.

 

The case was later relocated to Ankara on “security” grounds. The shooter Hamit Yıldırım was released in 2017, five years after his imprisonment pending trial due to “long period of remand.” Meanwhile, eyewitness to the murder Orhan Miroğlu said “It has been a long time, I would not want to presume” about the shooter “Şırnaklı Hamid,” whom he had previously identified in his book and statements.

 

Throughout the trial that was held “for appearance’s sake,” Aygan could not be made to testify and “Yeşil” vanished into thin air. The shooter Hamit Yıldırım was released on the assumption that he had served enough time.

 

Finally, with the statute of limitations running out on 20 September 2022, the Musa Anter murder trial was dropped on 21 September 2022. So, in a sense, those who took part in the murder of Musa Anter said “we committed the murder,” but the court could not be convinced. The dark murder receded back into the darkness with its apparent perpetrators.

 

Impunity from the Musa Anter trial to the present

 

The very same day when the murderers of Musa Anter were saved by the shield of statute of limitations, the Saturday Mothers/People who are searching for their lost ones were on trial in İstanbul for “Violation of Law 2911 on Meetings and Demonstrations.” Before the hearing, they wanted to read out a press statement outside Çağlayan Courthouse, as they had done so in the four preceding hearings. However, justifying their actions on a day-long ban on demonstrations by the Kağıthane District Governorate, the police arrested many people, including relatives of disappeared people, their attorneys and human rights defenders. Journalists trying to do their jobs were obstructed and subjected to violence. One of the journalists subjected to violence was Meral Danyıldız. Danyıldız filed an official complaint.

 

The detentions and obstruction outside Çağlayan Courthouse are not isolated incidences. In recent years, but even more intensely during the past year, journalists have faced violence from law enforcement during news reporting. To give a few examples:

 

· The police, who were following people marching after a demonstration in Van on 1 September World Peace Day, intervened against journalists. Mesut Bağcı was forced to the ground, assaulted and his photo camera was broken in an act of police violence. Drawing a gun against Mezopotamya Agency reporter Berivan Kutlu and JinNews reporters Zelal Tunç and Elfazi Toral, the police threatened to kill the journalists.

 

· Also on 1 September, the gathering planned by the Forces for Labour Peace and Democracy to mark World Peace day in Bakırköy, İstanbul was prevented by a decision of the governorate. The police broke up the press statement held in Taksim, journalists were circled off, assaulted and obstructed by the police.

 

· On 17 September, Demirören News Agency (DHA) reporter Hüsnü Ümit Avcı, who was taking images of a fire on the roof of a four-story building in Sivas, was assaulted by a police officer who kicked and punched him.

 

· On 20 September, journalists following the Mahsa Amini protest in Taksim were obstructed by the police and a police officer was heard saying “I’ll take care of you” to journalist Ufuk Çeri, who was monitoring the protest.

 

As journalists try to protect themselves from violence and obstructions, they are also filing complaints against the law enforcement officers responsible. One cannot say that the official complaints yield outcomes. So much so that on 31 May, the anniversary of the Gezi Protests, nine journalists reporting the news were assaulted and prevented from obtaining images. Six journalists, including me, were taken into custody with the use of behind the back handcuffing. We filed an official complaint for “Abuse of duty, torture, maltreatment, threats, insults, wilful injury and violation of the freedom to work and employment.” However, the Governor of İstanbul Ali Yerlikaya did not allow an investigation into the police officers as those on duty could not be identified. Yet we journalists are in possession of many video recordings and images which document the violence and which we would turn over to the authorities if requested.

 

What the Musa Anter case reflects

 

A look at the period from the murder of Musa Anter to the present shows that while the individuals involved may change, the principle of impunity does not. The order that saved the murderers through the “statute of limitations” despite the confessions of those who took part in the murder, and the order that cannot identify police officers who perpetrate violence feed off the same source that is the wall of impunity and encouragement.

 

This is why Musa Anter and his case hold up a mirror to our present. That mirror reflects a light from a place that some would rather bury into darkness through the statute of limitations. A light in every sense of the word.