Ihsan Bal writes in the Journal of Turkish Weekly:
The Ergenekon investigation faces severe criticism with the point it reached today regarding the excessive time it takes to prepare the indictment as well as the applicability of the judicial procedures. It is clear that the criticism will enable a better functioning investigation process; however it is ultimately dangerous when the criticisms overshadow the process and the successes of the operations and the investigation, especially, claiming that the operations are purely political, as the government is using them to clear the opposition. The Susurluk investigation was not successfully completed for many of the same reasons. If the government and the institutions fully supported the investigation, Turkey would have been promoted to the league of “fully democratic nations” many years ago. Calling the investigations “nonsense”, as the Prime Minister did in 1996 was wrong; but it is to not support the prosecutors and the police force- conducting the investigation. In order to get rid of such illegal underground organization, the government and the institutions need to fully cooperate by providing logistical support for the investigations.
The second criticism of the Ergenekon operation regards taking high profile bureaucrats, officers, businessmen into custody who seem to have no links (in public) to the Ergenekon organization. The criticism is strong enough to remind us of the oppressive authoritarian regimes. The Ergenekon investigation has probably gone through the most democratic controls and observations in Turkish history. Heavily criticizing the process and relating it to the oppressive authoritarian periods is unfair considering the fact that there is much room for media to follow everything step by step and criticize every minor mistake in the operations. Above all, the prosecutors and the judges are not on the junta side, they are on the state's side. Therefore an intervention in the judicial process, heavily and constantly criticizing the judges, will not serve to the best interest of Turkey.
One other criticism of the investigations stems from the possible involvement of high profile persons which is skeptically received by the public. The investigation process continues, but considering that Gladyo in Italy found support even from the President, and in the GAL operation in Spain it was found that high level bureaucrats and politicians were involved and prosecuted, this skepticism is no longer relevant. Of course it is not correct to relate every name associated with the Ergenekon operation to the past assassinations. But it is also not correct to claim that these people cannot possibly be related to the organization because of their high-rank status. Turkey will be able to take a step towards the “democratic league” once it is able to accept the fact that any person including a high-profile figure can be taken to court, tried in front of a judge when a crime is committed.
Categorizing the Ergenekon operation as secular vs. non-secular, Kemalist vs Non-Kemalists is nothing more than manipulating the investigation and the public. After all, even the persons accused are not defending themselves this way. During the Susurluk investigation – the common phrase heard over and over again is “what I did was for the best of my country” and in the Ergenekon investigation, the use of Kemalism, flag, nation, country and etc. is only abusing these values for personal benefit. Using such values in order to prove innocence may have different meanings. At the end of the investigations, if these people are found guilty, they should also think of the damage they made to the values they claim to protect. Therefore the ones demanding the Ergenekon operation are those who want more democracy, more transparency and more justice. The only way to find out the truth is through fully supporting the investigations by providing only constructive criticism to the judges and the prosecutors.
~ more... ~
No comments:
Post a Comment