Tahir Elçi Case: The file will be sent to the prosecutor's office for opinion

2023-11-29 17:14:33


	 

	AMED - In the case regarding the murder of Amed Bar Association President Tahir Elçi, the court rejected the requests of the lawyers and decided to notify all the documents in the file to the prosecutor's office in order to prepare its opinion on the merits.

	The 8th hearing of the case filed regarding the death of Amed Bar Association President Tahir Elçi, who was murdered in front of the historical Four-Legged Minaret in Amed's Sur district on November 28, 2015, was held at Diyarbakır 10th High Criminal Court. Elçi's wife Türkan Elçi, Union of Turkish Bar Associations (TBB) President Erinç Sağkan, 18 bar association presidents, as well as members of Lawyers Association for Freedom (ÖHD), People's Equality and Democracy Party (HEDEP) and Republican People's Party (CHP) MPs attended the hearing. Representatives of many non-governmental organizations attended.

	Police officers Sinan Tabur, Mesut Sevgi and Fuat Tan, who were tried without arrest for the crime of "causing death by conscious negligence", were connected to the hearing via the Audio and Video Information System (SEGBİS). In addition, at the hearing where a sentence was requested for PKK member Uğur Yakışır, who was accused of killing 2 police officers and for whom there was an arrest warrant, on the charge of "causing death with possible intent", TÜBİTAK's report on the examination of the cabin of Mardin Kebapevi, which overlooks the area where Elçi was killed, was read.

	'3 FOOTAGES LOST'

	In the report prepared by TÜBİTAK, it was claimed that the camera did not record on the date in question and that the recordings belonged to 2010. The report stated that there were 9 recordings in the camera, 3 of which were "lost" footage, and that there was no footage on November 28, 2015, when Elçi was killed. The report claimed that the constant appearance of a blue screen in the cabin was due to a malfunction, and that no image deletion data was found in the camera inspection.

	'THE SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE'

	Gamze Yalçın İlboğa, the lawyer of the Elçi family, who spoke against the report, said:  "The common feature of the 3 camera recordings that saw the scene is that there is no footage of the moment of Tahir Elçi's murder. İlboğa reminded that there were PTT, Mardin Kebapevi, press and police Photo Film Branch cameras at the scene, and that 17 minutes of the footage of the PTT camera that saw the scene was missing, 13 seconds of the footage of the police Photo Film Branch were missing, and Mardin Kebapevi's camera had no footage."

	Noting that 3 cameras that saw the inside of the workplace in Mardin Kebapevi were working, but the 4th camera that saw the murder scene was not working, İlboğa said: "We know that camera number 4 saw the crime scene. An obscuration of evidence was made through these image elements. Again, 3 out of 9 recordings are missing on this camera. So 3 basic images do not open. These show us that the evidence was obscured."

	PROSECUTOR REQUESTED THE FILE FOR OPINION

	Presenting its opinion regarding the demands, the prosecution requested the rejection of the request for a detailed examination of all images, discovery, and asking the Governorship whether there is an injunction against the Ambassador. The prosecution requested the separation of the Yakışır file on the grounds that it would drag on the case for the defendants Fuat Tan, Mesut Sevgi and Sinan Tabur, who were tried in the file because the defendant Uğur Yakışır was not caught. The prosecution requested that the file be given to them in order to prepare their opinion on the merits in the absence of a request for an extended investigation.

	Following the request, the court adjourned the hearing to make a decision. In the hearing held after a break, the court panel rejected all the requests of the lawyers. Taking into consideration the request of the prosecutor's office, the court decided to send all the evidence and documents in the file to the prosecutor's office so that the prosecutor's office could prepare its opinion on the merits.

	The panel also decided that the prosecutor's office could submit the opinion prepared on the merits to the court panel during the hearing, and postponed the hearing to March 6, 2024.