DINK FAMILY PETITIONS PROSECUTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS

BIAnet.org

Feb 16 2012
Turkey

After the final hearing of the trial related to the Hrant Dink murder
in January, the family of the slain Turkish-Armenian journalist applied
to the chief prosecutor’s office for the litigation of public officials
in the context of the murder.

Istanbul – BÄ°A News Center16 February 2012, Thursday The joint
attorneys of the Dink family applied to the Istanbul Public Chief
Prosecutor’s Office for the litigation of public officials who were
allegedly involved in the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist
Hrant Dink.

Dink, founder and then chief-editor of the Armenian Agos newspaper,
was shot dead in front of his office in Å~^iÅ~_li/Istanbul on 19
January 2007. The final hearing of the murder trial was held on 17
January 2012.

The petition was filed by Dink’s widow Rakel Dink, his brother Hosrof
Dink and his adult children Delal, Arat and Sera Dink.

As reported by the Agos newspaper, it was claimed in an additional
petition that several people and institutions carried responsibility
for the Dink murder, namely the Provincial Gendarmerie Commander of
Trabzon, the Provincial Police Directorate of Trabzon, the Provincial
Police Directorate of Istanbul and the Police General Directorate
Intelligence Branch Presidency.

It was stated that the public officials committed certain crimes
including “intentional homicide by negligent behaviour” according
to Article 83 of the Turkish Criminal Law (TCK). The complainants
requested open a criminal case to launch a probe about these persons.

The Dink family demanded the prosecution of Muammer Guler, Celalettin
Cerrah, Ramazan Akyurek, Engin Dinc, Muhittin Zenit, Ali Oz, Ergun
Gungör, Ahmet İlhan Guler, Bulent Köksal, İbrahim Pala, İbrahim
Å~^evki Eldivan, Volkan Altunbulak, Bahadır Ozkan, Ozcan Ozkan,
ReÅ~_at Altay, Faruk Sarı, Ercan Demir, Ozkan Mumcu, Mehmet Ayhan,
Metin Yıldız, Huseyin Yılmaz, Gazi Gunay, Hacı Omer Unalır and
Onder Araz.

Additionally, the complainants demanded the litigation of officials of
the Trabzon Provincial Gendarmerie Command, the Trabzon and Istanbul
Provincial Police Directorates and the Police General Directorate
Intelligence Branch Presidency who had apparently been informed about
the Dink murder in advance.

“Trabzon police concealed organization” The submitted petition points
to prosecutor Hikmet Usta’s concession that the investigation failed
to be comprehensive. It was demanded to determine the responsibilities
and roles in the murder played by the public officials who would have
been obliged to prevent the murder after they had been informed about
it. According to the results, trials should be opened against them,
the petition requested.

Furthermore, the petition drew attention to officials of the Trabzon
Provincial Police Directorate who destroyed related telephone records
and hence concealed both the organizational structure behind the
murder and the responsibility. It was claimed that Erhan Tuncel, who
was acquitted in the context of the Dink murder, should have received
a life sentence and that action should be taken to lodge a trial about
officials of the Provincial Police Directorate of Trabzon. (EKN/VK)