US embassy cable - 04ANKARA1643

C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 001643 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE 
 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/18/2014 
TAGS: PGOV, PREL, PHUM, TU 
SUBJECT: DEFENSE IN ALTINBAS CASE PROTESTS U.S. "PRESSURE" 
 
 
REF: A. ANKARA 1359 
     B. ANKARA 958 
     C. SECSTATE 35967 
 
 
Classified by Polcouns John Kunstadter; reasons 1.4 b and d. 
 
 
1. (U) Defense attorneys for police officers indicted in the 
death-in-detention case of Birtan Altinbas continued March 18 
to argue that "U.S. pressure" is preventing them from 
properly defending their clients.  As in the previous hearing 
(reftel A), the attorneys noted that the case was mentioned 
in a February 19 letter to FM Gul from the Secretary (reftel 
C) and in the 2003 Human Rights Report for Turkey.  They also 
claimed that the presence of an Embassy Officer in the 
courtroom was "creating pressure" on them.  One of the 
attorneys, Mehmet Ener, told the court he refused to defend 
his client in the presence of a U.S. observer, and asked that 
Emboff be removed.  Another asked that a new panel of judges 
be assigned to the case.  Chief Judge Ziya Unal ignored the 
requests.  Lead prosecuting attorney Oya Aydin argued that 
the defense failed to explain how U.S. attention is 
interfering with the case. 
 
 
2. (U) Altinbas, a Hacettepe University student at the time, 
died under police custody in 1991.  Hasan Cavit Orhan, one of 
10 police officers charged in the case, and the only one 
attending the March 18 hearing, told the court that he was an 
"operations officer" and did not participate in 
interrogations.  Moreover, Orhan claimed he recently came 
across evidence proving he was not present when Altinbas was 
being interrogated.  He asked the court to delay proceedings 
so that this evidence could be investigated.  The court 
refused, stating that additional time is not necessary. 
 
 
3. (U) Ahmet Ozcicek then announced his resignation as 
Orhan's attorney and left the courtroom.  Attorney Halit 
Armutlu announced he is taking over, and asked for additional 
time to study the case file.  The chief judge refused, noting 
that Orhan's previous two attorneys had asked for additional 
time and then resigned.  He said that throughout the 
13-year-old trial defense attorneys have repeatedly resigned, 
postponing a verdict.  "If at every hearing a new lawyer 
comes and asks for more time, how will this trial end?" he 
asked.  Armutlu argued that each defense lawyer has the right 
to prepare an adequate case.  The judge agreed, but said that 
right has "apparently been abused" in this trial.  The chief 
judge said he will hold only one more hearing before reaching 
a verdict.  He initially set the next hearing for March 25; 
when defense lawyers asked for another week, he moved it to 
March 26. 
 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
 
4. (C) Though this court is apparently about to reach a 
verdict, this case is far from over because the losing side 
is certain to appeal.  The defense attorneys' shabby, 
nationalistic approach is only the latest stunt in a 
long-running effort to delay a final verdict until January 
2006, when the statute of limitations on the charges runs out 
and the defendants would walk.  U.S. attention has not forced 
more defendants to show up for trial, but it has apparently 
caused the court to expedite the proceedings.  Turkish penal 
courts usually schedule one hearing a month -- and this had 
been the norm in this case -- but the next session will be 
the third held in March for this case.  Moreover, the court 
has begun refusing postponement requests that it routinely 
approved in the past. 
 
 
 
 
EDELMAN