The latest ruling by Turkey’s Supreme Court of Appeals affirming the acquittals of 19 men charged with extrajudicial executions in the 1990s underscores a complex and frequently distressing chapter in Turkish history.
This case pertains to accusations against former senior authorities and members of a clandestine military unit referred to as JİTEM. It raises sensitive issues related to the conflict between the Turkish government and Kurdish militants, alongside overarching issues of judicial autonomy, impunity, and their impact on the continuing Kurdish peace initiative.
JİTEM and the Kurdish Conflict
JİTEM, the Gendarmerie Intelligence and Anti-Terror Unit, has been frequently implicated in human rights crimes during the 1990s, a time of intensified confrontation between the Turkish state and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). JİTEM is suspected of covertly engaging in the torture, disappearance, and extrajudicial killing of several persons, especially Kurdish politicians, activists, and businesses alleged to have ties to the PKK. Although the existence of JİTEM was publicly refuted for numerous years, statements from former officials and public pressure ultimately brought the matter to prominence, resulting in several prominent investigations.
The case pertains to the deaths of 18 individuals in Turkey’s primarily Kurdish Southeast region. The defendants comprised senior officials, including former interior minister Mehmet Ağar, former police head İbrahim Şahin, and intelligence officer Korkut Eken. These persons were implicated in the extrajudicial killings reportedly executed by JİTEM as part of a state-sponsored campaign against purported Kurdish insurgency and opposition.
The Legal Journey and Acquittals
The Ankara 1st High Criminal Court initially issued the acquittals of the 19 defendants in 2019, determining that the evidence was inadequate for conviction. The decision was contested and reversed in 2021, resulting in a retrial. Nevertheless, the court once more exonerated the offenders in late 2023. The Supreme Appeals Court affirmed the acquittal, citing insufficient convincing evidence against the defendant. The court emphasized that a significant portion of the evidence was founded on hearsay, contradictions, and unreliable testimony, making it inadequate to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The ruling has elicited disappointment and fury from the victims’ relatives, who have spent decades pursuing justice for their loved ones. This decision reflects not only the judicial system’s inability to administer justice but also a pervasive issue of impunity in Turkey. Critics contend that the case exemplifies a pervasive culture of shielding public officials from accountability, particularly with instances of state brutality and human rights violations.
Impunity within the Turkish Judicial System
The notion of impunity has always been a contentious issue in Turkey, especially regarding offences committed by official actors. The failure to hold authorities accountable for historical atrocities has diminished public confidence in the judicial system and intensified apprehensions over the state’s dedication to human rights. In the instance of JİTEM, numerous observers perceive the acquittals as indicative of a wider trend wherein security forces and public officials engaged in the fight with the PKK are protected from prosecution, irrespective of the severity of the accusations.
Human rights organizations have consistently condemned Turkey for its inability to confront the legacy of violence and human rights violations from the 1990s. They contend that the judiciary has been either incapable or disinclined to challenge the influential entities responsible for these offences. This recent verdict exacerbates discontent by precluding one of the most crucial legal efforts to achieve justice for the victims of extrajudicial killings from this sombre period in Turkey’s history.
The Broader Implications
The affirmation of the acquittals conveys a significant message on the condition of Turkey’s judiciary and its stance on historical accountability. This creates apprehensions regarding the autonomy of the judiciary in politically charged matters and the obstacles encountered by victims in pursuing justice. For the families of the disappeared or deceased, the verdict serves as a poignant reminder that justice remains unattainable.
The court’s judgment highlights the challenges of reconciling with the past amid Turkey’s persistent issues regarding the Kurdish population and human rights, while striving for a more inclusive and equitable future. The unresolved cases from the 1990s persistently influence Turkey’s political environment, and in the absence of substantial accountability, this era of impunity may continue to afflict the nation for years ahead.
The acquittals in the JİTEM case reflect broader structural difficulties inside Turkey’s legal and political structure, rather than merely the inability to convict particular individuals. This verdict represents the enduring obstacles to justice encountered by victims of the state’s counterinsurgency effort in the 1990s, raising unresolved issues regarding Turkey’s ability to confront its history while guaranteeing justice and accountability for all.
How These Developments Endanger the Kurdish Peace Process
The Supreme Court’s recent affirmation of acquittals in the 1990s extrajudicial executions case concerning JİTEM aligns with current endeavours to reinvigorate the Kurdish peace process in Turkey. The Kurdish issue has historically posed a significant obstacle in Turkish politics, characterized by prolonged warfare between the state and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). Attempts to achieve a peaceful end to this issue have encountered numerous obstacles, notably the failure of the 2015 peace negotiations, resulting in a resurgence of violence and instability in the primarily Kurdish areas of southeastern Turkey.
The amalgamation of JİTEM acquittals and the escalation of nationalist rhetoric inside Turkey’s political framework constitute a substantial threat to any prospective Kurdish peace initiative. The lack of accountability for state actors over historical offences, coupled with the government’s increasingly rigid position on the Kurdish question, undermines the potential for reconciliation. Meaningful discussion is challenging to envision when the Kurdish people views the state as reluctant to confront historical injustices.
Furthermore, the deterioration of the rule of law in instances of state brutality exacerbates the Kurdish community’s skepticism about the Turkish state. The belief that perpetrators of atrocities against the Kurdish population are exempt from accountability strengthens the notion that the government is not committed to resolving the issue through nonviolent methods.
Moving Forward: The Path to Peace
For the Kurdish peace process to succeed, Turkey must recognize its historical injustices and address the problems of its Kurdish populace. This necessitates not just the reinitiation of discourse but also a dedication to justice for the victims of state brutality, especially those impacted by JİTEM’s activities in the 1990s. The persistent inability to hold state actors accountable will exacerbate divisions and extend the conflict.
With Turkey confronting the possibility of new political dynamics, the future of the Kurdish peace process is ambiguous. The ascendance of nationalist factions, coupled with judicial decisions that safeguard state actors, jeopardizes the marginalization of proponents of peaceful solutions. Nevertheless, without confronting the fundamental roots of the conflict—such as the enduring legacy of violence, repression, and impunity—Turkey is improbable to attain enduring peace.
The recent Supreme Appeals Court ruling and the entrenchment of nationalist politics indicate a difficult path for Turkey’s Kurdish peace initiatives. The inability to address historical injustices not only estranges the Kurdish community but also jeopardizes the conclusion of the conflict, rendering a peaceful settlement increasingly unattainable.
