This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

220544Z Apr 04

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 002294 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE 
 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/21/2014 
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM TU
SUBJECT: TURKISH STATE SECURITY COURT RE-CONVICTS LEYLA ZANA, CO-DEFENDANTS; VERDICT WILL BE APPEALED 
 
 
REF: ANKARA 1559 AND PREVIOUS 
 
 
(U) Classified by Polcouns John Kunstadter; reasons 1.4 (b,d). 
 
 
¶1. (U) Summary: An Ankara State Security Court (SSC) April 21 
re-convicted Leyla Zana and three other Kurdish former MPs 
charged with being members of the terrorist PKK, ending a 
contentious 13-month retrial that has been widely criticized 
by human rights advocates and EU parliamentarians as unfair. 
The ruling affirms the original 1994 verdict.  The defense 
has already filed an appeal.  In any event the defendants are 
expected to be released in 2005.  Current AKP government 
plans to introduce legislation in May that would abolish the 
SSCs.  End Summary. 
 
 
¶2. (U) The SSC's verdict repeats the original conviction and 
15-year sentence set in the defendants' controversial 1994 
trial.  The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled in 
2001 that the 1994 trial was unfair; a retrial was granted in 
March 2003 following GOT enactment of a EU-related reform 
under which ECHR rulings are grounds for a possible retrial 
in a Turkish court.  In accordance with the Anti-Terror Law, 
the convicts are expected to serve three-fourths of their 
sentence, meaning they will be released in 2005.  Based on 
the date of their original incarceration, three would be 
released in March and one in October. 
 
 
¶3. (U) Lead defense attorney Yusuf Alatas told us after the 
trial that he had already filed an appeal to a Turkish 
appellate court, and will apply separately to the ECHR.  The 
ECHR has frequently overturned SSC convictions. 
 
 
¶4. (U) The three judges on the SSC panel announced the 
verdict to a hushed courtroom after a 5-minute recess. 
Spectators -- including Kurdish rights activists, defendants' 
relatives, foreign diplomats, members of international NGOs, 
and European Parliament officials -- filed quietly out of the 
room.  The defendants were not present; they began boycotting 
the sessions in March to protest a reported accusation by 
Justice Minister Cicek that they had "insulted" the court. 
On the courthouse steps, Alatas and European Parliament MP 
Luigi Vinci jointly addressed a large group of reporters. 
Vinci called the ruling an "insult" to the EU and ECHR and 
accused the court of bias against the defendants.  Alatas 
said he had expected the decision, and argued that the court 
had revealed its "prejudiced" approach by repeating the 
decision reached in the original trial, despite the ECHR 
ruling. 
 
 
¶5. (U) The defendants -- Leyla Zana, Hatip Dicle, Orhan 
Dogan, and Selim Sadak -- are former members of the 
pro-Kurdish-independence Democracy Party, which has since 
been banned.  They were convicted of "staging separatist 
activities both in Turkey and abroad" as members of the PKK. 
At each of 13 consecutive trial sessions the court refused 
defense requests to have the defendants released pending the 
outcome of the trial.  Alatas repeatedly argued the court was 
obligated to release his clients in light of the ECHR ruling 
in their favor.  He also argued unsuccessfully that Chief 
Judge Mehmet Orhan Karadeniz should remove himself from the 
case because he voted against granting the re-trial (but was 
outvoted by the other two SSC judges). 
 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
 
¶6. (C) The SSC system has been an enduring obstacle to 
judicial reform in Turkey.  SSCs have the authority to hold 
closed sessions and admit testimony taken under police 
interrogation in the absence of counsel.  SSCs have often 
convicted without persuasive evidence.  Moreover, SSCs, 
ostensibly designed to try terrorists and other dangerous 
criminals, have been used routinely in the past by the State 
to intimidate and silence its critics.  Many defendants tried 
in SSCs have been charged for non-violent expressions 
"insulting" the State and its institutions.  The bulk of ECHR 
rulings against Turkey result from SSC convictions deemed in 
violation of the right to a fair trial. 
 
 
¶7. (C) The current AKP government appears set finally to 
address the problem.  A raft of constitutional amendments 
scheduled to be introduced in Parliament in May includes a 
measure that would eliminate the SSCs.  Another measure would 
revise the physical structure in SSCs and heavy penal courts 
that places prosecutors and judges together on an elevated 
platform, while leaving defense attorneys seated below. 
Under the revisions, defense attorneys and prosecutors would 
both sit at ground-level, designating (at least formally) 
equal status in the courtroom. 
 
 
¶8. (U) As at an earlier stage in the re-trial, chairman of 
the EU parliamentary ad hoc observer delegation Lagendijk 
issued a tough criticism of the court's conduct, including 
the court's refusal to allow defense witnesses to testify. 
To date Post has refrained from commenting publicly on the 
re-trial; given the defense lawyers' appeal, we plan to avoid 
public comment on the verdict. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EDELMAN