Preliminary objection partially dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies);Preliminary objection partially joined to merits (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies);Violation of Art. 2 with regard to lack of effective investigation;Violation of Art. 2 with regard to death of applicant's brother;No violation of Art. 3;Violation of Art. 13;No violation of Art. 14;Pecuniary damage - financial award;Non-pecuniary damage - financial award;Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings

NORP This case concerns , principally , the events between DATE and CARDINAL DATE , when PERSON who had been taken away by armed men was found killed outside ORG . A criminal prosecution brought against CARDINAL village guards and an ex - member of the ORG on DATE culminated recently in a decision of ORG no . CARDINAL of DATE .

The facts being disputed by the parties , the ORG appointed Delegates who took evidence in GPE from CARDINAL to DATE . They heard the following witnesses : Mr PERSON ( brother of the deceased PERSON ) ; Mr PERSON ( cousin of the deceased ) ; PERSON , the lawyer representing the family at the criminal trial ; Mr PERSON , father of the deceased ; Mr PERSON , LOC , Mr PERSON , Mr PERSON and Mr PERSON , the CARDINAL village guards charged in relation to the kidnapping and murder of PERSON ; PERSON , the ex - member of the ORG and confessor , charged in relation to the kidnapping and murder of PERSON ; Mr PERSON , assistant commander of the ORG provincial gendarmerie command in DATE ; Mr PERSON , commander of the ORG provincial central district gendarmerie in DATE ; Mr PERSON , intelligence operations ORG at the provincial central district gendarmerie in DATE ; Mr PERSON , public prosecutor in the criminal trial from DATE to date ; PERSON , public prosecutor who drew up the indictment for the criminal trial .

The transcripts of the oral evidence , together with the documentary evidence provided by the parties to the ORG , have been transmitted to the ORG . Additionally , the ORG have provided the decision of ORG no . CARDINAL of DATE and other documentary materials requested by ORG . This material is summarised below ( Sections C and D ) , as are the submissions by the parties concerning the facts ( Sections A and B ) .

DATE , a large number of disappearances and unexplained killings occurred in the south - east of GPE in the context of counter - insurgency measures against the ORG . The province and city of ORG were particularly notorious for this phenomenon . The involvement of security forces and shadowy gangs linked to elements in the security forces was rumoured and supported , inter alia , by the findings of the GPE report .

The PERSON family was headed by PERSON , who had CARDINAL children . His son PERSON , born in DATE , was married with CARDINAL children , GPE born in DATE and PERSON born in DATE . He , with his brother PERSON and another relative , owned a company which sold fertilisers to farmers . Other brothers included PERSON , who had been arrested and charged with ORG offences and the applicant PERSON who had been convicted and sentenced to DATE imprisonment but had fled to GPE , where in DATE he was NORP correspondent for the PERSON newspaper .

On DATE , PERSON , commander of ORG district gendarmerie instructed CARDINAL village guards to travel to ORG to assist in the detention of CARDINAL suspects . He gave them a car registered DATE . The car which was used by the guards to go to ORG and during their activities in ORG belonged to a person detained for ORG activities and it was given to the guards for their use , though it was later alleged that they had been instructed to deliver it to the gendarmerie in PERSON , ORG . On arrival at the PERSON gendarme station Captain PERSON sent them to the Anti - Terror police to assist in the apprehension of CARDINAL or CARDINAL suspects . These suspects were brought back to the PERSON station , from where they were to be sent on to ORG .

On DATE , at TIME , the CARDINAL village guards entered the fertiliser business premises run by the PERSON family in ORG . They started talking to PERSON and stated that they were going to take him into custody . It was not apparent that they had come for PERSON personally rather than acting with the intention merely of taking away one of the family . When their authority to take PERSON was challenged , they spoke on a walkie - talkie and CARDINAL village guards left to find a police officer . PERSON and a seventh person then arrived . The seventh man acted as if he was in charge and the village guards deferred to him . He was referred to as “ müdür ” ( director ) , spoke proper NORP and wore glasses . The QUANTITY men took PERSON from the shop , placing him in a white Toros car . Members of the family ( PERSON and PERSON ) who followed the car saw it enter the district central gendarmerie , PERSON , which was TIME away .

The family made complaints to the authorities , describing and giving , in some cases , the names of the men who had abducted PERSON .

The white car used in the abduction was found on DATE in ORG and returned to ORG , where it was handed over to the family of the owner .

On DATE , an identification parade was held and CARDINAL village guards were identified . The fifth village guard and PERSON were also detained . On DATE , Captain PERSON , in charge of the investigation , carried out a reconstruction of the abduction at the family ’s shop . The CARDINAL guards admitted involvement in the abduction and PERSON admitted being present at the abduction but denied involvement in the incident . They denied the presence of any seventh person .

On DATE , PERSON took the gendarme investigators to a disused building QUANTITY from ORG on FAC . PERSON body was found there . He had been shot twice in the head .

On DATE , there was an attempted abduction of CARDINAL ORG cousins in LAW , PERSON and ORG .

On DATE , the trial of the CARDINAL village guards and PERSON opened in ORG no . CARDINAL . In testimony to the court , the village guards partially retracted their pre - trial statements and claimed that a seventh person was present and that he took charge of the detention of PERSON . On several occasions during the trial ( DATE , DATE and DATE ) the village guards testified that they had acted under orders and that the killing and abduction of PERSON had been carried out under the orders of PERSON and a gendarme special sergeant .

From the beginning of the trial , the PERSON family suffered intimidation , resulting in them ultimately closing down their business and moving to GPE . The family ’s lawyer PERSON was also intimidated when she attended the trial in GPE .

On DATE , PERSON identified the special sergeant as PERSON , from the CARDINALth ORG corps infantry battalion , code - named PERSON .

At DATE , the GPE report was published , which named PERSON and PERSON in connection with the killing of PERSON . It stated that , amongst various other activities , a gang including PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and a specialist sergeant PERSON were involved in extorting money and that they tried to extort money from ORG using threats against his brother PERSON who was in detention suspected of ORG activities , killing him when he refused to pay . On DATE , the name PERSON was raised in the trial . On DATE , the family ’s lawyer requested the court to enquire as whether PERSON had served in ORG in DATE . The court made a request for information to the army authorities . On DATE , the court received the response that PERSON left his duties in the region on DATE . The court referred the file to the public prosecutor for information to be gathered on PERSON and requested a statement be taken from him . On DATE , the lawyer for PERSON requested a confrontation between PERSON and her client .

On DATE , the court convicted the CARDINAL defendants . PERSON was convicted of murder and sentenced to DATE imprisonment while the others were convicted of aiding and abetting and given DATE and CARDINAL months’ imprisonment . PERSON , the prosecutor and the PERSON family appealed against the decision . On DATE , after being informed that PERSON had left his place of residence to go to GPE , the court issued an arrest warrant .

The Government submit that it is premature to make any observation on the facts as firstly , the decision of ORG of DATE is subject to appeal to ORG which has the power to require the first instance court to fill the gaps in the investigation or collect further evidence and , secondly , as the ORG court has in its judgment notified the offence allegedly committed by PERSON to the public prosecutor , who will now carry out an investigation .

This stated that on DATE five armed persons , who said they were village guards , came to the fertiliser business LOC and asked to take away PERSON . CARDINAL more persons came , who made themselves known as security officers . They took PERSON away by force in a white GPE car DATE , with the car CARDINAL following behind . The petitioner and other brothers followed and saw that the cars entered the provincial central gendarme command . PERSON saw the village guards inside the grounds of the gendarmerie . They had learned the names of CARDINAL of the village guards – Ömer the lame and PERSON . The family was concerned by the way PERSON had been taken and the denials of the authorities that he had been taken into custody . He requested that the necessary proceedings be instituted in respect of the perpetrators .

On DATE , at TIME , CARDINAL armed men came to their workplace to take away PERSON . When they opposed this , the men stated that they were village guards . CARDINAL people came then , who claimed that they were security officers . The CARDINAL men took away PERSON , getting into CARDINAL cars GPE and CARDINAL . He and his brothers followed them to the provincial central gendarmerie . PERSON identified the CARDINAL village guards whom he saw in the grounds . The gendarme commander said that he would carry out the necessary legal procedures . The family was concerned by the way PERSON had been taken and the denials of the authorities that he had been taken into custody . He requested that the necessary proceedings be instituted in respect of the perpetrators .

On DATE , at TIME , CARDINAL men came to the shop , saying that they were policemen . They spoke to PERSON , saying that he had to give a statement on behalf of his brother PERSON who was in custody in GPE prison . PERSON said that they had not given him their identification and that he would be happy to give his statement to a uniformed police officer . There was an argument between the men and the PERSON brothers . The men said that they would call the police station and as a result the brothers heard that they were village guards . CARDINAL more people appeared , claiming to be policemen , speaking NORP and flashing cards . As the argument continued , one of the QUANTITY men pulled a gun , and the others followed suit . As PERSON believed that they were going to shoot , he agreed to go with them . The brothers saw CARDINAL men and PERSON get into a ORG car AFCARDINAL , while the others got into a taxi CARDINAL . The brothers jumped into their own car and followed to the PERSON gendarmerie , where they could not go in after the CARDINAL cars . They could see CARDINAL of the village guards outside the command building . They saw CARDINAL of the men from the shop driving off in a blue car ( CARDINALCDECARDINAL ) . A gendarme denied PERSON was there and they could not get anyone to do anything .

They returned to their shop and phoned the police who said that ORG had not been kidnapped but was at the gendarmerie . They made written petitions to the governor , ORG prosecutor and the judicial prosecutor . All denied that his brother was in custody . Someone called their house , saying that PERSON had been killed and they were all next . They had given up hope of seeing their brother alive .

On DATE , in ORG , armed persons shot at his CARDINAL cousins PERSON and ORG . ORG managed to run away . PERSON was caught , beaten and taken to the ORG gendarme headquarters . Both the police and gendarmes denied to the family that he was in custody . PERSON was released DATE from the gendarme headquarters . Shortly before the trial concerning the killing of his brother PERSON , his family had been threatened by the PERSON gendarmes , who warned that if the family mentioned the gendarmes in court things would get worse for them .

The petitioner was the lawyer acting for the family in the trial against CARDINAL accused for the kidnapping and murder of PERSON . She pointed out that , though the CARDINAL accused had initially denied the involvement of the seventh person , during the trial on DATE the CARDINAL village guards had said that the incident had been carried out on the orders of PERSON and a gendarme officer known as “ the director ” . Their description of the seventh man corroborated her clients’ account .

Captain PERSON , who had much information about the incident had failed to attend the court under summons although he worked next door to the judicial buildings . She also complained that the CARDINAL ORG brothers had been subject to threats and had been forced to leave ORG . When she came to ORG to attend the trial , she was followed by a car with CARDINAL armed plain clothed men inside . She had reported this to the chairman of the ORG bar . On DATE , as she passed through security control at the airport , a plain clothed man who had followed behind her issued a threat .

The car DATE , taken from PERSON , accused of aiding the ORG and sent to ORG , was at ORG . It was handed over to PERSON , PERSON , ORG and PERSON , who were to deliver it to ORG family at GPE . The document was signed also by the CARDINAL village guards .

This stated that the car DATE had been found in the garden of the ORG gendarme command . On DATE , it had been handed over to PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON to be taken to the ORG central gendarmerie . It was understood that they had been unable to contact anyone and after waiting for DATE rejoined the convoy coming back to ORG . As it was dark , they left the car in the garden .

The document was also signed by the CARDINAL village guards .

The first recorded the transfer of car DATE from a ORG officer to an officer from the ORG central gendarmerie . The second recorded that the owner of the car PERSON received it from the gendarmerie in perfect condition .

On DATE , at TIME , QUANTITY persons entered the business LOC of the PERSON brothers from car DATE . They told PERSON that they would take him away . PERSON told them that his brother would not go until the police arrived . CARDINAL more men entered , making a total of CARDINAL . The men pulled guns out when they opposed them . They took his brother , got into CARDINAL cars and drove to court buildings . The brothers , who followed , told the gendarmes . CARDINAL gendarme asked if he could identify the individuals and he went up to the building and pointed to CARDINAL men , whom he learned were village guards . He identified a fourth man , getting out of a car in the yard . When the brothers approached the gendarme commander , he said that the village guards would be handed over to security officials . The gendarmes said however that PERSON was not at the gendarmerie .

On DATE , at TIME , QUANTITY persons entered the business LOC of the PERSON brothers from car DATE , wanting the brothers to make a statement at the justice buildings about his brother PERSON who was involved with the ORG and in prison . He told them that this was not possible . The men said that they were village guards . He said no - one would go until the police arrived . CARDINAL more men entered , saying that they were police officers . When they objected , CARDINAL men pulled their guns and said that they would take CARDINAL of the brothers away , randomly pulling at ORG . CARDINAL men and PERSON got into a car with a wireless and weapon inside . CARDINAL other men got into a second car . He remained in the shop while his other brothers followed the cars to PERSON , where the provincial central gendarmerie is at the entrance of the court building . His brothers reported immediately to gendarmes that CARDINAL village guards , present at that time , had taken their brother . The gendarmes , a duty ORG and an ORG called LOC said that they would refer the village guards to security . His brothers left . They later found the names of CARDINAL of the village guards , Ömer and PERSON .

On DATE , TIME , he saw PERSON arguing with someone in the shop . The man wanted him to go with him to give a statement . Şerif said he would only go with a police officer . The man went out to a white Toros car ( DATE ) , where there were CARDINAL men , CARDINAL of whom spoke to the police on the radio . In TIME , CARDINAL men came into the shop , introducing themselves as police officers . This man said that CARDINAL of the brothers had to come and make a statement for their brother PERSON . PERSON protested that ORG was in prison and should make his own statement . A quarrel began and CARDINAL more persons came in . The man whom he had described said ‘ ORG and he and CARDINAL men drew their guns . Then they took PERSON into the LOC car . He described the men in the shop , stating that the one with the radio was called ORG . The CARDINAL men who had claimed to be security officers both spoke NORP properly without a local accent ; the taller one wore sunglasses . He wanted the people who abducted his brother to be found .

NORP On DATE , at TIME , he saw CARDINAL villagers enter their business LOC . He asked what they wanted . A man said that his brother PERSON had to make a statement at PERSON court building but as he was in prison CARDINAL of his brothers should come to make a statement instead . The witness objected that they could not make a statement for ORG . The man claimed that they were security personnel . The witness asked him to show his ORG and then said that he would phone the police . At this point , CARDINAL persons came inside to join the QUANTITY villagers . There were CARDINAL men outside in a white GPE car DATE , who also came inside , making CARDINAL . CARDINAL of the men drew guns and forced the brothers against a wall , threatening to kill them . PERSON then said that he would go with them . The CARDINAL men took his brother and left in CARDINAL cars . The witness and others followed in their own car but could not find their brother . They went to the police station , gave their statements and after TIME were told that PERSON was with the gendarmes . They also gave a petition to the public prosecutor and to the gendarmes at PERSON . The gendarmes said that PERSON was not there . When the brothers told this to the police , the police said that they must have misunderstood the matter .

The witness gave detailed descriptions of the men in the shop . He described CARDINAL of the men who claimed to be a security official as speaking very proper NORP , clean - shaven with sunglasses .

On DATE , at TIME , QUANTITY persons in villagers’ clothes entered their shop . TIME , CARDINAL more men entered . The witness was outside in the kiosk and when he heard quarrelling , he went inside . The men were arguing with his elder brother PERSON . The witness did not understand what was going on . CARDINAL of the men pulled a gun on him . The brothers were made to stand against the wall . PERSON said that he would go with them . He and CARDINAL men got into a white car DATE and the others got into a taxi CARDINAL . After TIME , the brothers drove to the PERSON court building , which was where the men had told PERSON they were going . The men had said that they were security personnel . The brothers saw the taxi driver of the second car and he told them that he had taken the men to the PERSON court building . When they got there , they could not see their brother though they saw CARDINAL of the abductors sitting by the fountain . They told this to a gendarme who said that it was not their business and that village guards were within the jurisdiction of the gendarmes . The witness told an ORG in front of the gendarmerie building that the abductors of his brothers were there DATE he could see CARDINAL in the gendarmerie . The brothers were told to go and that if the persons had abducted their brother , they would be handed to the police .

The witness gave a description of the men in the shop . CARDINAL wore sunglasses and spoke NORP properly without a local accent . They had seen one of the abductors leaving the gendarmerie in a blue or black car GPE while they were waiting at the front of the gendarmerie .

The witness , a village guard from PERSON village , was asked about the alleged abduction of PERSON by village guard CARDINAL the lame and other LOC . The witness denied any involvement . He said that PERSON could only walk with the help of crutches and was too disabled to be involved .

The witness , the muhtar and head village guard of PERSON village , was asked about the alleged abduction of PERSON by village guard CARDINAL the lame and other LOC . The witness denied any involvement . He said that his son PERSON was disabled and certainly could not be involved .

The report referred to CARDINAL armed persons , who claimed to be security personnel , having abducted PERSON from his shop . The investigation indicated that among the perpetrators were village guards PERSON , PERSON , GPE and GPE . CARDINAL persons were gathered for an identification parade including these persons . The brothers PERSON , PERSON and PERSON were present .

PERSON identified PERSON , GPE and PERSON . PERSON identified PERSON , definitely , and PERSON , less certainly . PERSON identified PERSON .

This informed the public prosecutor that PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON had been identified and that PERSON and PERSON had also been detained on suspicion of involvement . It requested an extension in custody in order to complete the investigation .

This described a reconstruction of the incident at the ORG business LOC . GPE , PERSON and PERSON entered the shop and said that on DATE they had gone in and asked if this was the shop of ORG . They said that they were security personnel and that CARDINAL of the brothers should come with them to make a statement at the PERSON court building in PERSON ’s place . The people in the shop did not believe them and would not go unless the police came . They said that they would bring the police . Meanwhile , ORG and PERSON were outside by a car . They said that they never went inside the shop and showed where they waited . PERSON had come along from outside and said , “ I am a policeman . Do what these people want . ” As the brothers were not convinced , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON pulled out their guns . They acted this out . Then the victim had said that he would come . PERSON and PERSON took him by the arms . The accused said that PERSON , PERSON and ORG got into the car DATE with the victim , while the other CARDINAL accused got into a cab that was passing .

The witnesses ( PERSON , PERSON and PERSON ) were asked if they agreed with this description of the event . They said that there was another man , in addition to these CARDINAL accused , whom they described , inter alia , as speaking NORP without an accent .

The vehicle DATE belonged to this witness . His son had driven it to ORG on DATE and had been apprehended and taken to ORG to be questioned . The car remained at ORG gendarmerie . The witness took delivery of it from ORG on DATE .

The suspect was asked to submit his defence to the charge that he , along with CARDINAL friends , had kidnapped PERSON .

The suspect said that on DATE he arrived in GPE with his friends PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON . They had the duty to deliver a car CARDINAL<A > FCARDINAL to the central gendarme command . PERSON joined them later . When they arrived , they helped anti - terror police apprehend CARDINAL men wanted by ORG gendarmerie . The village guards were to deliver them to ORG . They spent TIME in PERSON gendarmerie at a place used for village guards . On DATE , they went to the shopping district in the car . PERSON pointed out the ORG shop and said that PERSON , brother of ORG , was in contact with the ORG and that they should apprehend him to take along with the others . They met PERSON at this point and he went along with them to the shop .

Inside the shop , they introduced themselves as security officials . There were CARDINAL of them , CARDINAL else was with them . After taking PERSON , the suspect , PERSON and PERSON went in the car CARDINAL<A > FCARDINAL towards the PERSON court buildings . PERSON told PERSON they would hand him over to ORG . PERSON said that he knew where PERSON brother was buried and that he would show them . He said that he should not be handed over but that they could go together to ORG and look for PERSON brother . PERSON agreed . They picked up PERSON and PERSON who arrived in another car and they went off towards ORG . After a while , some of the guards , including this suspect , doubted that they had the authority to go to ORG and decided to go back . They left PERSON and PERSON by some ruined buildings to fetch another car . They could not find one . When they went back to find PERSON and PERSON at TIME , they found PERSON crying by the roadside . He said that he had accidentally shot PERSON . They all panicked . PERSON threw the gun into the river and they drove back to ORG . They left the CARDINAL suspects with the soldiers who came in the convoy from Hazro and made an excuse to leave . They deposited the car DATE somewhere near the ORG gendarmerie and returned to their villages .

He had thought that they were going to hand PERSON over to the gendarmes . He had not wanted the incident to end as it did . No official authority had ordered them to apprehend PERSON . He acknowledged that the unlicensed gun found at his address was his and used in the abduction .

The suspect said that on DATE when he went to NORP district gendarmerie to get permission to go to ORG for personal reasons , he met fellow village guards PERSON , PERSON and PERSON , who also wanted to go to ORG . The NORP gendarme commander gave them permission and told them to deliver a car DATE . They met PERSON after taking the car and he joined them . In ORG they reported to PERSON gendarme command but kept the car . They used it for shopping and also to help anti - terror police to apprehend CARDINAL suspects ( PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON ) , whom they were to take back to ORG . TIME they stayed in the PERSON guesthouse for village guards . On DATE , they went to the shopping district in the car . PERSON pointed out the ORG shop and said that PERSON was in contact with the ORG and might know where the ORG had buried the body of his murdered elder brother . He suggested that they apprehend him and take him along with the others . PERSON , whom they knew before , came up and went with them to the shop .

As the village guards did not know PERSON , they said that CARDINAL of the ORG brothers had to come to PERSON to make a statement for their brother PERSON . When they objected , the suspect went outside to call the police . However PERSON who had been outside , came in and tried to convince them . There was an argument . With threats and persuasion , they took PERSON away . The suspect thought they were going to take him to be detained with the other CARDINAL suspects . PERSON , PERSON and himself left in a taxi , while the others left in the white Toros car . PERSON got off at ORG . He and PERSON got out in front of the judiciary building , where the white car also arrived . PERSON said that ORG had agreed to go to ORG . They all got into the car and started towards ORG . After a while , some of the village guards doubted that they had the authority to go to ORG and recalled that they were to deliver the car . They decided to go back and hire CARDINAL cars so PERSON could go on to Lice . They left PERSON and PERSON by some ruined buildings . They could not find any cars . When they went back , they found PERSON crying by the roadside . He said that he had accidentally shot PERSON . They panicked and drove back to ORG . They left the CARDINAL suspects with the soldiers who came in the convoy from Hazro and made an excuse to leave . They deposited the car DATE somewhere near the ORG gendarmerie and returned to their villages .

He had not wanted the incident to end as it did . No official authority had ordered them to apprehend PERSON . He acknowledged that the licensed gun found at his address was his and that he carried it during the abduction .

The suspect said that on DATE when he went to NORP district gendarmerie to get permission to go to ORG for personal reasons , he met fellow village guards GPE , PERSON and PERSON , who also wanted to go to ORG . The NORP gendarme commander gave them permission and told them to deliver a car DATE . They met PERSON after taking the car and he joined them . In ORG they reported to PERSON gendarme command but kept the car . They went shopping and also helped anti - terror police to apprehend CARDINAL suspects , whom they were to take back to ORG . TIME they stayed in the PERSON guesthouse for village guards , as well as guarding the suspects . On DATE , they went to the shopping district again . PERSON pointed out the ORG shop . He said that PERSON was connected with the terrorists and might know where the ORG had buried the body of his murdered elder brother . He suggested that they apprehend him and send him for interrogation . PERSON , who had previously been in the ORG , came up and agreed to help them apprehend PERSON .

The CARDINAL men – CARDINAL else was involved DATE went to the shop , introducing themselves . As they did not know PERSON , they said that any one of the brothers should come . PERSON , PERSON and himself left in a taxi , while the others left in the white Toros car . PERSON got off at ORG . He and PERSON got out in front of the judiciary building , where the white car also arrived . PERSON said that ORG had agreed to go to ORG to help to find his brother ’s body . They all got into the car and started towards ORG . After a while , some of the village guards thought this might be dangerous and remembered that they had no permission to go to ORG . They decided to go back and hire CARDINAL cars so PERSON could go on to Lice . They left PERSON and PERSON by some ruined buildings . They could not find any cars . When they went back , they found PERSON in a sad state . He said that he had accidentally shot PERSON , who had attempted to run away and attack him . They panicked and drove back to ORG . They handed over the CARDINAL suspects to the soldiers who came in the convoy from ORG and made an excuse to leave . They deposited the car DATE somewhere near the ORG gendarmerie and returned to their villages .

He had thought PERSON was going to be handed over for proceedings . No official had ordered them to apprehend PERSON . He acknowledged that the licensed gun found at his address was his and that he was carrying it during the abduction .

The suspect said that on DATE he and fellow village guards GPE , PERSON and PERSON were given a car by ORG gendarme commander to deliver to ORG . PERSON joined them . In ORG they reported to PERSON gendarme command but kept the car . They went shopping and also helped anti - terror police to apprehend CARDINAL suspects , involved in incidents in LOC , whom they were to take back to ORG . He named the CARDINAL suspects . TIME they stayed in the PERSON guesthouse for village guards . On DATE , they went to the shopping district again . PERSON pointed out the ORG shop . He said that PERSON was connected with the terrorists and that if they apprehended him , he might be able to find the body of his brother . They met PERSON , whom they knew from Hazro and he came with them . They apprehended PERSON as shown in the reconstruction .

The suspect , PERSON and PERSON were in the LOC car with PERSON . PERSON told PERSON that he would be interrogated to disclose where his brother was buried . PERSON proposed that they did not take him for interrogation and offered to help PERSON find the body in ORG . PERSON suggested that he should go to ORG with PERSON . They arrived in front of the judiciary building , where PERSON and ORG arrived in a taxi . They all got into the Toros car and started towards ORG . After a while , some of the village guards thought this might be dangerous and remembered that they had no permission to go to ORG . They decided to go back and hire CARDINAL cars so PERSON could go on to Lice . They left PERSON and PERSON by some ruined buildings . They could not find any cars . When they went back , they found PERSON crying by the road . He said that he had accidentally shot PERSON . They panicked and drove back to ORG . They handed over the CARDINAL suspects to the soldiers who came in the convoy from ORG and made an excuse to leave . They deposited the car DATE somewhere near the ORG gendarmerie and returned to their villages .

He had thought PERSON was going to be handed over to the gendarmerie . No official authority had ordered them to apprehend PERSON .

DATE . The suspect was asked to submit his defence to the charge that he , along with CARDINAL friends , had kidnapped PERSON .

The suspect said that on DATE he was going to the Trafik tea gardens when he met PERSON and PERSON whom he knew from ORG . They were with CARDINAL other village guards . They told him that they were on duty and were going to apprehend PERSON . While talking , they reached the shop . A few of them entered but he did not as he was not an official . When an argument broke out , he entered and told the people that his friends were officials . The atmosphere was tense and several of the village guards took out their guns . They apprehended someone and left . He got into a taxi with GPE . He got out in front of ORG and did not know where the others went . After TIME , he went to PERSON gendarmerie to find PERSON but was unsuccessful . That was his only involvement with the incident . He had thought that the village guards had authority to act as they did . Otherwise he would have reported them . Inside the shop , he saw CARDINAL guards and some shop people .

The suspect said that on DATE he went to NORP district gendarmerie to get permission to go to ORG for personal reasons , including obtaining medical treatment . He came across GPE , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON , who wanted also to go to ORG and were to deliver a car CARDINAL to ORG gendarmerie . He joined them . In the car he told the others that his village PERSON had recently been attacked and that some of the people involved were wanted for other offences were in ORG . After a discussion , they decided it would be appropriate to apprehend those individuals and hand them over to ORG or ORG security people . In ORG they reported to PERSON gendarme command . They went to ORG and explained that they knew where to find certain individuals connected with the terrorists . They went along with police teams and apprehended the CARDINAL individuals . The village guards took delivery of them in order to take them back to ORG . TIME they stayed in the PERSON guesthouse for village guards . On DATE , they went to the shopping district in the white car . They met PERSON , who was known to some of the village guards .

The suspect , who had lost members of his family to the ORG and was himself disabled due to injuries caused by the ORG , had discovered that PERSON was the leader of the group who kidnapped and killed his elder brother . The PERSON family was also in contact with the ORG , especially PERSON who met with the terrorists in ORG . He learned the address of the ORG business LOC and explaining the situation to his friends , proposed to apprehend PERSON . The CARDINAL of them entered the shop at TIME . They introduced themselves as security officials and when an argument broke out , drew their guns . He , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON got into the white car while the others caught a taxi . While taking PERSON to PERSON gendarme command , the suspect told PERSON that he had to help locate his brother ’s body or they would hand him over to the court . PERSON pleaded not to be handed over and offered to go to ORG and help him . They arrived at PERSON as did the other guards . PERSON had already got out at ORG . They all got into the white car and started towards ORG . After a while , some of the village guards said that they would be late returning to ORG and decided to go back and hire CARDINAL cars so the suspect could go onto ORG . They left the suspect and PERSON , who was blindfolded , by some ruined buildings . They talked . Then PERSON tried to attack him and run away . The suspect , alone and disabled , fired a few warning shots from his PERSON pistol . PERSON fell down covered in blood . The suspect panicked and ran away to the road , in tears . When his friends returned , he told them an accident had happened . They drove back to ORG , the suspect stopping to throw the gun into the river . They handed over the CARDINAL suspects to the convoy from ORG and made an excuse to leave . They deposited the car DATE somewhere near the ORG gendarmerie and returned to their villages .

He had had no intention of killing PERSON who was going to be handed over for proceedings . There was no official present at the shop other than his CARDINAL friends . No official had ordered them to apprehend PERSON .

As a result of the interrogations of the CARDINAL suspects , it appeared that ORG had been taken to a ruined building QUANTITY away on FAC . The gendarmes sent out a team to the location . According to PERSON , the incident had taken place in front of the south - facing door . A barely visible bloodstain QUANTITY in diameter was found on the doorstep . The victim was not there however , nor did a search disclose any empty cartridges . The victim was found QUANTITY to the south , CARDINAL buried in water in a field , putrefying , with the face unidentifiable . No marks or evidence were found in the vicinity and it was not possible to tell whether he had been killed on the spot or brought there afterwards . Photographs were taken .

PERSON indicated the place at the old dynamite depot , QUANTITY south of the CARDINALth kilometre point on FAC , where he had been left with PERSON . The CARDINAL men had sat on a wall and were talking , when PERSON attacked him and tried to escape . He fired CARDINAL shots with his pistol . He indicated the spot . At the entrance of the building some dried blood was observed . PERSON had fallen on the ground but he did not know if the man was injured or dead as he panicked and ran away . When showed the body lying in the field , QUANTITY south of the building , he could not remember the clothing but it was possible that it was PERSON body . He showed where he threw the gun into the Dicle river .

DATE . The body was identified by PERSON as being PERSON . There was a bullet entry to the right temporal region , with an exit wound to left frontal region , and CARDINAL bullet entry below the left ear and an exit hole on the left cheek bone . Due to absence of burns or soot , both bullets had been shot at a distance . No other injury from physical violence was observed . It was concluded that death occurred from the bullet wounds , either of which would have been fatal , DATE before .

This stated that car , no . CARDINAL , had not been found . It belonged to PERSON , resident in GPE .

This letter enclosed the investigation documents and concluded that the CARDINAL men had admitted their guilt in respect of abducting PERSON and that PERSON had admitted that he had killed him .

On DATE , the NORP gendarme commander had appointed the CARDINAL village guards to apprehend CARDINAL individuals . They set out in car DATE to go to ORG and met PERSON , who joined them . They finished their task in ORG and stayed in the guest house . On DATE , the CARDINAL men went shopping . PERSON pointed out a shop and said that they should apprehend someone there and take him to the gendarmes . PERSON went inside the shop and talked to PERSON , who did not want to come . The suspect and others went into the shop . When PERSON would not go unless the police came , he and PERSON went outside to look for the police . PERSON met someone called PERSON and they went back into the shop . The suspect told the elder brother that they were taking PERSON to the gendarmerie and they could follow . They got into CARDINAL cars and arrived in front of the gendarmerie . PERSON told PERSON that they should take the victim to ORG and not into the gendarmerie . They started out towards ORG . Talking amongst themselves , they thought they might have problems going to ORG without permission and decided to go back . PERSON and PERSON got out to wait for them to return with CARDINAL cars , CARDINAL for them to go onto ORG . The village guards were unable to find any cabs willing to come back with them . They returned to the spot to find PERSON crying . PERSON had attacked him while they were talking and he had shot him .

They returned to the gendarmerie . PERSON begged them not to hand him over . They felt sorry for him . Without returning the car , they went back to ORG and from there to their homes . The suspect had had a gun on him in the shop but did not draw it . No - one drew their guns .

On DATE of the incident , he was going to the Trafik tea gardens to meet friends when he met PERSON whom he knew . PERSON told him that they were going to apprehend someone in the shop nearby . When they arrived in front of the shop , he saw CARDINAL people having an argument . CARDINAL village guards were pointing their weapons . The shop people refused to let anyone go without the police . The village guards said that they were officials and would take them to the gendarmerie . The suspect told PERSON that they could call the police . At this point , CARDINAL village guards took a man outside and got into a white Toros car . He , PERSON and PERSON got into a cab . He got out near a bakers . He was shocked by the incident . When he came to the gendarmerie TIME , he asked the sergeant at the checkpoint if the ORG guards had brought CARDINAL in . He was told that the village guards had brought in CARDINAL men earlier but none since .

The suspect went to ORG and was called by the gendarmerie to take part in an identification parade , where no - one recognised him . He took part in the reconstruction but in fact he had not helped take out the victim as was shown in the photographs . He had only been there because he believed that the guards would hand the man over to the gendarmes .

On DATE , the NORP gendarme commander had appointed the CARDINAL village guards to apprehend CARDINAL individuals . They took PERSON with them . They apprehended the CARDINAL men and delivered them to the gendarmerie . On DATE , the CARDINAL village guards wandered round the shopping district . PERSON pointed out a shop and said that they should apprehend someone there and take him to the gendarmes . The suspect stood outside while the other CARDINAL went inside . PERSON told a man that he had to come . There were CARDINAL other people present . They argued , saying no - one would go unless the police came . The suspect walked off QUANTITY looking for the police . He met PERSON , who said that he would see to the situation and walked into the shop . The suspect stayed outside and heard nothing . Shortly after , the guards came outside with PERSON . PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON got into the car to go to PERSON gendarmerie . PERSON , PERSON and himself got into a cab . PERSON got out on the way . When they arrived by the fountain , PERSON told PERSON that they would go to ORG . They started out towards ORG . Talking amongst themselves , they thought they might have problems going to ORG without permission and decided to go back . PERSON and PERSON were to wait by an old building for them to return with CARDINAL cars , so that they could continue to ORG . They were unable to find any cabs willing to come back with them . They returned to the spot to find PERSON crying . PERSON had attacked him while they were talking and he had shot and killed him .

They returned to the gendarmerie . Without returning the car , they went back to ORG and from there to their homes . The suspect had had a gun on him in the shop but did not draw it . PERSON had told them that his uncles and brother were killed by the ORG and that PERSON had a relationship with the ORG and might know where his brother ’s body was buried . Their initial idea however had been to hand PERSON over to the gendarmerie .

On DATE , he and CARDINAL others were setting out from GPE to ORG to apprehend CARDINAL individuals . They met PERSON , who joined them . All CARDINAL went to ORG and with police teams took the CARDINAL men and delivered them to the provincial gendarmerie . They stayed in the guest house . On DATE , the CARDINAL village guards went shopping . PERSON pointed out a shop and said that they should apprehend someone there and take him to the gendarmes . PERSON went inside the shop but the man would not come . The suspect and PERSON went inside , saying that they were guards and that he should come to the gendarmerie . He refused to go unless the police came . The suspect agreed . PERSON and PERSON went to look for the police . They came back with PERSON who spoke to the man . They told the people to come to the gendarmerie and took the man out by the arms , putting him in the car . The suspect drove the car which also contained PERSON and ORG . The others followed in a taxi .

They arrived at the fountain next to the gendarmerie . PERSON was no longer there . PERSON said that they should go to ORG and hand him over there . As PERSON was a ORG guard , they thought it must be a ORG matter . They started out towards ORG . Talking amongst themselves , they thought they might have problems going to ORG without permission and changed their minds . PERSON and PERSON stayed at an old building while they went to look for CARDINAL cars , so that they could go on to ORG . They were unable to find any cabs willing to come back with them . They returned to the spot to find PERSON crying . PERSON had attacked him while they were talking and he had fired QUANTITY shots , killing him . Angry , they intended to take PERSON back to the gendarmerie . When they got there , PERSON begged them not to hand him over , referring to his uncles and brother being shot by the ORG . They were in a panic but agreed to keep quiet . They went back to ORG and from there to their homes . They had only taken PERSON away as PERSON had claimed that he would be handed over to the gendarmerie .

The suspect said that on DATE he met PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON , who were going to ORG . He joined them as he wanted to go to hospital . In ORG , they helped apprehend some people and handed them over to the provincial gendarmerie . On DATE , they went to the shopping district . At that stage , PERSON came into his mind . In DATE , his brother had been kidnapped by the ORG and though he was dead , his body had not been found . As PERSON had connections with the ORG in ORG , he thought he might know the location of the body . He proposed to the others that they should apprehend PERSON . The CARDINAL of them entered the shop . PERSON refused to come without the police . PERSON went to look for the police . He came back with PERSON , who spoke to PERSON . PERSON agreed to come . They all went in cars to the front of the gendarmerie , except PERSON . In the car , the suspect talked about his brother with PERSON and asked his help . PERSON said that if they did not hand him over , he would help the suspect find the body at ORG . The suspect asked the other village guards to take him to ORG .

They started towards ORG . After a while , some of the guards said that they had no permission and decided to go back . PERSON proposed getting out to wait for the others to send back a car . PERSON and the suspect entered the old building and sat down . After a while , PERSON said that he wanted to go outside . The suspect refused to let him . PERSON ran at him , making threats . The suspect drew his gun , pointed it at the man ’s head and fired . After firing , the suspect ran away without looking back . When his friends returned , he told them an accident had happened . They drove back to ORG , the suspect stopping to throw the gun into the river . The others were angry and he pleaded not to be handed over . They felt sorry for him and went back to ORG .

On DATE , the NORP gendarme commander had appointed the CARDINAL village guards to apprehend some individuals in ORG and to take the car DATE to the provincial central gendarmerie . They met PERSON , who joined them . They went to the anti - terror police and apprehended the CARDINAL named individuals , handing them over to the provincial gendarmes . On DATE , the CARDINAL village guards went shopping . PERSON pointed out a shop and said that they should apprehend someone there and take him to the gendarmes . PERSON went inside the shop , followed by the others . He talked to a man , who did not believe them and would not go unless the police came . PERSON went outside to look for the police , returning with PERSON , who said that they were village guards on duty . The village guards took the man by the arm and put him in the car . They arrived in front of the gendarmerie . PERSON told the others that the man had agreed to go with him to ORG . The others thought they would hand him over to the gendarmerie at ORG . On the way , they thought they might have problems going to ORG without permission and decided to go back . PERSON and PERSON were to wait for them to return with CARDINAL cars , CARDINAL for them to go onto ORG . They were unable to find any cabs willing to come back with them . They returned to the spot to find PERSON crying . PERSON had attacked him while they were talking and he had fired QUANTITY shots at him .

They returned to the gendarmerie . PERSON begged them not to hand him over . They felt sorry for him . They delivered the car to the station at ORG and went home .

The CARDINAL accused appeared . All gave statements ( those of PERSON and GPE were illegible in the copy provided by the Government ) .

PERSON confirmed his statements to the gendarmes and the public prosecutor . PERSON had told them that ORG had information about the body of his brother . They took him from his shop to take to the gendarmerie but changed their minds and went towards ORG . They left the victim with ORG and when they came back found that Ömer had killed him .

PERSON confirmed his previous statements . They took PERSON in order to find information about ORG brother . They had left him with Ömer on the road to ORG and ORG had killed him .

Zeyyat Akçil confirmed his previous statements . They had taken PERSON to find out information with the intention of handing him over to the gendarmerie . They had changed their minds and Ömer had killed him when they left them on the road to Lice .

Mehmet ORG confirmed his previous statements . He had come across the CARDINAL others by chance and had been told that they were taking PERSON to the gendarmerie . He had gone into the shop with GPE . After leaving the shop in a taxi , he got off at ORG and knew nothing more about the incident . He had not introduced himself as an official in the shop . He had only said that the others were officials .

The court decided that the CARDINAL accused should be arrested and charged with the murder of PERSON and the aiding and abetting of murder .

The indictment listed PERSON , PERSON and PERSON as complainants and identified PERSON , GPE , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON as having committed the offence of murder and conspiracy in respect of PERSON . It concluded that the CARDINAL village guards had been instructed by the ORG gendarme commander to go to ORG to apprehend certain suspects in the car DATE which was to be delivered to the provincial gendarme command . On their way , they met the fifth guard PERSON , who joined them . They handed over the suspects to the provincial gendarmerie and DATE went shopping . PERSON told them that ORG had a brother in prison for being in the ORG and that his own brother had been killed by the ORG but they had not found the body . He suggested that if they took PERSON , who had a relationship with the ORG , the gendarmes could interrogate him to find where the body was . The others agreed and went to the ORG business LOC . They introduced themselves as security officials and were going to take PERSON to the gendarmerie . An argument broke out , the shop people requesting that the police be brought . PERSON went to look for the police . He met PERSON , who came back , introducing himself as a security officer . When there was still resistance , they drew their guns , took PERSON by the arms and put him into the LOC car . The guards arrived in front of the gendarmerie . PERSON had got out earlier . PERSON told the others that he was going to hand over the victim in ORG and that the victim would help find the body . They set out for ORG . However the other CARDINAL village guards said that they had no permission to go to ORG and decided to go back . PERSON suggested that he and PERSON wait by a ruined building and that the others bring back a car for them to go on to ORG . After the others left , PERSON argued with PERSON . He drew his gun and fired several times , before running away . When the others came back , they drove PERSON to ORG . He threw his gun in the river . They returned together to ORG , leaving the car in the gendarmerie yard . PERSON body was later found and an autopsy disclosed that he had CARDINAL bullet wounds to the head .

According to the evidence , the accused had taken the victim without any instruction from any authority . They had used force and threats . PERSON had believed that the victim had connections with the ORG and wanted revenge . He took the victim to an isolated spot with the agreement and collaboration of the others , murdered and abandoned the body . He had therefore committed premeditated murder .

The court ordered the continued detention of the CARDINAL accused , that the complainants to be informed of the proceedings and the summoning of witnesses : PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON .

The CARDINAL accused made statements to the court in response to the indictment .

PERSON stated that when he came to ORG he found that his CARDINAL friends GPE , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON were appointed by the ORG gendarmes to go to ORG to detain some suspects . He joined them . In ORG , they met Captain PERSON at the central gendarmerie , who sent them to the Anti - Terror Department . They detained CARDINAL persons with police teams and handed them over to the gendarmerie . At this time , he had the idea of locating the body of his brother PERSON , who had been killed on DATE . PERSON was known to have been involved in village raids and he thought he might have information about his brother . He had also been injured in a clash himself . They went to the ORG LOC in the car brought from ORG . The accused told PERSON that they were the police and he had to come to make a statement . ORG resisted and said he wanted the police . PERSON and PERSON went outside to find the police . They came back with someone he later learned was PERSON . He told them that he was a police officer and showed them an ID . He had another person with him whose name he did not know . PERSON was taken in a car by PERSON , the unknown friend , the accused , PERSON and ORG . In front of the gendarmerie , PERSON and his friend said that they would take PERSON to be interrogated . They drove off . They stopped at a ruined building on the Lice road . PERSON and his friend took the victim inside . He and PERSON waited by the car . He did not know what was talked about but he did hear mention of MONEY ( TRL ) . DATE , PERSON came and told him to shoot PERSON . He did so . When they arrived back in GPE , he gave PERSON his gun . PERSON was driving . The other man wore glasses .

The accused was asked to explain the contradictions in this account compared with the other statements . He said that this statement was correct and the other ones were untrue . He had made his statement to the court on DATE as he was scared of being tortured at the gendarmerie . In answer to questions , he said that as village guards they had been given the authority and duty to apprehend those they knew to be criminals and hand them over to the gendarmes or police , even outside their own villages . He was therefore empowered to apprehend PERSON and hand him over to the authorities . It was what they did in apprehending CARDINAL suspects DATE .

PERSON said as follows . He and the others had been sent to ORG to apprehend some individuals and hand them over to the ORG gendarmes . They had gone to the ORG shop because PERSON said PERSON might know where his brother was buried . PERSON refused to go without the police . The accused and PERSON went outside to bring the police . After QUANTITY , they met PERSON , with a man wearing glasses , whom he did not know . They entered the shop and showed their IDs . PERSON then came with them in the LOC car . The accused , PERSON friend , who was introduced as “ Müdür ” ( director ) and PERSON got into a taxi . At the gendarmerie , he joined PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON in the car , which PERSON drove to a ruin on FAC . He remained near the car . He could hear PERSON asking the victim about the ORG . A sum of MONEY was mentioned . He heard nothing about ORG ’s brother . There were CARDINAL gun shots . He saw PERSON come out with a pistol and bloodstains on his trouser legs . PERSON said ORG had killed the victim . On the way back to ORG they were stopped by the police . PERSON friend showed his ID . There was some mention about the number plate of the car and that the car should be held . PERSON drove on anyway and they arrived at the PERSON gendarmerie . The police arrived later looking for the car but did not find it . Captain PERSON asked what had happened but the accused said that he did not know anything and should ask PERSON . When the incident was discovered , someone whom he did not know told him what he should say in the preliminary investigation .

ORG . PERSON said as follows . He and his CARDINAL friends were going to PERSON to apprehend CARDINAL suspects . PERSON joined them as they were leaving ORG in the white GPE . He said he was going for a medical report . In ORG they carried out an operation with security officials . They found CARDINAL of the suspects , handing them over to the gendarmes . They found the fourth , PERSON , DATE and handed him over . PERSON told them at this stage that PERSON was to be apprehended due to his connection with the ORG . They went to his shop . They told him that they were village guards but he refused to come unless police were present . PERSON and PERSON went to look for a police officer . TIME , they returned with PERSON and another person , wearing glasses and speaking proper NORP . That person showed his ID to PERSON saying that he was the police . PERSON agreed to come and was put into the car . PERSON , PERSON and the man called the Director got into a taxi . They all arrived in front of the gendarmerie . The accused , PERSON and ORG stayed at the gendarmerie while the others went off at TIME . TIME , the police arrived . The individuals from the shop might have been with them . Police asked PERSON where the white Toros had gone . The accused told the police that PERSON had been taken for questioning . The police officers left . They handed over the CARDINAL suspects to the ORG convoy . PERSON and the others returned after TIME . PERSON told him to remove the number plates from the car . He handed them to Captain PERSON . He saw the captain talking to the police . PERSON and the man with glasses disappeared at about that time . Growing suspicious , the accused asked PERSON what had happened . PERSON said that he had accidentally shot PERSON . He stated that the previous statements were not correct and that he could not explain why .

PERSON said as follows : They caught CARDINAL suspects in GPE on DATE and stayed on DATE to catch the fourth . They caught PERSON and handed him over to the gendarmes . PERSON then told them that PERSON was in touch with the ORG and might know where his brother was buried , so he should be taken for questioning . They went to the shop and PERSON told PERSON that he had to come for questioning . PERSON refused . PERSON and the accused went to find a police officer . PERSON met PERSON , who was with another man and who said that there was no need for the police . They went into the shop . PERSON talked to PERSON and the man with glasses showed his wallet to him . PERSON agreed to come and got into the LOC car . The accused got into another car with the man with glasses . Later , he saw PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , GPE and the man with glasses go off in the Toros car . PERSON was driving . They returned after TIME . The police arrived and asked PERSON where the Toros car was . His present statement was true . At the gendarmerie , they wrote the statements and he signed . They prepared the statements probably to protect the man with glasses .

Zeyyat Akçil said that he did not accept his previous statements . He knew only what PERSON and PERSON had said .

Mehmet ORG said that he repeated his previous statements . He had no friend wearing glasses . His hand was disabled due to a cut above the wrist . He was unable to use his right hand and anyway did not know how to drive . He had gone into the shop with PERSON to help them as they were village guards . He told PERSON that the men were officials , that he would be taken to the gendarmerie and nothing abnormal would happen . PERSON agreed to go with them . The accused got into the taxi with GPE and PERSON but got off at a ORG near the post office . He did not tell anyone that he was a police officer . He played no part in the murder .

The court heard from witnesses from PERSON village who maintained their previous statements and PERSON the owner of the LOC car . TIME noted that PERSON was limping with his left foot and that PERSON arm had a deep cut above the right wrist .

The court ordered , inter alia , that it should be established whether the accused were village guards ; whether PERSON had any form of identification from the gendarmerie ; that an instruction warrant be issued to establish whether ORG gendarme command appointed village guards to apprehend persons outside the village ; that a rogatory letter be sent to ORG for a statement to be taken from ORG ; that PERSON be summoned to give evidence ; and that the hospital medical file concerning PERSON be provided .

He stated as follows . PERSON had been apprehended and sent to the provincial gendarmerie for interrogation . On DATE , he gave PERSON ’s car to GPE , GPE , PERSON and PERSON to be delivered to the provincial central gendarmerie for safekeeping until the owner was referred to court . On DATE , the car was seen back in the grounds of the gendarmerie . On investigation , the guards claimed that they had brought it back as the ORG gendarmerie was very crowded and they could not find an officer . They came back with the convoy after DATE . He knew nothing of the incident until the provincial central gendarme command telephoned to ask him about the village guards .

A petition from GPE was read out . The court ordered , inter alia , that sufficient time be allocated to establishing the identity of the specialist sergeant referred to in the petition .

The accused wished to add a further point to his statement to the court . A gendarme special sergeant , whose name he did not know , had been involved in taking in GPE . He had been transferred from ORG within DATE of DATE . The sergeant told the accused that he and PERSON were going to interrogate PERSON and later take him back to the provincial gendarmerie . He told the accused to wait by the car while they interrogated him . The accused did not realise that they were going to kill him .

PERSON addressed the court , stating that he had no intention to kill the deceased but only did so because the specialist sergeant told him to . The court ordered , inter alia , for the summons for PERSON to be renewed .

The defence counsel requested the hearing of the driver of the car CARDINAL who had seen the seventh man and also PERSON , another village guard who had been with the accused in GPE . The court ordered the public prosecutor to locate the witnesses and resummon PERSON .

Defence counsel submitted that a ORG officer had been involved and requested that steps be taken for him to be identified . PERSON told the court that he did not know the name of the specialist sergeant and had only learned that he was a sergeant after he was detained . The court agreed that the official ’s identity should be established but did not agree to the means suggested by the defence counsel . PERSON was resummoned , and summonses issued for PERSON and the officials present when the accuseds’ statements were allegedly taken by force .

He stated that he had carried out the investigation into the incident . This had established that the accused had entered the shop . He confirmed the reconstruction and location reports as correct . No pressure was exerted on the accused . He did not know the identity of the official referred to by the witnesses .

PERSON appeared as a witness . He confirmed meeting PERSON and PERSON at ORG and seeing GPE and PERSON there later . He returned with them from there to the gendarmerie at TIME . He saw them returning to ORG in the convoy later .

PERSON appeared as a witness . When they had refused to go with the village guards to give a statement in place of GPE , ORG had left to find a police officer . He returned with CARDINAL individuals ( pointing to PERSON in the court room ) . He described the second man as tall , wearing sunglasses and speaking fluent LANGUAGE . When he said that he was the police , the witness asked for his ID . He produced something which he opened and shut without the witness seeing what it was . All had weapons except PERSON and the seventh man .

PERSON , a gendarme ORG , gave evidence , saying that he was present when the accused made their statements . No pressure was applied on them and the contents were true . The accused made no mention of a seventh man , though the relatives of the deceased had . They were unable to establish the identity of that man .

Mehmet ORG told the court , inter alia , that persons linked with the ORG had put pressure on the others to change their story and incriminate him .

Counsel for the accused requested that steps be taken to identify the security official known as “ müdür ” .

NORP The court ordered inter alia for disclosure of PERSON medical records and rejected counsel ’s request concerning the official known as “ müdür ” .

This stated that the accused PERSON had informed ORG that there had been a seventh person with them on DATE of the incident . They should investigate the identity of this person and inform the prosecutor ’s office .

This stated , inter alia , that the relatives of the deceased and witnesses had mentioned a seventh person . All accused however had clearly stated that they were not joined by anyone else . No - one answering the description given by the relatives had been found during the investigation . The search for the seventh person would continue .

Present when statements were taken from the CARDINAL accused , the gendarme witness stated that no pressure or force was used but that they answered questions freely .

They confirmed their previous statements . PERSON stated that he had identified PERSON as involved during the reconstruction . PERSON stated that there was another man involved and requested that he be identified and that the reasons why the accused were sent for his brother be investigated .

The gendarme witness was present when the body of PERSON was discovered due to the description of the location by PERSON . They established the involvement also of CARDINAL other suspects but CARDINAL else . They had investigated but failed to identify the person described by the brothers of the deceased .

Şinası PERSON attended as a witness . He stated that he had taken part in the investigation under Captain Gül . The relatives told them of a person involved in addition to the village guards . They were asked to describe him . During the confrontation and identity parades and in making their statements , the accused had however made no mention of such a man .

Counsel for some of the accused stated that the unidentified person was present in the gendarmerie during the interrogation and it was inconceivable that he was not known or found .

Mehmet ORG repeated his assertion that he was unable to drive at the time of the incident as his arm was injured and in plaster .

A medical doctor was heard as a witness concerning PERSON . He had examined the hospital records concerning treatment given for a cut to PERSON right arm on DATE and gave the opinion that he would have been unable to turn keys in a car ignition or make the movements necessary to drive with facility DATE and DATE . There was no record that plaster had been applied .

PERSON stated that PERSON did know how to drive and used to come to their village driving a car many times . PERSON stated that it was his father who drove and he did not know how .

Counsel for the interveners ( family ) rejected the previous medical evidence concerning PERSON and submitted their own expert opinion . Counsel made further submissions , rejecting the alleged motivation of personal revenge for the killing , referring to the traces of ill - treatment found on the body of PERSON . She stated there was an intention to intimidate the family of the deceased . PERSON , in prison for ORG offences , had been asked to become a confessor and had refused , since they wanted him to commit murders . The abduction of PERSON was intended to put pressure on him . The involvement of an unidentified person raised the suspicion that it was a murder involving an organised group of people enjoying ORG support and that officials were obstructing the investigation .

NORP The public prosecutor made submissions on the merits of the case . It was clear from the file and evidence that the NORP district gendarme commander sent CARDINAL village guards to ORG to apprehend CARDINAL suspects . They took PERSON with them . They stayed TIME , looking for a remaining suspect DATE . PERSON believed that PERSON knew the place where his brother and uncle were buried and at TIME took the others to the ORG business LOC , which had been shown to him by PERSON . While PERSON and PERSON stayed by the car , the others went in and said that they were police officers and that PERSON was wanted to give a statement in the PERSON court buildings . When there was resistance , the accused PERSON went out to find a police officer and returned with the confessor , PERSON , and an unidentified person . He introduced himself as a police officer and flashed an identity card . When the deceased resisted , they pulled their guns , and that caused him to go along with them . They all went together to the gendarme command in PERSON . The man described as the “ spectacled director ” , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON took PERSON in the white car to a ruined building for interrogation . PERSON stayed by the car . Following a talk inside the building , PERSON and the director walked out . PERSON went inside and shot PERSON with CARDINAL bullets in the head . The motivation for this incident – whether money , or revenge – was unclear . However none of the accused knew that PERSON was going to be killed , including PERSON . It was more probable that PERSON was there only for interrogation . All the accused had restricted the liberty of the victim . While PERSON carried out the killing , deliberately and unpremeditatedly committing a crime under Art . CARDINAL of the ORG , there was no information that the others knowingly took part in , or facilitated , the killing .

Submissions were made by counsel representing the village guards . PERSON requested time to submit his defence to the public prosecutor ’s pleadings . The court adjourned and granted PERSON further time .

PERSON repeated that he only killed PERSON under pressure and threat to his own life when PERSON and the director had told him to do so . It had been PERSON who had chosen the location and driven them there .

Feyzi Gökçen said that PERSON arm was not plastered during the incident . He had told PERSON about the incident on their return . PERSON had been angry with PERSON .

PERSON claimed that the village guards were trying to incriminate him due to family enmity dating back DATE . He also claimed the ORG were waging a campaign against him .

NORP The public prosecutor proposed that the driver of the taxi who took the accused from the scene be found . The accused present were asked to describe who was in which car .

Feyzi Gökçen said that he , PERSON and the spectacled director were in the taxi and the others in the white ORG . PERSON said that he was in the ORG , with PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , the victim and PERSON . PERSON did not get out on the way to the gendarmerie and they arrived at the judicial buildings . PERSON agreed that he , PERSON and the director were in the taxi . PERSON was in the white car with PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and the victim . The court ordered the issue of a warrant to identify the taxi driver and that a letter should be written to the provincial gendarme command to enquire as to whether a man named or nicknamed “ müdür ” existed .

The court gave , inter alia , directions concerning the location and summoning of PERSON , the driver of the taxi .

This referred to a letter from the court of DATE , enquiring whether anyone called or nicknamed “ müdür ” was employed at their command . No personnel were known by that name .

The court gave instructions , inter alia , for the request for information to the provincial gendarme command to be repeated , under penalty of attribution of a criminal offence .

The response of CARDINAL DATE of the provincial gendarme command , denying the existence of any person known as “ müdür ” , was read out . The court issued a summons for the driver of the taxi whose presence was to be secured by the police .

PERSON made a statement confirming his earlier accounts . The accused informed the court that they no longer needed any more time for their defence . The court ordered a rogatory letter be sent to PERSON to obtain PERSON statement and that PERSON , PERSON and PERSON be released due to the change in the nature of the charge and the time spent in custody .

PERSON denied being in ORG after DATE . He was not involved in driving any car in the incident . His car CARDINAL had been in GPE .

NORP The court instructed that the court file be sent to ORG for a report on the deceased ’s injuries and on whether PERSON could have driven a car or turned on the ignition .

This identified PERSON , known as “ PERSON , a member of the CARDINALth ORG infantry battalion at PERSON , as the man who organised the killing of PERSON . The accused was prepared to confront him and requested that he be brought before the court .

PERSON petition was read out . He had not known the name earlier . Counsel for GPE and PERSON requested that an inquiry be made into LOC . PERSON counsel protested that it would unnecessarily prolong the trial . The court ordered , inter alia , that an inquiry be sent to ORG , CARDINALth ORG , to determine whether PERSON was still serving in that unit and for his presence to be secured .

Referring to the court ’s summons of PERSON of CARDINAL DATE , this stated that their records showed CARDINAL of that name employed by ORG .

NORP The response from ORG was read out . The court instructed , inter alia , that further enquiries be made from ORG about PERSON .

NORP The following information was requested : did PERSON work for their command in DATE ; if , so what were his duties ; where did he now work ; what was his address ?

NORP There was a manuscript note on the letters : “ does not exist in our records ” .

NORP ORG requested the exhumation of the deceased ’s body to examine the skull and neck . The court , inter alia , instructed the public prosecutor to locate the body and to repeat the enquiry to ORG .

This referred to the court ’s letters of DATE and DATE . The court had requested information with regard to PERSON . No entry had been found in their records .

Response from the CARDINALth ORG was read out . The court instructed inter alia that the public prosecutor continue his investigation concerning the body and that an enquiry be addressed to the army chiefs of staff as to whether a specialist sergeant PERSON served under their command , and if so , when and where .

NORP The public prosecutor submitted that there was no useful purpose in exhuming the body . He adopted the submissions on the merits made earlier on CARDINAL DATE and DATE . The court decided , inter alia , to abandon the exhumation and the attempt to hear evidence from PERSON ; to review whether the file was ready for a final ruling ; and to summon PERSON counsel to make his final submissions in his defence .

Counsel for the family submitted that the investigation was incomplete as the procedure to bring PERSON before the court had not been completed . She requested that the court extend the investigation in this respect . She also submitted that as the incident had been committed by gangs , working for state officials , the matter fell within the jurisdiction of ORG . The court ordered that counsel for the family be allowed to carry out an inquiry into the case files concerning gangs operating in ORG and to inform the court if there was any information in them concerning a man matching the description of PERSON .

The court ordered the release on bail of PERSON and PERSON .

It was noted that PERSON had been released on bail and was performing his military service . Counsel for GPE and PERSON and the public prosecutor submitted that further investigation into LOC was unnecessary . Intervening counsel was not present . The court stated that it abandoned the intention to inquire into PERSON and withdrew previous instructions concerning such enquiries .

As the bench had changed , the court gave adjournments to examine the file and invited the public prosecutor and defence counsel to make further submissions .

The accused stated that he had had no animosity towards PERSON . PERSON had aided the ORG . He had stated that he would not accompany specialist sergeant PERSON and PERSON when they wanted to take him from his business LOC . GPE and PERSON had been going for the police when they met those QUANTITY persons , who said that there was no need for the police . They entered the shop , showed their identification and took PERSON away . When they stopped at a place on FAC , the accused , who was using crutches , waited during the interrogation . They told him to kill PERSON and as they threatened him , for his own safety , he had to kill PERSON . The incident took place due to the incitement of the specialist sergeant and PERSON .

NORP The public prosecutor adopted his previous submissions . PERSON and PERSON had nothing to add . The court noted that charges had not been brought against the accused concerning ORG CARDINAL paragraphs CARDINAL and LAW paragraph CARDINAL . As LAW could apply to GPE and PERSON , the former should be given time to make submissions and the latter should be summoned to appear from his military service . The prosecutor was to issue a new indictment .

Mehmet ORG appeared and made submissions on LAW , repeating that he could not drive at the time . PERSON had nothing to add .

This listed PERSON , GPE , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON as accused of abduction and deprivation of liberty of PERSON on DATE .

The accused had previously identified PERSON and specialist sergeant PERSON from PERSON as responsible for the incident . The sergeant ’s name was in fact PERSON . The GPE report referred to ORG murder as being carried out by PERSON and others ( see paragraph CARDINAL ) . Apparently , the reason was that PERSON had demanded money from ORG who was in prison . PERSON must have been murdered when he refused to pay the demanded sum . He asked the court to take the GPE report into account as evidence in the case .

PERSON made submissions and presented a petition . This stated that the specialist sergeant ’s name was not Seçkin but PERSON and referred to the GPE report as giving information about this man ’s activities and the killing of PERSON . The court ordered the indictment to be served on the accused and for them to attend to answer it and for the matter of the GPE report to be adjourned .

NORP The court instructed that a request be made to the Prime Minister , via ORG , to obtain the GPE report .

NORP The court received a copy of the GPE report .

PERSON stated that he had killed PERSON under duress from PERSON and PERSON . The court summoned PERSON to verify the autopsy identification .

PERSON stated that he was not guilty of the charges . PERSON killed PERSON . He had confessed because he was threatened . He was still being threatened . He asked for release .

PERSON confirmed that the autopsy report was signed in his presence and was correct .

NORP The public prosecutor repeated his submissions on the merits . PERSON had initiated the incident due to his belief that PERSON might know the location of his brother ’s body . PERSON had brought PERSON back to the shop and PERSON had introduced himself as a security official and the others as village guards . The accused had drawn their pistols and forced PERSON to go with them . PERSON left the taxi on the way to the gendarmerie while the others went on . The CARDINAL village guards drove out of ORG with the victim . When CARDINAL of them changed their minds , leaving PERSON and PERSON together in the ruined building , PERSON shot and killed PERSON . He submitted that PERSON had committed premeditated murder ( Article CARDINAL paragraph CARDINAL ) , that GPE , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON should be convicted and sentenced under ORG CARDINAL paragraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL paragraph CARDINAL for restricting the freedom of GPE in using weapons and acting in concert .

PERSON submitted that PERSON was the perpetrator . At the very beginning , the gendarmes had told him what to say in his statement and that he would be out of prison in DATE as they would look after him . No - one had helped him and now he had been threatened instead .

NORP The court adjourned , stating that the case had reached the verdict stage .

Counsel for the family submitted that murder was widespread at the time in the region , when certain public officials were abusing their powers and forming gangs . Though the search for PERSON had earlier been abandoned , she stated that a search for him would lead to a more just result and would show that the allegations about the incident being personally motivated by ORG desire to find his brother ’s body were a diversion . The public prosecutor agreed that the CARDINALth ORG and ORG be questioned about PERSON . The court gave orders to that effect .

NORP The court summarised the indictment , the submissions of the prosecution , defence counsel and counsel for the family . It recounted the various statements made by the accused in their defence , and the other documentary and oral evidence .

The court concluded from the evidence as follows . PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON , provisional village guards , were sent to ORG to apprehend CARDINAL ORG suspects . On the way in the car provided by the gendarmes , they met PERSON who joined them as he wanted to go to ORG for medical treatment . CARDINAL of the suspects were found and handed over DATE . With help from ORG , they found the fourth DATE . At this point , the CARDINAL guards bumped into PERSON outside ORG . The uncle and brother of PERSON had been killed by the ORG , but their bodies never found . PERSON thought that PERSON had been involved with the ORG and he might know where the bodies were . Carried away by this idea , PERSON took the others along to the ORG shop , which PERSON showed them . They arrived in the white GPE . GPE , PERSON and PERSON entered first , joined later by ORG , and they told PERSON that he had to come for interrogation . He resisted . The others present asked for the police and for identity cards to be shown . PERSON and PERSON left to fetch the police . They brought back CARDINAL people , PERSON and a man , with glasses , speaking good NORP who was addressed as “ Boss ” . This man was said by PERSON to be PERSON . PERSON showed his ORG card . The accused pulled their weapons when there was continued resistance . PERSON agreed to leave . They hired a taxi as they were so many . PERSON , PERSON , GPE , PERSON , PERSON friend and the deceased got into the white ORG and the others into the taxi .

The cars arrived at the gendarmerie . The white ORG left , with PERSON , PERSON , PERSON , the deceased and the man with glasses . Outside the city , PERSON was taken to the scene of the incident . PERSON and the man in glasses interrogated him inside a building , while PERSON and GPE were outside . PERSON and the man in glasses came out . PERSON went inside and killed PERSON with CARDINAL shots .

The motivation for the incident came from PERSON , the other village guards acting on the basis of his wishes . They had no authority or assignment to take PERSON and so the CARDINAL accused had restricted the freedom of the victim and violated his liberty in a manner which was to end in death . PERSON did not enter the shop but was at the scene of the killing . He had killed PERSON without the knowledge of , and with a different motive from , the others .

NORP The court convicted GPE , PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON pursuant to ORG CARDINAL parasgraphs CARDINAL and CARDINAL paragraph CARDINAL as they had restricted the freedom of PERSON at gunpoint , collectively and unlawfully , and he had been killed as a result . They were sentenced to DATE and CARDINAL months’ imprisonment and a fine of CARDINAL GPE . They were acquitted of murder . PERSON was convicted of intentionally killing PERSON pursuant to LAW and sentenced to DATE imprisonment . A complaint was to be filed with ORG against PERSON for the necessary action to be taken .

ORG , responding to requests from ORG at the hearing of evidence , submitted LAW ( see Relevant Domestic Law and Practice below ) and a copy of the statement taken from LOC . They also stated that there was no entry in the ORG or ORG gendarme records concerning the CARDINAL men detained on DATE with the alleged assistance of the CARDINAL village guards .

It was recounted to the witness that PERSON had stated that he had informed the duty ORG at PERSON that his brother PERSON had been abducted and taken inside the gendarmerie and that the ORG told the family to go away . It was also stated that the ORG signature appeared on a record of CARDINAL DATE concerning the impossibility of finding car , registration no . CARDINAL .

The witness stated that DATE he was second - in - command of the central gendarmerie station under the orders of the ORG central gendarmerie commander . Since it was DATE before he was unable to recall the ORG incident clearly . He did not remember , and did not think that , he had talked to PERSON as described and he did not remember being spoken to in that way . He remembered nothing about the investigation .

The applicant lodged with the ORG a copy of the so - called GPE report , produced at the request of the Prime Minister by Mr Kutlu Savaş , Vice - President of ORG within ORG . After receiving the report in DATE , the Prime Minister made it available to the public , though CARDINAL pages and certain annexes were withheld .

NORP The introduction stated that the report was not based on a judicial investigation and did not constitute a formal investigative report . It was intended for information purposes and purported to do no more than describe certain events which had occurred mainly in south - east GPE and which tended to confirm the existence of unlawful dealings between political figures , government institutions and clandestine groups .

NORP The report analysed a series of events , such as murders carried out under orders , the killings of well - known figures or supporters of the NORP and deliberate acts by a group of “ informants ” supposedly serving the ORG , and concluded that there was a connection between the fight to eradicate terrorism in the region and the underground relations that formed as a result , particularly in the drug - trafficking sphere . The report made reference to an individual PERSON , also known as PERSON or “ NORP ” detailing his involvement in unlawful acts in the south - east and his links with MİT ( National Intelligence Organisation ) :

“ ... Whilst the character of PERSON , and the fact that he , along with the group of confessors he gathered around himself , is the perpetrator of offences such as extortion , seizure by force , assault on homes , rape , robbery , murder , torture , kidnap etc . , were known , it is more difficult to explain the collaboration of the public authorities with this individual . It is possible that a respected organisation such as ORG may use a lowly individual ... it is not an acceptable practice that ORG should have used LOC several times ... LOC , who carried out activities in GPE under the name of ORG , in GPE under the name of ORG and used the name PERSON , is an individual whose activities and presence were known both by the police and MİT ... As a result of the ORG ’s silence the field is left open to the gangs ( page CARDINAL ) .

... PERSON was also associated with GPE , an organisation within the gendarmes , which used large numbers of protectors and confessors ( page CARDINAL ) .

In his confession to ORG , ... PERSON ... had stated that PERSON ( page CARDINAL ) would say from time to time that he had planned and procured the murder of PERSON and other partisans from the mafia and the ORG who had been killed in the same way ... The murder of ... PERSON had also been planned and carried out by PERSON ( page CARDINAL ) .

All the relevant ORG bodies were aware of these activities and operations . ... When the characteristics of the individuals killed in the operations in question are examined , the difference between those NORP supporters who were killed in the region in which a state of emergency had been declared and those who were not lay , in the financial strength the latter presented in economic terms . These factors also operated in the murder of PERSON , a smuggler and pro - ORG activist . They equally applied to PERSON , ORG and ORG . The sole disagreement we have with what was done relates to the form of the procedure and its results . It has been established that there was regret at the murder of PERSON , even among those who approved of all the incidents . It is said that PERSON was not involved in any armed action , that he was more concerned with the philosophy of the matter and that the effect created by his murder exceeded his own real influence and that the decision to murder him was a mistake . ( Information about these people is to be found in Appendix CARDINAL ) . Other journalists have also been murdered ( page CARDINAL ) . ”

The report concluded with numerous recommendations , including the improvement of co - ordination and communication between different branches of the security , police and intelligence departments , the identification and dismissal of security force personnel implicated in illegal activities , the limiting of the use of confessors , a reduction in the number of village protectors , the cessation of the use of ORG outside the south - east region and its incorporation into the police outside that area and the opening of investigations into various incidents and steps to suppress gang and drugs smuggling activities . It was recommended that the results of ORG enquiry be forwarded to the appropriate authorities for the relevant proceedings to be undertaken .

NORP In the section of the report concerning the activities of LOC , there were references to unlawful activities , including extortion , kidnapping and murder allegedly involving , amongst others , PERSON and PERSON . This passage is included :

“ By DATE PERSON started introducing himself as the person in charge of the south - eastern region for ORG [ ORG ] . At this stage his relationship with PERSON , chairman of the GPE ORG went bad and around that time PERSON and PERSON took PERSON from the hotel at which he was staying in order to murder him but at a later stage for some unknown reason released him and took a certain amount of money in this fashion from PERSON for the relevant company .

– Specialist sergeant ( PERSON ) code name KURSAD from PERSON , confessor PERSON and confessor PERSON were witnesses to this incident .

– Alaattin GPE , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON , code name PERSON , conspired and murdered PERSON ( member of ORG from Batman ) ...

– PERSON personally planned and carried out the murder of ORG and PERSON . PERSON and ORG collected large sums of money from ORG and the surrounding provinces with ORG headed threatening letters ... This collection of money was made by PERSON and PERSON .

– In DATE by indicating that GPE , who was under arrest in ORG prison in a ORG trial and who was the brother of the proprietor of the “ Sedef Trading Company ” , was transferred to the ORG dormitory , PERSON collected FAC from ORG . They repeated their demand in DATE and upon a refusal to pay the money they murdered PERSON , a partner in the company and this incident surfaced for some unknown reason .

PERSON , the brother of the applicant , was born in DATE . He , PERSON and PERSON ran a business partnership in ORG , running a fertiliser franchise . On DATE , shortly after TIME , a group of CARDINAL people came into the shop , joined TIME by CARDINAL others . His brother PERSON was down by the entrance . The witness , on the mezzanine , saw him talking to the visitors . His brothers PERSON and PERSON were also in the shop .

At first , he thought the visitors were customers . Then , due to the sound of arguing , he realised that they were not and he opened the window of his office and asked what was going on . They said that they had instructions from the public prosecutor in the PERSON court building to take CARDINAL of them there . They did not mention PERSON specifically . When the witness asked why , they said that PERSON was in prison and had not come to make a statement . The witness said that they could not make a statement for their brother . They asked why he was making problems and said that they were security officials . He asked them to show their identity cards . They did not want to do that . He suggested that they go and find some police officers nearby , saying they would go with the police officers . CARDINAL of the men said that he would call on the radio . He walked to the door , talking into the radio in his hand . He later recalled that it was probably ORG who had a radio in his hand . At that point there were CARDINAL men there , who talked , dressed and acted like people from the region . PERSON noticed that CARDINAL of the men was limping but did not see any crutches . The man who left came back in with CARDINAL more people . They looked different and the others deferred to them as if they were in charge . CARDINAL of them was dressed elegantly and neatly , spoke very correct NORP and had a diary in his hand . He was clearly in command , being greeted respectfully like a senior official . The witness did not hear the word “ müdür ” used though .

The CARDINAL men asked why the PERSON brothers were causing difficulties for the CARDINAL men , saying that they were security officials and he should go with them . The PERSON brothers asked them to show their ORG . CARDINAL of the men , who claimed to be a security officer , opened his ORG and closed it . The witness insisted on seeing it properly . The man pushed him to the wall , and said , “ PERSON them . ” The men drew their guns and cocked them . After argument , PERSON said that he would go with the men in order to avoid an incident . They agreed , pulled him into the white Toros car DATE in which they had arrived and took him away . According to his brothers , the seventh man , the one in charge , got into a taxi however . The brothers took the numbers of both cars . The people left in the shop panicked . They called the police emergency number and he himself called the gendarme number . His brothers PERSON and PERSON went out immediately and followed the white ORG in their own car , which was parked outside . He stated that the statements taken by the gendarmes which referred to a lapse of TIME were inaccurate . TIME , the police arrived . They took their statements and said that they would look into it . After they had called their station on their radios , the police said that his brother had been taken to the gendarmerie and not to worry . He also phoned his father PERSON , at his ORG shop and his father went to PERSON to join his brothers . The taxi driver also came back to the shop , saying that he had dropped CARDINAL men off at the gendarmerie .

He heard later that his brothers followed the car as far as the gendarmerie compound , which was at TIME away . The white car went inside . His brothers stopped at the gate . They told an ORG that their brother had been brought inside and wanted to know what was happening . The ORG told them that they were lying . After the village guards had delivered PERSON into the gendarmerie , they came out . The brothers saw them and pointed them out to the gendarmes .

The witness was rung by his brothers who told him they were waiting outside the gendarmerie . The witness went to join them there . They told the gendarmes that they wanted to make a complaint . They were kept waiting until TIME . Finally , the gendarmes told them to write a petition to the public prosecutor ’s office . They wrote a petition and the witness took it to the public prosecutor ’s office . At TIME , the public prosecutor sent them to the police , as he had told the witness that the gendarmes had no authority to detain people in the city without the knowledge of the police . At the police station , they were kept waiting until TIME , when they made their statements . The police said at that point that they had made a mistake in saying that his brother had been taken to the gendarmerie . The witness took their petition from the police and went back to the public prosecutor . The prosecutor said that the people concerned were village guards . As the gendarmes said that the village guards had returned to their villages , he would try to bring them back .

DATE , and over DATE that followed , they went back to the police , the public prosecutor and the gendarmerie . Their father went to GPE , talking to politicians , bureaucrats and many others . On DATE , the witness went to see the ORG provincial governor . The governor said that he was aware of the incident and that they were doing everything in their power to find PERSON . The witness and the family waited anxiously .

When the gendarmes came with CARDINAL suspects to the LOC to reconstruct the incident , he and his brothers pointed out that it was incomplete as the seventh person was missing . TIME , Captain Gül rang to say that a body had been found . They rushed to the morgue and identified it as their brother . He saw the body at the autopsy . There were dark bruises on his head and shoulders and his ankles were swollen and bruised , with a mark as if a cord had been wrapped round them . He did not believe , from the intact state of the body , that it had been left all that time in a river in the open as alleged .

From the beginning , they had insisted that there were CARDINAL persons but there was always excuses as to why he could not be found or denials that he existed . Some - one was always protecting the seventh person . As they considered that all their lives were now in danger , they left ORG . He moved to GPE to continue business there . DATE before the incident , PERSON had been taken into custody but released after being brought before the court . The witness thought the incident had nothing to do with PERSON brother ’s body but was because his family were perceived as being against the ORG . For example , the applicant worked for PERSON and ORG was in prison for helping the ORG . The confessor , PERSON , had also been with ORG in the mountains and maybe knew PERSON when he helped PERSON with an operation with his ear , though that was only a guess .

When the applicant ’s lawyer referred him to the passage in the GPE report , the witness explained that PERSON was a business in a different district and he did not know the partners . Nor did he know PERSON . No threats had been made concerning demands for money . His brother PERSON had been close friends with PERSON , who had disappeared DATE before . His brother had been active in trying to find him .

The witness , born in DATE , was the father of the applicant and PERSON . At the time of events , he and CARDINAL of his sons had a jewellery shop , while PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and PERSON ran the LOC fertiliser franchise , QUANTITY away . He was in his shop when his son was taken away . At TIME , PERSON called him on the phone , saying that PERSON had been abducted . He jumped in a taxi at once and went to the shop . PERSON was there . He said that they had taken PERSON to the gendarmerie , so the witness went there immediately in a taxi . PERSON stayed , waiting for the police . At the gendarmerie , where he arrived at TIME , he saw PERSON and PERSON . They wanted to go inside to report the abduction but the gendarmes said the station was closed until TIME . As they waited by the door , PERSON pointed out CARDINAL of the persons who had been involved , walking around in the courtyard , QUANTITY away . The white car was there also . His sons said the other CARDINAL men involved had left in a car . He was sure that PERSON was in the compound . There was CARDINAL entrance / exit , as the place was inside the ramparts of the old fort . Inside the wide gate , was the gendarmerie on the left and the prosecutor ’s building to the north , with the prison behind .

At TIME , they were allowed into the gendarmerie . The CARDINAL men were still outside in the courtyard . He spoke to an ORG on duty , telling him that his son had been abducted and brought there . He went upstairs to find out and when he returned his attitude had changed and he said , “ Get out . Nothing of the sort happened . ” He then returned to his shop . He was upset and did not notice if the village guards were still there at that point . He contacted a Member of ORG , who called the Minister of ORG and the President for him . The deputy police chief called them that night to re - assure them that nothing would happen to their son . He flew to GPE on DATE , where he talked to CARDINAL MPs , to the Minister for Human Rights and to the Vice President of ORG . The latter talked on the phone to the Minister of the ORG who said that ORG had been found in a military unit and nothing would happen to him .

His son ORG had gone to the mountains , been caught and confessed . The family had told him not to become a confessor because confessors not only admitted their crime but became contra - guerrillas , like PERSON . He suspected that his son ’s decision to leave the ORG wing was a reason for what happened . Also his son PERSON ( the applicant ) had been found guilty of sympathising with the ORG and had fled to GPE , where he worked for the PERSON . There were photographs in the newspaper of the applicant with Öcalan . He had told his son that this put the family in GPE in danger . PERSON was also a close friend of PERSON who had disappeared , after which his son had looked after the father .

In answer to a question by the ORG , he stated that many of his CARDINAL strong family had been arrested or detained . His son PERSON had been arrested and sentenced under LAW , being released in DATE . His son PERSON , ORG ’s wife and his daughter PERSON had been arrested , then released after DATE . He had been told that his daughter PERSON had gone to the mountains . She was detained twice , and on the second occasion acquitted and released . As CARDINAL of his sons was in the mountains , the police were always around , in their shops , harassing them . PERSON had been detained once before , but released after being taken to court .

He had not attended the court proceedings himself as he was afraid . Because of the pressure , they sold their businesses at CARDINAL price and left . He had never been called to give his statement .

NORP The witness born in DATE , was the cousin of PERSON . He was living in DATE at the time of the kidnapping and murder . He described an incident on DATE , when he and his brother PERSON were told to get into a car by armed men . Both of them had run away . He tried to reach a police station but was knocked unconscious , coming round in a room with men in civilian dress . They asked him his connection with the applicant and PERSON , saying that they had killed PERSON and it would be his turn next . He was taken blindfolded to the gendarmerie and tortured , before being released . He had recognised CARDINAL of the men in the car who had shot at him as being a gendarme ORG .

The witness , born in DATE , was a member of the GPE bar . She was representing the family as interveners in the trial of the village guards in ORG . Though she did not attend all the hearings due to the distance and expense for the family , she followed the proceedings and received the documents . The proceedings had been going on so long because of the seventh person and the frequent changes in the bench of judges . Cases usually lasted DATE , including appeals , though political ones lasted a long time .

As regarded the seventh person , her clients had mentioned the involvement of CARDINAL persons in their statements shortly after the incident to the gendarmes . Their statements to the police had apparently been lost . The accused referred to the seventh person for the first time on DATE , describing him as a military person or police officer but without giving his name . She had suspected that their earlier statements to the gendarmes , which were all suspiciously the same , had been given under duress and the seventh person deliberately omitted . The descriptions given were almost identical – an individual MONEY , brown hair , somewhat heavy , with sunglasses who spoke perfect NORP .

The seventh person ’s name had been revealed as PERSON by the GPE report . His address had recently been given to the court in DATE . As officials’ addresses were easily found , the reason for his non - appearance in the proceedings was due to powerful elements deliberately causing the delay or he had his own particular reason not to appear . She thought that ORG had been very negligent in not obtaining his address earlier . The court had failed to accept her request for photographs of personnel to be shown to her clients for the purposes of identification . Though the court made various requests on her application , they did not try very hard in her view . It was a mistake for the court now to summon him as a witness as he has been described as a suspect in the documents for a long time . However , he could only be heard as a suspect if the prosecution drew up an indictment , based on the necessary steps . She considered that there was negligence in that respect .

Her clients had been forced to leave ORG because of threats . She herself was followed when in ORG and threatened openly . She had received no response to her petition to ORG , though the judge , the President of the ORG and the public prosecutor took some initiatives , helping her for a while in getting to the airport . That protection stopped when the bench changed . There were increased threats when the seventh person was mentioned in the proceedings . More recently with the exposure of the situation in the south - east , matters had improved .

She did not believe that the incident was based on ORG personal ideas . It was ludicrous to believe a village guard would go with such a large group and take someone away . It was something more – a scare tactic , CARDINAL of the illegal acts prevalent at that time . Her clients had told her that ORG had been forced to become a confessor under pressure and after a short time had changed his mind . They were afraid that they were being targeted to put pressure on him .

She referred to a medical report that recorded blows and marks on the body which were possibly due to trauma from a hard object . She had also been suspicious about the state of the body , which had not deteriorated as might have been expected if PERSON had been killed when alleged .

The witness , born in DATE , had been a village guard from DATE . He had been wounded in a clash in DATE . The injury had disabled him on the left side . Following an operation in DATE , he had been told to come back to the military hospital in GPE DATE for treatment . He had been walking with crutches until DATE . As village guard , he had gone wherever the ORG had told him . He had a gun . Though his principal duty was to protect the village , he went where he was sent , to take part in clashes elsewhere . That had happened many times . He did not remember if he had helped to detain persons before .

NORP In DATE , he went to ORG as he wanted to go to ORG for medical treatment . He had not been during the DATE as travel was not possible . He did not have a specific appointment . The commander said that he should go with the CARDINAL village guards who were going to ORG and that he should help them apprehend some men to hand over to the station . There was no car to be delivered – the car was not an issue but only mentioned later for something to say . When asked how he could be expected to help if he was still injured , he said that he had to do what he was told and that perhaps it was to show the others where the headquarters were .

NORP When they arrived in GPE , he showed the guards the gendarme headquarters and they saw PERSON . He sent them to the police headquarters . Together with the police , they apprehended CARDINAL men and handed them over to the gendarmes . The witness stayed in the car during the operation . The guards stayed at the headquarters that night . In TIME , PERSON told them to go and bring PERSON . He did not give any reason .

A villager PERSON showed them where the shop was , but did not go into the shop . All CARDINAL village guards entered the shop . He did so on crutches . He did not have a walkie - talkie or a gun , as he could not carry anything . PERSON refused to come , saying that he would only go with the police . PERSON and PERSON went to call the police . They came back with CARDINAL people , who had been outside and who had said that there was no need to call the police . The witness thought that they were the police . They showed their identity cards and took the man . At that point , as it was crowded , he was outside the shop leaning on a tree outside the door . He did not hear what was said inside the shop . The QUANTITY men and CARDINAL of the village guards drew their guns . They left in CARDINAL cars .

When they arrived inside the gendarmerie , the men whom he later knew were the expert sergeant and the confessor PERSON said that they would interrogate PERSON before handing him over . The witness was in the car and could not get out without help . The CARDINAL men called for PERSON , got into the car and the confessor drove out of ORG , stopping at a ruin . He and PERSON stayed by the car . He could hear the men talking with PERSON . GPE helped the witness out of the car . Then , they heard gunshots and the CARDINAL men came back . PERSON was a little way off . The expert sergeant came to the witness and said that he had to admit to killing PERSON or they would kill him . The witness agreed as he was alone and disabled , with hardly any family .

On the way back , the police stopped them . PERSON accelerated away , the police following . When they got back to the gendarmerie , they explained everything and he had to admit to the killing . When he told PERSON that it was his man that did it and he would end up in prison , the Captain said that it was his problem . PERSON kept them detained for TIME , then on release , they went back to ORG with the convoy . From there he returned to the village . As matters had turned out , he had not been taken by the others to the hospital for treatment .

The NORP elder brother had been taken away by the ORG and they had never seen the body since . He did not know who in the ORG killed him . There was no connection between his family and the Avşars . PERSON who had not gone to the mountains would not know where to find his brother .

He had learned PERSON name in prison . PERSON told the guards that the other man was PERSON , an infantry expert sergeant from PERSON in ORG . He gave the name to the court .

NORP The reconstruction had been carried out as the gendarmes wanted . It was not correct that he had taken PERSON arm . They took his crutches away when they took the photographs . The statements taken by the gendarmes had been made up by them . He went to where the body was , with the gendarmes and PERSON . He did not see the body himself , though he saw the gendarmes doing things with blankets and cameras .

NORP The witness , born in DATE , had been a village guard from DATE . As a guard , he protected the village . When they saw persons helping the ORG , the village guards told the ORG and apprehended the suspects with the help of the ORG . They did so in the village , in the surrounding district and as far as ORG , with the knowledge of the ORG . There were no police in GPE at the time and the soldiers did not know the people so the village guards virtually did the police work . Things had changed as the police were there now and there was no work left for the village guards . The guards had walkie - talkies for use at TIME in the villages . He did not have one with him in GPE . He had been to the PERSON gendarmerie quite a few times before in respect of the deaths of various relatives DATE of his brothers and CARDINAL uncles had been shot by the ORG .

The ORG commander sent them to ORG to deliver a car and to help apprehend CARDINAL people whom they knew , as they were from the NORP area . He remembered meeting PERSON outside the police headquarters , who was perhaps there about a licence for a gun . He had known PERSON as he was from Hazro . PERSON had walked with a single crutch .

He referred to his previous statements and court proceedings as regarded other questions . When asked , he stated that the latest of his statements was the one that was DATE the one which mentioned PERSON , and another unidentified man . He did not know if PERSON had killed PERSON . However , he remembered seeing a gun in PERSON hand and a spot of blood on his shoe . Apart from that the statements read out were correct : DATE , CARDINAL DATE , DATE . He was still a village guard .

The witness , born in DATE , referred to his statement in court and stated that he did not wish to say anything more .

He did however answer a few questions . He had become a village guard in ORG in DATE , or maybe DATE . He did not go into the ORG shop , but stayed outside . When they went to ORG , it was the first time he had been asked to do a duty .

The witness had become a village guard in DATE . His duty was to protect the village . There had been a raid on the village by the ORG , following which people gave up resistance and left . As he and others were unable to serve in the village , they went to carry out their duty in ORG .

They had gone to ORG for their own personal needs , not under orders . While there they had seen some people and picked them up , delivering them to the authorities . Whether they had orders or not , they could intervene when they saw wanted people . Sometimes they helped the police pick people up ; other times they acted by themselves and handed the people over . They would conduct searches around ORG on their own initiative . PERSON was a village guard from ORG but he was living in ORG temporarily as his village had been evacuated .

He did not remember whom the car belonged to . PERSON was limping a bit , but he did not recall if he was using crutches . There was probably a walkie - talkie with them . Probably they showed the people in the shop their village guard identity cards . They apprehended CARDINAL men on DATE in ORG and the fourth one DATE . PERSON knew nothing about the incident . PERSON had acted on his own initiative and could not accuse anyone else .

When his statement to the court on DATE was read out , he confirmed that it was correct . He was still a village guard . He referred to losing CARDINAL of his own family to the ORG and to the deaths of CARDINAL village guards in their village . The ORG did not order them to do things : if a crime was committed by the village guards , it was because of the village PERSON own ignorance or personal resentment against other villagers .

The witness had become a village guard in ORG in DATE . The PERSON job was to protect the village . It had been attacked several times by the ORG and his elder brother , an uncle and CARDINAL other villagers had been shot . He was still a village guard .

When asked about events in DATE , he said that he did not want to remember and did not remember .

NORP The witness , born in DATE , was living in ORG in DATE . Prior to this time , he knew only PERSON , though all the other village guards were from his own district , GPE .

On DATE , he was in the GPE café with a woman friend . He left to go to his cousin ’s shop and met PERSON and PERSON by chance . They told him that they were to apprehend a terrorist and hand him over to the ORG . They did not ask him to help them . He went back with them to the shop , as it was in the direction that he was going . He heard one of the people in the shop say that they could not trust the village guards . He asked them how they could take that position , as the men were village guards and would hand PERSON over to the ORG . There was an argument going on as to whether PERSON should go . The people in the shop said that the police should come . Eventually PERSON said that he would go with them to the gendarmerie . CARDINAL used force and there were no security officers present . At this time , he was at the door , waiting for GPE . He never went inside , only talking to a young man whom he later knew to be a relative from by the door . He was not carrying a gun .

He got into a car with GPE and was dropped off at the main post office area , from where he went to his relatives’ home . The post office was QUANTITY away . It was not in the direction of his relatives’ home . PERSON was in another car with the other guards . He knew nothing about what happened until he was taken into custody later by the gendarmes . He got into the car as he thought PERSON family might think he was CARDINAL of them and react against him .

He had been in the ORG for DATE and when he was in custody he had given evidence on a few occasions . He had benefited from the remorse law by confessing to the ORG everything that he knew . He had been given no other duties , official or unofficial . He was just a citizen . In DATE , he had no job .

When he was told that persons said that he had claimed to be a security officer with another man who had authority , he stated that he had been the victim of frame - up theories for DATE . He had seen no person acting as if they were in charge of the village guards . At another point he said that he could not say if any such person was there as he did not know anyone but PERSON and there was a group of people , CARDINAL or CARDINAL in addition to the village guards .

PERSON had no difficulty in walking or other functions at this time . He carried a small pistol . He was of the opinion that the whole incident was caused by PERSON using his own friends to carry out a murder for personal revenge . PERSON had been the leader of a ORG group which had killed ORG elder brother by melting plastic over him . He had heard about the incident when he was in prison with other confessors . PERSON had taken on a kind of blood feud . The witness had been in GPE ORG group for DATE and they had carried out activities together .

DATE before the incident , he had cut his hand , punching it through glass . The plaster had come off DATE before but he could not use his hand e.g. to pick up cigarettes or to turn a car ignition or to drive .

When asked why PERSON relatives would insist that he was involved with another person , he claimed that the relatives had not been able to point him out at the identity parade . His photograph had been in the newspaper and he was always accused of being mixed up in incidents . At the reconstruction , sergeant PERSON put a gun in his hand and made him under duress play the part of the person taking PERSON away .

He did not meet PERSON on DATE of the incident . He only saw him when he was taken into custody . He knew him from before though , when he was interrogated for terrorist offences .

He knew ORG . They had been together in prison for DATE . They had had a friendly and respectful relationship . In prison though , there was no choice as to whom you were confined with .

The witness , born in DATE , was assistant commander at the ORG provincial gendarme command in DATE . He was given a team by the commander with orders to conduct an investigation jointly with Captain Gül , into the killing of PERSON . This was a normal part of his duties , carrying out investigations as the commander considered appropriate . PERSON was not his subordinate but was attached directly to the provincial commander .

He did not remember many details of the investigation . He had taken statements of some relatives . He did not know anyone called PERSON . Neither had he heard the name PERSON . After a short time , he was assigned elsewhere and PERSON continued without him . He was not involved in any line of investigation concerning any alleged involvement of the security forces in the killing . He recalled CARDINAL of the guards was disabled and it had crossed his mind how he could have been involved .

From his experience of DATE , he stated that village guards were appointed by the provincial governor on approval of the district governor and the security forces . The ORG paid them and supplied them with pistols and long - barrelled weapons . Their duty was to provide security to the place where they were registered , namely within the territory of their village . They were given walkie - talkies when the need arose . They had special identity cards from the governor . They took orders from the muhtar . He denied that the muhtar would take orders from the gendarmerie , or that the gendarmerie would give orders to village guards . Village guards were not used for any purpose other than protecting their own village . It was not possible to use them for taking persons into custody . He did not recall why the village guards in this case had come into ORG . He confirmed that it would be unlawful for the ORG gendarme commander to order the village guards to go to ORG to apprehend suspects .

NORP The witness , born in DATE , was in DATE commander of the ORG provincial central district gendarmerie , in charge of the PERSON headquarters as well as the stations within the administrative limits of the central district , outside the municipal limits . He left that post in DATE . Village guards used to come from the province and districts and always called at PERSON . It was a sort of meeting centre for them and they had guest houses at the regiment . At another point , he said that the guest house was by the courthouse . He could have met the CARDINAL village guards before the investigation , but could not remember . He might have sent them on to the police when told about their instructions . PERSON had custody facilities , used for persons detained within their jurisdiction .

As regarded the CARDINAL village guards’ involvement in apprehending persons in ORG , he had given no such orders . Orders might have been issued by the ORG command to which they were attached . However , village guards were not authorised to take people into custody on their own . They only helped law enforcement officers , by informing them about wanted persons and assisting in their detention . Though their primary function was to protect their villages , they were regularly given anti - terrorist missions in other areas e.g. in operations or in assisting in apprehension . The village guards in this case were working with the police as far as he could remember . He agreed that he would have to be informed if village guards had been sent to his jurisdiction to take persons into custody . However the men concerned in this case were not in his jurisdiction . If the village guards had come to the guest house , they would certainly have reported to the gendarmes . He had not been in touch with the NORP gendarme commander about the persons to be detained in his gendarmerie , though information would have been sent when they had been taken into custody . The custody record , if the persons were in the custody room and not merely waiting TIME for the convoy , would record that event .

He knew PERSON , who had left the ORG . He would have co - operated with the police or other units in giving information and providing support in that connection .

He first learned about PERSON abduction when the public prosecutor referred the petition of the family . He did not know if PERSON was under surveillance or observation but his family might be directly or indirectly involved in terrorism . They were from ORG and were known to have organic connections with terrorism . He was appointed by the provincial commander to conduct the investigation with Colonel PERSON . Most of the questioning however was done by him and his team . After DATE , the investigation was complete , and they sent the file to the public prosecutor . That was the end of his role .

According to his recollection , the real key to the incident was a personal conflict between PERSON and the PERSON family , members of whom were in the ORG and whom he considered had killed his brother . As regarded the alleged seventh person , they had found no indication or sign of the person in the investigation – there were contradictions in the descriptions given anyway . According to their enquiries , there was no such person in the security forces or police . He did not know anyone called PERSON . PERSON was entirely an army unit .

He recalled that PERSON was slightly disabled but did not notice crutches . Nor would his condition have prevented him from using a gun . He would never have given the instruction to detain PERSON as it was outside his jurisdiction in the municipal area and the village guards were not attached to his command . There had been no duress during the reconstruction and the family and the village guards had not had any objections to what was done .

The gendarmes had carried out the investigation as the village guards were involved , guards being under the command of the gendarmerie , and because they had said that they were taking PERSON to the gendarmerie . Though the victim had been abducted within police jurisdiction , he had been taken within gendarmerie jurisdiction and they took over the entirety of the investigation for consistency , aided by the police .

The checkpoint for the PERSON gendarmerie was by the Lion Fountain . The fountain itself was open to the public . The checkpoint did not affect persons going past the gendarmerie to the court building . It would have been impossible for the village guards and PERSON to have entered without being checked . The allegation that he was brought to the gendarmerie was false . He could have been brought to the courthouse without their knowing . In his view , the family were exploiting the abduction of their son on behalf of the ORG . It was a case of ordinary homicide and PERSON had changed his story to save his skin . Any involvement of the security forces was out of the question and could never have happened .

The witness , born in DATE , was acting at the relevant time as intelligence operations ORG at the PERSON gendarme headquarters in GPE , under the command of Captain Gül . He had been in the team investigating the PERSON incident .

The descriptions of the alleged seventh man had been contradictory , about height etc . Nothing was clear . At another point , the witness said that , as PERSON alone had done the killing , they left matters there . They had tried to find the taxi driver who drove from the scene without success . It was normal for village guards to give information about suspects to their commanders and then be sent to give the information to the relevant authorities in the city and show where the persons were if necessary . They could not act to detain on their own .

The guards and PERSON had raised no objections to the reconstruction . If so , they would have been recorded . He did not remember if they tried to find the NCO Okan identified by the relatives .

He stated that he had never heard of anything called GPE . He had no information before the incident about the PERSON family or whether they were involved with the ORG .

The witness , born in DATE , had been public prosecutor in the trial concerning the killing of PERSON since DATE to date .

NORP The prosecution view was that PERSON killed PERSON and the others were accessories . PERSON had given information in DATE about a man PERSON . The court had little information about him and enquiries with ORG showed CARDINAL by that name had worked in the region . Defendants often used to make up names to save themselves from conviction . Later , it was established that an expert sergeant PERSON in fact existed and lived near PERSON . Letters rogatory had been issued . He was currently a witness , not a suspect .

Much of the delay in the proceedings was due to the lack of a presiding judge for a long time , and the fact that the court was presided over by temporary presidents . There were changes in the bench . The length in this case was exceptional .

He confirmed that the prosecution had consistently taken the view that the village guards were in ORG to search for and apprehend CARDINAL men wanted for interrogation . There had never been any question of PERSON being the seventh person . He had had doubts about the alleged desire of PERSON to find out information about his brother ’s body , which would be difficult after that length of time . It was probably only a pretext for taking him away to kill him in a premeditated way .

The witness , born in DATE , was involved in the ORG investigation up to the transfer of the case to the court , where it was taken up by another colleague . He had prepared the indictment . He recalled no allegation about a seventh person being made by that time . He did not recall why the gendarmerie were carrying out the investigation , even though the abduction had taken place in police jurisdiction . As far as he could remember the body was found outside police jurisdiction .

LAW makes it a criminal offence :

– to deprive an individual unlawfully of his or her liberty ( LAW generally , LAW servants ) ;

– to issue threats ( LAW ) ;

– to subject an individual to torture or ill - treatment ( Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) ;

– to commit unintentional homicide ( Articles CARDINAL and CARDINAL ) , intentional homicide ( Article CARDINAL ) and murder ( Article CARDINAL ) .

NORP The authorities’ obligations in respect of conducting a preliminary investigation into acts or omissions capable of constituting such offences that have been brought to their attention are governed by LAW Offences may be reported to the authorities or the security forces as well as to public prosecutor ’s offices . The complaint may be made in writing or orally . If it is made orally , the authority must make a record of it ( LAW .

If there is evidence to suggest that a death is not due to natural causes , members of the security forces who have been informed of that fact are required to advise the public prosecutor or a criminal court judge ( Article CARDINAL ) . By Article CARDINAL of LAW , any public official who fails to report to the police or a public prosecutor ’s office an offence of which he has become aware in the exercise of his duty is liable to imprisonment .

A public prosecutor who is informed by any means whatsoever of a situation that gives rise to the suspicion that an offence has been committed is obliged to investigate the facts in order to decide whether or not there should be a prosecution ( LAW ) .

In the case of alleged terrorist offences , the public prosecutor is deprived of jurisdiction in favour of a separate system of ORG prosecutors and courts established throughout GPE .

ORG If the suspected offender is a civil servant and if the offence was committed during the performance of his duties , the preliminary investigation of the case is governed by LAW on the prosecution of civil servants , which restricts the public prosecutor ’s jurisdiction ratione personae at that stage of the proceedings . In such cases it is for the relevant local administrative council ( for the district or province , depending on the suspect ’s status ) to conduct the preliminary investigation and , consequently , to decide whether to prosecute . Once a decision to prosecute has been taken , it is for the public prosecutor to investigate the case .

An appeal to ORG lies against a decision of the ORG . If a decision not to prosecute is taken , the case is automatically referred to that court .

By virtue of DATE , paragraph ( i ) , of Legislative Decree no . CARDINAL of DATE on the authority of the governor of a state of emergency region , the DATE PERSON ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) also applies to members of the security forces who come under the governor ’s authority .

If the suspect is a member of the armed forces , the applicable law is determined by the nature of the offence . Thus , if it is a “ military offence ” under LAW ( Law no . CARDINAL ) , the criminal proceedings are in principle conducted in accordance with PERSON no . CARDINAL on the establishment of courts martial and their rules of procedure . Where a member of the armed forces has been accused of an ordinary offence , it is normally the provisions of LAW which apply ( see LAW and sections CARDINAL to CARDINAL of Law no . CARDINAL ) .

The Military Criminal Code makes it a military offence for a member of the armed forces to endanger a person ’s life by disobeying an order ( LAW ) . In such cases civilian complainants may lodge their complaints with the authorities referred to in LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) or with the offender ’s superior .

NORP Under LAW of PERSON no . CARDINAL on administrative procedure , anyone who sustains damage as a result of an act by the authorities may , within DATE after the alleged act was committed , claim compensation from them . If the claim is rejected in whole or in part or if no reply is received within DATE , the victim may bring administrative proceedings .

Article CARDINAL § § CARDINAL and CARDINAL of the LAW provides :

“ All acts or decisions of the authorities are subject to judicial review ...

The authorities shall be liable to make reparation for all damage caused by their acts or measures . ”

That provision establishes the ORG ’s strict liability , which comes into play if it is shown that in the circumstances of a particular case the ORG has failed in its obligation to maintain public order , ensure public safety or protect people ’s lives or property , without it being necessary to show a tortious act attributable to the authorities . Under these rules , the authorities may therefore be held liable to compensate anyone who has sustained loss as a result of acts committed by unidentified persons .

DATE of Legislative Decree no . CARDINAL of DATE , the last sentence of which was inspired by the provision mentioned above ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , provides :

“ No criminal , financial or legal liability may be asserted against ... the governor of a state of emergency region or by provincial governors in that region in respect of decisions taken , or acts performed , by them in the exercise of the powers conferred on them by this legislative decree , and no application shall be made to any judicial authority to that end . This is without prejudice to the rights of individuals to claim reparation from the ORG for damage which they have been caused without justification . ”

NORP Under LAW , anyone who suffers damage as a result of an illegal or tortious act may bring an action for damages ( Articles CARDINAL to CARDINAL ) and non - pecuniary loss ( Article CARDINAL ) . The civil courts are not bound by either the findings or the verdict of the criminal court on the issue of the defendant ’s guilt ( Article CARDINAL ) .

However , under LAW no . CARDINAL on ORG employees , anyone who has sustained loss as a result of an act done in the performance of duties governed by public law may , in principle , only bring an action against the authority by whom the civil servant concerned is employed and not directly against the civil servant ( see LAW ) . That is not , however , an absolute rule . When an act is found to be illegal or tortious and , consequently , is no longer an “ administrative act ” or deed , the civil courts may allow a claim for damages to be made against the official concerned , without prejudice to the victim ’s right to bring an action against the authority on the basis of its joint liability as the official ’s employer ( LAW ) .

Chapter CARDINAL of GPE no . CARDINAL ) concerns village guards and their duties . The role of village guards is to protect the life , honour and property of the people within the boundaries of the village ( DATE ) . There is to be CARDINAL in every village , with CARDINAL per CARDINAL population in villages of CARDINAL ( LAW ) . They are to be recruited by ORG and take up their duties on approval by the district governor ( Article CARDINAL ) . Guards must be between the ages of CARDINAL and DATE , have no previous criminal conviction , have a good reputation and have no bad habits such as drunkenness or a tendency to quarrel with others ( Article CARDINAL ) . They carry out the orders of the muhtar ( Article CARDINAL ) and carry weapons , resistance to them to be punished in the same way as resistance to gendarmes ( Article CARDINAL ) .

Provision is made for the recruitment of volunteer guards in times of raiding and pillaging , extended by an amendment of PERSON no . ORG dated DATE ) to cover circumstances disclosing a state of emergency or other serious acts of violence . The provincial governor , with the approval of the Minister of the ORG , may establish the appropriate number of guards to be recruited , who are paid salaries , aids and indemnities for service by ORG ( Article CARDINAL ) . The weapons and ammunition of village guards are provided to ORG by the authorities ( Article CARDINAL ) and the weapon given to a guard can be used only by that person ( Article CARDINAL ) .

Guards are allowed to use their weapons to protect themselves against attack , to protect the life of another person when no other solution is possible , if they encounter armed resistance while trying to apprehend a murderer or any other person caught in the act of committing an offence or fleeing the scene of the offence , where the apprehended person flees , disregards the “ stop warning ” and there is no other possibility than to resort to the use of weapons ; and where during a chase to capture brigands a suspect appears in the area where the brigands are sheltering and does not respect the “ stop warning ” given by the guard . In any other circumstances , the guards shall be punished for using their weapons . Even where the use of weapons is justified , the guards should as far as possible seek to wound , rather than kill , the suspects ( Article CARDINAL ) .

Village guards are required always to carry the village guard ORG issued to them ( Article CARDINAL ) . On death , resignation or dismissal , the guard ’s weapon , ORG , papers , badges etc are to be handed over to the muhtar ( Article CARDINAL ) . Provision are made for disciplinary punishment ( caution , reprimand , dismissal ) of guards neglecting their duties or engaging in prohibited activities e.g. absence without leave , taking improper advantage of the LOC , orchards or farmlands guarded by them , failing to carry their badge , uniform , weapons or exchanging them ( Articles DATE ) . Village guards who lose negligently or allow others to take their weapons or ammunition are to be discharged ( Article CARDINAL ) .

Regulations concerning temporary village guards were drawn up under sections CARDINAL and CARDINAL of GPE Law no . CARDINAL ) and came into force on CARDINAL DATE to establish the principles and procedures relating to temporary village guard ’s appointments , training , duties and responsibilities , the areas within which they shall perform their duties as well as their occupational rights and their dismissal from duty .

Conditions for appointment as a temporary village guard include : that the person be of NORP nationality , has completed military service , has no conviction for an infamous crime or inciting hatred or enmity ( Article CARDINAL paragraph QUANTITY of the ORG ) , has no involvement in separatist or anti - State activities or blood feuds , is a native and resident of the village where he are performs his duties and has no physical or mental illness or disability that prevents him from performing his duties ( section CARDINAL ) . Candidates have to apply in writing to the district or provincial governor , with copies of various documents ( section CARDINAL) . The application is referred to the district gendarme command , which opens a file on each application and investigates from its own records and other official sources . The collected information and the district gendarme commander ’s comments are returned to the district governor and the candidates selected by him as suitable are submitted to the provincial governor for approval . The provincial governor issues the order of appointment . ( section CARDINAL ) . On appointment , the village guards are summoned to the district gendarme command to take up their duties and receive their weapons , ammunition , clothes , identity cards and other items ( section CARDINAL ) .

Pursuant to section CARDINAL , the area within which the village guards carry out their duties is the area within the boundaries of the village . However a village guard can pursue beyond the boundaries a person who has committed an offence within the village and the provincial or district governor can extend the area covered by the village guard beyond the village boundaries . The area of a village guard carrying out his duties along with the law and order forces , including tracking , chasing , collecting information and guiding such forces , was to be the area covered by that law and order force .

Pursuant to section CARDINAL , the duties of the village guards are as follows :

– to identify , pass information to the gendarme command about , prevent the escape of and capture , persons who committed or attempted to commit , acts of assault , theft , violations of honour , sabotage , abduction , armed attacks , arson ;

– to take steps to preserve evidence of incidents requiring judicial procedures ;

– to report natural disasters ;

– to investigate the activities of , and collect information concerning , convicted persons and their relatives , and to report to the gendarmerie any information about offences ;

– to learn the names of any strangers in the area and to enquire into the reasons for their presence , finding out the names of the persons with whom they are staying ;

– to identify villagers or strangers spreading false reports or news aimed at disturbing the peace , or disseminating separatist propaganda ;

– to take measures to prevent attacks on , inter alia , roads , bridges , energy transmission lines , railways , pipelines , dams and to assist the general and special law and order forces in protection of such facilities ;

– to keep watch on whether derelict or remote houses in the village area are being used as shelters by fugitives , criminals or wanted persons ;

– to report at least once DATE to the gendarme station with jurisdiction for the village to obtain instructions from the commander with regard to their tasks ; to report , on being called to the gendarme station with their weapons with all promptness ; to place themselves at the disposal of the gendarmerie or authorised military unit to carry out checks , or searches , or to track and capture fugitives from justice .

While carrying out their duties , they must use their weapons subject to LAW . When carrying out their duties along with military or law - and - order forces , the village guards , under the command of those units , have the same powers and responsibilities as those entrusted to that unit . They are authorised to use force to apprehend and to overpower those carrying out an attack or attempting an attack . ( section CARDINAL ) . Guards are accountable administratively to the village muhtar and subject to his supervision . Occupationally , guards are under the command of the gendarme commander for the area covering their village and the district commander is responsible for training , ensuring village guards perform their duties effectively and supervising them ( section CARDINAL ) .

On request of the district gendarme commander , the district governor may issue a warning to a guard who fails to carry out his duties or to maintain his equipment ; he can stop pay CARDINAL to CARDINAL days’ pay where a guard has been absent without leave for DATE , disclosed confidential information or reported untrue facts ( section CARDINAL ) . Guards may be dismissed , on approval by the provincial governor , for absence of DATE without leave ; recurrence of the acts under LAW ; failure to take part in a mission when summoned by the district gendarme commander ; hiding fugitives or wanted persons or failing to report their location ; making improper use of , losing or allowing the seizure of , weapons and ammunition or other tools or equipment issued to them . ( section CARDINAL ) .

On taking up their duties , the guards undertake a DATE compulsory training course by the district gendarme commander , and receive CARDINAL days’ training once DATE ( section CARDINAL ) . Guards must present their weapons and ammunition for inspection by the gendarmerie at least once a DATE ( section CARDINAL ) .