Judicial decision on wiretapping shakes judiciary

Turkey has found itself faced with one of the largest wiretapping scandals in its history. It was revealed Thursday that Istanbul Chief Prosecutor Aykut Cengiz Engin and the Supreme Court of Appeals switchboard have been wiretapped, along with several other judges and prosecutors, within the scope of Ergenekon investigation.

The country’s agenda was shaken Thursday when it was revealed that Engin, under whom all prosecutors of the Ergenekon case are working, and the Supreme Court of Appeals’ switchboard have been tapped since November 2008 as part of the Ergenekon case, which is an investigation into an alleged gang accused of aiming to topple the government by creating turmoil in society.

It was revealed that the 11th Istanbul High Criminal Court tapped both Engin and the Supreme Court of Appeals upon an order from the Justice Ministry Inspection Committee. The truth about Engin being tapped was revealed when the Justice Ministry Inspection Committee sent a letter to the court to ask for a three-month extension for the tap on Engin.

The truth about the Supreme Court of Appeals being tapped was revealed when the First High Criminal Court in Ankara’s Sincan district sent a report prepared as a result of an examination of the records of the Telecommunications Directorate, which is responsible for conducting wiretaps, to the Supreme Court of Appeals upon its request.

Osman Kaçmaz, chief judge of the First High Criminal Court in Sincan, had recently handed down a decision demanding an examination of the Telecommunications Directorate’s records to determine whether Ömer Faruk Eminağaoğlu, chairman of the Judges and Prosecutors Association, or YARSAV, was illegally tapped by the body. The Justice Ministry later demanded the dismissal of both Eminağaoğlu and Kaçmaz, who previously ruled that President Abdullah Gül should be tried in the “missing trillion” case.

Judiciary wiretaps judiciary

In its letter to the 11th Istanbul High Criminal Court, the Justice Ministry asked the court to wiretap Kaçmaz, Eminağaoğlu and Engin, saying that it was necessary to tap Engin and other judicial members (Kaçmaz and Eminağaoğlu) to clarify whether they had links to the suspects in the Ergenekon case.

Following developments, Engin met with other Ergenekon prosecutors in Istanbul on Thursday to learn more about the process. Speaking to the media after the meeting, Engin said he will demand information from the ministry about the recent developments and that he will use his legal rights if necessary.

Also speaking to the media on Thursday, Hasan Gerçeker, president of the Supreme Court of Appeals, said they were investigating the issue and that they had requested the necessary information on the issue from the related institutions. “We will pursue the issue if such a wiretapping decision for our body exists. Any wiretapping decision is subject to the permission of the Supreme Court of Appeals itself. Without its decision, it is impossible to wiretap the Supreme Court of Appeals. We will do what we have to do after the information reaches us,” Gerçeker said.

Later on the same day, the Supreme Court of Appeals announced it launched a preliminary investigation in line with the report sent by the First High Criminal Court in Sincan.

Also late on Thursday, the Supreme Board of Prosecutors and Judges, or HSYK, convened to evaluate the recent developments. Speaking to the media after the meeting, acting president of HSYK, Kadir Özbek, said any ministerial decision demanding wiretapping was subject to the permission and supervision of the Supreme Court of Appeals, but the recent developments showed that wiretapping was being conducted without permission from the court.

'Judiciary defends itself'

“The judiciary has turned into an institution that is trying to defend itself, which is a very problematic situation,” Özbek said. “The decisions on wiretaps should not be made by the Justice Ministry’s chief inspectors. Wiretapping should be made in line with the law. We will pursue the issue.”

Meanwhile, Chief Judge Kaçmaz on Thursday demanded a more comprehensive examination of the Telecommunication Directorate’s records arguing that the first examination couldn’t be fully conducted because of the opposition of the directorate.

The directorate held a press conference late Thursday and refuted the allegations. The president of the directorate, Fethi Şimşek, said the directorate did not wiretap the Supreme Court of Appeals or the YARSAV. He said the directorate could not wiretap the court because of technical peculiarities of the court’s switchboard, implying that there was an order for the wiretap from the Justice Ministry.