Mustafa Koçak, a political prisoner in Turkey, has died after a 297-day death fast for a fair trial. Last July, a court in Istanbul sentenced Koçak to an aggravated life sentence plus 39 years imprisonment for allegedly having procured the weapons for the hostage-taking from the Istanbul Palace of Justice on 31 March 2015 as an alleged member of the "Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front" (DHKP-C). The charge was based exclusively on the false statements of former DHKP-C member Berk Ercan, who hoped to obtain impunity by means of contradictory accusations. There was no evidence of Mustafa Koçak's complicity in the hostage-taking case. His lawyer Ezgi Çakır spoke to ANF about the events.

Your client died on a death fast. What made him choose this form of protest?

Mustafa Koçak became a defendant without any evidence due to the testimony of a key witness in a trial for the killing of a public prosecutor, through which the state tried to regain its prestige. Mustafa was wanted to feel the full fury of the state through this frame-up. As Mustafa himself said, he refused to become the scapegoat of the state. Bertolt Brecht said: Where right becomes wrong, resistance becomes a duty. Mustafa also felt this duty to resist.

Mustafa Koçak was arrested on 23 September 2017 on the basis of Berk Ercan's statement. He was tortured for twelve days in the political department of the Istanbul police. His sisters were threatened with rape and he was wanted to be forced to sign false statements about three people. Mustafa Koçak resisted the torture and did not give in. He was imprisoned on 4 October 2017.

How did his trial go?

When the trial began at the 27th Heavy Penal Court in Istanbul, exculpatory evidence for my client was ignored, but anything that could be interpreted negatively, whether it had anything to do with the trial or not, was included in the case file. The second key witness, Cavit Yılmaz, reported on the torture, threats and prohibited interrogation techniques he had suffered and retracted his statements. He said he had been forced to do so by MIT, the public prosecutor's office and the police. The court dismissed his request to be re-listened to.

The court was biased at all times and made clear from the outset its intention to punish my client. His right to a defense was violated and he was convicted without being heard on the merits. The treatment of my client after his arrest, the trial and the punishment are contrary to the basic principles of Turkish criminal law.

Mustafa did not accept this injustice. He demanded the reopening of the trial, the determination of his torture, the conviction of the torturers and the rehearing of the key witness Cavit Yılmaz. For this he went on hunger strike. He demanded justice.

Was it possible to present any concrete evidence? On what did the court base its verdict on?

There is no concrete, objective evidence in the court file, only the testimony of a key witness. Berk Ercan gave false testimony against 344 people. He was caught with heavy weapons himself and tried to escape punishment. The second key witness Cavit Yılmaz made his statements under torture and retracted them. The statements of a witness cannot be used as a basis for a judgement. Berk Ercan was heard as "secret witness". How can a verdict be based on the testimony of a secret witness alone? Mustafa was sentenced without any evidence.

There is no justice in this legal system. It is about fascist enemy law. A justice system which serves fascist ideology can’t provide justice and leads society into chaos. We can see that today. Mustafa was murdered by Turkish justice and political power.

On the 254th day, it was said that Mustafa Koçak's death fast was violently interrupted. Does this intervention play a role in his death?

Mustafa Koçak was force-fed on the 254th day of his death fast. He was tied hand and foot. Seventy-three of his veins burst. He was maltreated with a stick. He was threatened and insulted. Mustafa opposed this violence with the same conviction and continued his resistance. The forensic medicine institute also confirmed this. Yes, force-feeding played a role in Mustafa's death.

When was the last time you saw him and how was he then?

I last saw him after he was force-fed and tortured. Before that, he could walk, but after that, he wasn't able to. His body was covered with bruises. But he remained convinced and determined. Afterwards, under the pretext of the Coronavirus pandemic, we were denied access to our client. The last time a colleague was able to visit him was ten days ago after great efforts. His condition was extremely bad. He should have been discharged, but the discharge report was postponed.

In your opinion, was Mustafa Koçak adequately supported?

Mustafa Koçak was killed by this unfair trial, the fascist judiciary and the ignorance of the public. Many stayed away out of fear. So why are Members of Parliament being granted immunity? They ignored how a 28-year-old young man, who alone demanded a fair trial, die before their very eyes. They turned a blind eye to his murder by the political powers. Apart from the free press and the deputies of the HDP, no one has dealt with this situation. Those who remained silent have protected those responsible for this injustice.

Those who did not hear Mustafa's call for justice can now stand up for the hunger strikers Ibrahim Gökçek of Grup Yorum and lawyers Ebru Timtik and Aytaç Ünsal and our clients Özgür Karakaya and Didem Akman. They must support the legitimate demands of these people. It is not a question of whether or not to support the death fast as a form of action, they have to stand at the side of the peoples who resist and make history.

RELATED NEWS: