Türkiye'nin en iyi köşe yazarları en güzel köşe yazıları ile Hürriyet'te! Usta yazarlar ve gündemi değerlendiren köşe yazılarını takip edin.

Military cannot trust civil judgment

Fikret Bila’s headline story in the daily Milliyet on Sunday reminded us of a painful truth. Bila, in his article, revealed reasons for the General Staff’s objection to military personnel under certain circumstances being tried before a civil court. The General Staff sent these valid objections to the president. Gül, who has consulted the government, will either today or tomorrow make a decision about the bill.

But what a pity that this change in law, baring a revolutionary value, was made hastily, which has caused an adverse reaction in public. It was perceived as if it was planned to hit the Turkish Armed Forces, or TSK, below the belt.

If only it would have gone through the normal procedure.

If it would have passed commissions or would have asked for different views and then became legitimate, then there wouldn’t have been an increase in mistrust between the TSK and the government.

If the change in law is realized without any drawbacks it would be a revolution. For now it is an unfinished deed. Why does the AKP persist on immunity? Because it does not trust the jurisdiction and is afraid prosecutors will take action based on nonsensical and political reasons.

Among the reasoning of the General Staff, the one that gives me a headache the most is the part when it says that trying military personnel before a civil court means "politics will enter the military."

The reasoning put forth and AKP’s resistance on the subject of immunity for congressmen is based on almost the same concern. The AKP first was very sensitive about immunity.

It came to power saying that immunity in the case of crimes like embezzlement, abuse and insult should be lifted.

Then it changed...

The reason is because they don’t trust the judiciary. The AKP got scared because prosecutors have adopted a habit of passing the ball to the courts without examining even simple cases carefully or sufficiently.

And they are not wrong in being scared. In a country this solidified in opposition and where personal vendetta is perceived as "politics," prosecutors unfortunately cannot perform their duty of only filtering important things.

Military's objection

You can rest assured that as soon as immunity is lifted a hunt for congressmen based on political reasons, lies or even conspiracy games will boom and every application will be passed on to courts before they are pre-examined.

As long as our prosecutors are not properly trained and required to pre-examine, to play the role of the filter, then nobody can lift immunity.

It’s a pity that disbelief in justice is this widespread. The military’s objection is based on the same reason. The military worries that civil prosecutors will accept each case coming before them whether it be bad intentions or based on conspiracy. The content of the basic approach in the military objection to the bill is similar to the AKP approach: Disbelief in justiceÉ

This is a valid objection.

I’m thinking about what will happen and I agree with the General Staff.

Some person who gets mad at the military, or whose benefits are destroyed, or who wants to take revenge against the TSK would, with insufficient data, apply to the prosecutors. And if today’s administration persists, each application will be passed to the courts.

To that we need to add the Chief of General Staff. And the Chief of General Staff Ñ if no precaution is taken Ñ will be open to the justice trap. If looked upon in this way, we have no choice but to veto Gül’s civil court bill.

It is only natural that the president wants to add buffers to a bill that could create such deep issues before confirming it in order to prevent attempts of bad intention.

But what we need to underscore here is the justice reform. As long as justice reform cannot be realized and this country is not placed on stable ground, artificial precautions won’t do any good.

As long as all people, institutions and politicians are managed according to their view, then we cannot reorganize the state. The European Union does not say "you need to realize a justice reform" for nothing. They already see what we long to see.

The rest is just verbiage.