HDP Co-Chairs Buldan and Sancar meet lawyers against the closure case

The Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) co-chairs met lawyers to address the closure case and stated that they are strong enough to repel the attacks of the AKP-MHP government.

The Asrın Law Office, Association of Lawyers for Freedom (ÖHD), former judge of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) Rıza Türmen, and lawyers the of politicians who are tried in the Kobani Case attended the meeting organized by the HDP Law and Human Rights Commission in Istanbul. Lawyer Reyhan Yalçındağ, Deputy Chairman of the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), lawyer Turgut Kazan and some other lawyers attended the meeting online.

A HISTORIC CASE

Speaking here, HDP Co-Chair Pervin Buldan stressed the importance of the meeting in the current period.

“We attach importance to this meeting at the time of a closure case and attacks. We are going through a difficult and painful time. It should be noted that this is a historic case. I would like to state that your suggestions and evaluations will contribute to us in this historic case. The closure case will do no good to Turkey’s democracy and its future. This case is a political one, but we know that much can be done legally. We will discuss what we can do together.”

THEY ARE BLACKMAILING SOCIETY

Speaking after, HDP Co-Chair Mithat Sancar said that:

“The closure case against the HDP is a political case; we know this. The international jurisdiction has repeatedly said that none of the judicial operations carried out against the HDP are legal. The spokespersons of the government, and especially its junior partner, have expressed their demand to close our party. The government has conducted a political campaign and blackmailed the society.”

“The Constitutional Court (AYM) unanimously decided to returned the indictment in its first examination. It thus made a right decision since the indictment was a fabrication.

The reasons and ‘evidence’ used by the Supreme Court of Appeals Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office cannot present a convincing argument to shut down our party. It is not possible to prepare an indictment accusing the HDP of separatism and violence. HDP is the party that resolutely advocates living in peace and democracy in Turkey.”

‘PROSECUTOR FABRICATES EVIDENCE’

Sancar continued, “It is not possible for the prosecutor to find evidence. The evidence and justifications fabricated by the prosecutor should not convince anyone. The Constitutional Court should have rejected this indictment for the second time. Had it done so, it would have used a historic opportunity. It did not do so and consequently missed a historic opportunity. This case is not just a case brought against the HDP, it is a case against peace and freedom in Turkey. We want to carry out this legal process together with all democratic forces. This is the purpose of our meeting.

‘WE HAVE STRENGTH; LET’S PUSH BACK ATTACKS’

We had our first meeting in Dersim three days ago. There, we met Alevi representatives and opinion leaders from all over Turkey. We talked to them about the closure case. We stated there that we want to carry out both the trial and the process to follow together with our people. Thus, we want to fight together and repel the attacks on democracy in Turkey. We trust we are capable of this. We need a common struggle, a joint struggle of the democratic forces in order to stop and remove this corrupt order. The main prosecutor of this case is the government, and the lawyer of this case is the people themselves.

We do not have the slightest hesitation or doubt that we cannot achieve this. We are also determined to carry out the legal struggle in the strongest way possible. The indictment may be garbage; however, our defence will not be against this indictment. It is not difficult to refute this indictment. We want to conduct our defence in the strongest way during the trial. Because the defence we will introduce should be one of the basic documents of the struggle for democracy through law in Turkey. We will prepare that document together and record it in history. That document will be a legacy for future generations.

Finally, I would like to share with you a speech by a member of the Constitutional Court in a symposium or panel: ‘Let’s not forget that there can be no judge without a free mind and conscience. A partisan judiciary or a judge is unthinkable in a state of law’. Very true words, we agree. Unfortunately, the Constitutional Court did not hold these views while examining the second indictment. We hope that they stick to the ideas and principles set out here when making their final decision.”

After the speeches of the co-chairs, the meeting continued closed to the press.