GülistanAzak

 

DİYARBAKIR - Jean Louis Malterre, the lawyer of three Kurdish politicians who were massacred in Paris, the capital of France, states that the investigation that was interrupted due to the pandemic has been started again. Jean Louis notes that the target of the new investigation was ‘those who gave the order’.

 

It has been eight years since SakineCansız, one of the founders of the PKK, FidanDoğan, the representative of the Kurdistan National Congress (KNK) in Paris and Leyla Şaylemez, a member of the Kurdish Youth Movement were massacred at the Kurdistan Information Office located in Paris, France on January 9, 2013. The perpetrator ÖmerGüney was arrested eight days later of the massacre within the scope of the opened investigation. ÖmerGüney had visited Turkey 13 times before the massacre took place and his relationship with MIT (Turkish National Intelligence Organization) was revealed. 

 

Abatement of the case opened against ÖmerGüney

 

The investigation that was initiated for the enlightenment of the massacre lasted until May 2015. It was then decided that the suspect ÖmerGüney should be brought to court on December 5, 2016. But the lawyers of three Kurdish politicians objected to the hearing day and requested the hearing to be held on an earlier date. But ÖmerGüney was announced to have died on December 17, 2016, 36 days before the first hearing. The case was abated after the suspicious death of ÖmerGüney.

 

The start of a new investigation

 

A new preliminary investigation was started into the role of the MİT in the massacre in April, 2017 as a result of the initiative of the families of three Kurdish women and their lawyers. As a result of the application made by the families of Kurdish women politicians who lost their lives in the massacre, an anti-terrorist judge was appointed to reconsider the investigation in March 2018. New judge would focus on 'those who ordered the murder and their accomplices' in the investigation.

 

The lawyer of the case spoke to our agency

 

Jean Louis Malterre, one of the lawyers of the case, talked to our news agency about the case. He stated that the investigation being interrupted due to the pandemic has started again. Jean Lois noted that the target of the new investigation is ‘those who gave the order’.

 

*Eight years have passed since the massacre of three revolutionist Kurdish women. After the death of the suspect ÖmerGüney, you demanded the investigation to continue in March 2018. What has happened after that, are there any progress in the file?

 

First of all, I want to say this: The first investigation was completed quickly because its duration was about two years and a half. The judge of the first investigating wanted the trial to be held quickly because ÖmerGüney was ill. Unfortunately, the judicial authorities did not really act in this way. When the investigation was completed in August 2015, it took almost two years for the case to be held. Ömer died so the first procedure ended in January 2017.

 

With my colleagues, we immediately filed a new criminal complaint in February 2017. A dismissal of charges was decided for this criminal complaint by the prosecutor. We filed another criminal complaint in March 2018. A year later, in June 2019, a new judge could be appointed. This new judge determined an investigation team. The judge was supposed to accept the families in March last year. But, unfortunately, the pandemic blocked everything in France as well as anywhere in the world. The investigation also stopped. It's just starting over now. We are at this stage now. The investigation has taken up where it was left off. We hope the judge will invite us in March next year.

 

* Many documents show that the Turkish Intelligence Service was involved in the massacre of three revolutionist Kurdish women. But it is thought that the investigation has been paused since the death of the murder suspect. What is the scope of this new investigation and who is on target?

 

As you have stated in your question, as it is known, the important thing is the first judge made it possible to identify MIT’s responsibility in the massacre. What we want is that the person or persons who gave the order of the massacre to be prosecuted, tried, and convicted. Of course in this context, other perpetrator or perpetrators, and accomplices must be judged. It is not important where they are; in France, in Europe, or in Turkey... 

 

*Do you think there is a wider network in Europe behind these massacres?

 

Of course, there is a wider network in Europe. The updated information has shown that there are more or less similar conspiracies in Austria, Germany, and Belgium and this is extremely worrying. We think more investigations should be carried compared to Germany and Belgium. If remembered, ÖmerGüney had lived in Germany for a long time. He had been in contact with ultranationalist groups there. He had described himself as a gray wolf in Germany. We think he came to France upon an order. Immediately after coming from Germany, he infiltrated Kurdish associations. In this context, we think that there is an important European network.

 

* In this context, are there new information and documents in the file?

 

It's a difficult issue. I can't say much, because we don't have enough information. I think we cannot make a clear statement at this stage. We will wait for the investigators to keep their work and we will see in the future if there will be new factors.

 

* How do you evaluate the attitude of the French authorities against a massacre committed by MIT in France? What is the role of the French authorities in this massacre that occurred in the center of Paris?

 

The attitude of the French authorities is completely ambiguous. The French authorities have many complaints to direct themselves.  It is important to remember that the French authorities had fully cooperated with the Turkish authorities and possibly with the MIT for decades before the triple assassination. During the same period, the French authorities had prosecuted Kurdish militants, convicted and imprisoned many Kurds by organizing operations conducted along with Turkey. In these circumstances, we are convinced that the French authorities gave some information and files to the Turkish authorities about the militants in France. We also know that the Kurdistan Information Center is under ongoing surveillance. In this context, we cannot think that the French services don’t have enough information about what happened in January. We are worried a lot. During the first investigation, the investigating judge asked the state to share information about the French authorities' surveillance of Kurdish militants. The state did not want to answer and was hidden behind a "state secret". This is how the attitude of the French authorities.

 

* What do you think about the future of the new investigation? What should be expected in the near and distant future?

 

To me, there are three important things. The first is the geopolitical changes since 2013. Kurdish militants fought alongside the French army against ISIS. I think a lot has changed on the geopolitical issue. This situation gives hope that the French state will be able to share information by not hiding behind a state secret.

 

The second one is technological advances. There are some elements already in the first file, such as phones.  The technological advances allow these elements to be investigated more deeply and effectively. We also gave other phone numbers to them. We hope these will allow the advance of the investigation.

 

The last one: as I mentioned before, we demand the investigators to cooperate with all other investigators in Europe (Belgian, German, etc.).