Turkey's recent political history has been shaped not only by coups, memorandums and terrorism, but also by conspiracies, videotapes, video footage and character assassinations.
Especially between 2002 and 2015, the organized structure of the Fetullahist terrorist organization in the police, judiciary and civil service used the law not as a mechanism of justice, but as a tool to liquidate, discredit and politically engineer people.
Everybody remembers
The videotape conspiracies against MHP deputies...
The dirty operation against Deniz Baykal...
That dark period when private life was abused to produce political results and the chain of events that still continues...
The most distinctive feature of that period was this:
Execution would begin without waiting for the court's verdict, trying to secure a public conviction before a trial.
Unfortunately, some of the images of detentions that have come before us today revive this dirty memory.
Recently, during the detention of Ekrem İmamoğlu in IBB lodging, drone shots were taken and the lodging was served...
Footage of the search of a retired protection police officer's vineyard and a box of bullets found when his safe was opened...
Images of CHP mayors and municipality employees lined up in single file and taken to the courthouse in the Vatan Street campus of Istanbul Security Directorate...
The service of the images of celebrities and public figures during the detention and transfer to the forensic medicine institution and the courthouse by the gendarmerie (gendarmerie) in the province with the instruction of the Istanbul public prosecutor's office based on the statements...
On this day;
The social media coverage of the detention of Uşak Mayor Özkan Yalım is not an ordinary “information leak”. These events are a sign of a much bigger problem.
Because what we are discussing here is not just a detention process;
It is the instrumentalization of law, the transformation of public power into an exhibition, and the sacrifice of justice to a perception operation.
Police cameras are for evidence, not for display
Let us first recall a basic fact:
Police camera;
for the correct determination of the evidence.
It is there to record confiscated property.
It is there to document that the procedure has been carried out properly.
So the law enforcement camera is the safeguard of the law.
But it's the same camera;
There is no reason to expose a person on social media.
It does not exist to serve your outfit, your special situation, your personal privacy.
There is none to prejudge public opinion.
A law enforcement understanding that does not know this distinction is not the rule of law;
It produces an administration that makes a show of power.
The question is very clear:
Who recorded these images?
Who leaked it out?
Who served it?
Who turned a blind eye?
Because no one would believe that these images spontaneously appeared on social media.
The presumption of innocence does not exist just to be written in books.
A person can be investigated.
Detention may be ordered.
Search is available.
Evidence can be collected.
These are all powers of the state as long as they remain within the law.
But to humiliate that person in front of the public while there is still no verdict against him, while the investigation is ongoing, before the right to defense is fully exercised, before the trial has even started;
is not the authority of the state, but an abuse of state power.
There are three fundamental principles that are clearly violated here:
First, the presumption of innocence.
This means that a person cannot be declared guilty without a final judicial verdict.
Second, the right not to be stained.
In other words, the investigation process cannot be turned into a means of discrediting the person in front of the public.
Third, personal rights and human dignity.
The state can investigate, but it cannot violate human dignity.
If these principles are being violated today, it is not just a matter of a mayor.
The issue is directly related to overstepping the boundaries of the rule of law.
This is not an investigative technique, but a method of political discrediting
In Turkey, this scenario is all too familiar:
First detention
The images that were then served...
Then a derogatory, prejudiced language on social media with moral implications...
Then the curiosity of “I wonder what came out?” on TV screens...
And in the end, a social condemnation before a trial...
This mechanism is not the mechanism of law, but of perception engineering.
Turning a detention, one of the most intimate moments of an investigation, into a public issue;
to expose a person in a vulnerable moment;
and use it to gain political or psychological advantage;
that is not justice.
This is reputation assassination.
Let's say it more clearly:
If the goal was truly justice, the file would speak.
Evidence speaks.
The prosecution would speak.
The court would speak.
But if the image speaks instead of the file,
if the service mechanism works instead of the law,
If perception is produced instead of evidence...
It would be naive to seek justice there.
FETÖ cannot be fought with FETÖ methods, FETÖ methods are imitated.
This is the most painful thing.
This country has suffered a lot from the conspiracy schemes set up by FETÖ for years.
He suffered a lot from fake evidence, video footage, targeted people, tape conspiracies and executions carried out through the media.
So, today, any state official, any law enforcement agency, or any political center;
It is not only unlawful to use the same methods for “other purposes”;
It is also an insult to the memory of this nation.
If you say you are eliminating FETÖ and then reproduce its methods;
The organization is gone but the mentality remains.
And sometimes that is the most dangerous thing.
State power loses legitimacy when it hits human dignity
The state can be strong.
And it should be.
But the real power of the state is not in breaking down the door;
to protect the law even when it knocks on the door.
True state seriousness is not about humiliating people;
can conduct even the most serious investigation while protecting human dignity.
It should not be forgotten:
Serving on behalf of the state does not give the authority to break the law.
No one can commit a crime by relying on their uniform, office or authority.
If an officer, a supervisor, an official;
uses, makes available or has made available the image, information or recording obtained outside the investigation;
it is not just a disciplinary offense.
It's the same time:
It is abuse of power.
It is a violation of privacy and personal rights.
It is a grave unlawfulness that undermines the confidentiality of the investigation.
And of course there has to be a legal equivalent.
Turkey needs a state of law, not a state of exposure
Today, everyone should ask themselves this question:
Won't this method used against a mayor be used against a politician, a journalist, an academic, a bureaucrat, an ordinary citizen tomorrow?
The moment lawlessness is legitimized according to the target;
there is no security for anyone.
Because if the law is applied differently to friends and enemies;
is not called law.
What needs to be defended today is not just one person's right.
What needs to be defended is the legitimacy of the state, the reputation of justice and the conscience of society.
This is the need of the country;
Justice, not exposure...
Law, not lynching...
It is not an assassination of reputation, it is respect for human dignity.
Otherwise we will not have a strong state tomorrow,
a structure that derives its power not from law but from fear.
And there are no winners in such a structure.