■ “On March 25, 2019, one of our colleagues wanted to have his requests signed by the bailiff at Diyarbakır Bailiff’s Office, but the bailiff arbitrarily rejected this request and insulted our colleague after the ensuing quarrel. After this incident, the Lawyers’ Rights Centre intervened in the incident and as a result of the Centre’s attempts, the executive director signed the said requests, but the situation was recorded anyway to prevent arbitrary treatment of our colleague in the future.” ■ “On March 25, 2019, a colleague reacted to being continuously interrupted and prevented from exercising his right of defence effectively at the Diyarbakır 4th Civil Court of First Instance. In response, the court judge arbitrarily declared that he ended the hearing and tried to have our colleague forcefully removed from the courtroom. On March 26, 2019, the judge prepared a trial record that did not reflect the truth, and after having it signed by the bailiff and clerk working under his order, he sent this record to the Bar Association in order for action to be taken against our colleague. However, because other colleagues had witnessed the incident, an Additional Record was prepared by the same judge on March 27, 2019, where it was stated that the judge, bailiff or clerk had not engaged in any threats, insults, swearing or similar actions against our colleague.” ■ “On April 2, 2019, the Van T Type Prison administration requested to restrict the visits of a lawyer on the grounds that organisational communication and orders were allegedly delivered to a prisoner on hunger strike via the lawyer. The request was accepted by the Van 4th Assize Court despite a lack of concrete evidence. While the decision on the ongoing file violated the presumption of innocence, the lawyer was at the same time identified with the file and the crime, although there was not even an investigation launched against her. This decision reveals the judiciary’s attitude towards lawyers and the defence.” PURGES AND APPOINTMENTS IN THE JUDICIARY As mentioned above, the Gülen Movement’s influence on the judiciary had been a constant topic of debate before the 2016 coup attempt. These allegations were voiced loudly in the Ergenekon, Sledgehammer (Balyoz) and OdaTV61 trials among others. After the coup attempt, a major purge took place in the judicial bureaucracy. During the State of Emergency, thousands of judges and prosecutors, who were allegedly linked with the Gülen Movement, were dismissed from the judiciary. A number of these judges and prosecutors were arrested. Prosecutors like Zekeriya Öz,62 who had once been held in high regard, fled abroad.63 According to the “Situation Report – State of Emergency” prepared by the Human Rights Joint Platform (İnsan Hakları Ortak Platformu - İHOP), as of March 2018, the number of dismissed judges and prosecutors on the grounds of allegedly being Gülenists was 4,133.64 This means that approximately 30 per cent of the judiciary was liquidated. The purges continued after the State of Emergency was lifted. A large number of new judges and prosecutors were recruited to fill the vacuum that emerged after this massive purge. 61 In the OdaTV Trial, 14 journalists and authors were detained in 2011 with the accusation of “supporting the Ergenekon organization through media.” They were kept in prison for different periods. Eventually, all defendants were acquitted at the last hearing that was held in April 2017 [Turkey: acquittal in OdaTV case welcome but scores of journalists still detained (12.04.2017; PEN International): https://pen-international.org/es/noticias/turkey-acquittal-in-odatv-case-welcome-butscores-of-journalists-still-detained] 62 Zekeriya Öz is a well known prosecutor who conducted the investigations against the Ergenekon Organization and the corruption investigation of 2013 against the government. He was dismissed by the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors in May 2015 and fled abroad after a coup attempt in July 2016 [Zekeriya Öz yurtdışına kaçtı! (11.08.2015; Sözcü): https:// www.sozcu.com.tr/2015/gundem/zekeriya-oz-yurtdisina-kacti-906253/]. 63 In the course of this “purge,” tens of thousands of people were irrevocably removed from the judicial bureaucracy, academia, schools and various state offices. The term “civil death” was used to describe the situation of these people who were stripped of their pension rights and whose accounts were in part blocked and sequestrated. 64 21 July 2016 – 20 March 2018 State of Emergency in Turkey – Updated Situation Report (17.04.2018; Human Rights Joint Platform): http://www.ihop.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/SoE_17042018.pdf 34 A DEFENSELESS DEFENSE PURGES AND APPOINTMENTS IN THE JUDICIARY 35