Wednesday, November 11, 2009

There have recently been very important developments regarding the case of the Science Research Foundation (BAV). The public expects an explanation of these.

The 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals negated the local court’s statute of limitations expiry ruling in the BAV case under a ruling dated 21 May, 2007, No. 2007/3877. HOWEVER, TWO DAYS BEFORE THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT DECISION, daily Hurriyet carried this REVERSAL DECREE on 19 May, 2007. The report in Hurriyet, headed "Adnan Hodja is finally burnt out!” (the original Turkish suggests “burning” as well as imminent punishment), stated that the Supreme Court would reverse the expiry of the statute of limitations ruling and impose penalty, before the Supreme Court announced the decision. Had Daily Hurriyet considered it a possibility that this case would be concluded with an acquittal verdict, then the word “had” would apparently not be used. This means that there was a strong opinion the case would be resolved with conviction.

There are some questions that arouse curiosity:

1. What is the source of the Aydin Dogan-owned Hurriyet’s intelligence?

2. How was Hurriyet informed of the contents of the Supreme Court of Appeals decision 2 days before it was published and announced to the parties?

3. How did Hurriyet know that the court would find the defendants guilty after the file had been returned to the local court?

Following the local court ruling in the BAV case, appeal was lodged with the Supreme Court of Appeals for the second time. This time the September-October 2009 issue of New Humanist magazine said that the BAV case had been given to an investigating judge and would be concluded against the defendants within the month of October. The magazine is one of the world’s leading atheist, Darwinist publications.
The report in the magazine used a picture of Fatih Altayli, one of Aydin Dogan's former writers, and sought to give the impression that there was some rancor between Altayli and Adnan Oktar. The fact is, however, that this artificial ill-feeling portrayed to the public is just one of the sly strategies employed by agent provocateurs that have been infiltrated into the BAV community. Mr. Oktar is not acquainted with Fatih Altayli and there is no question of his feeling any ill-will toward him. In addition, the invalidity of Fatih Altayli’s allegations against Mr. Oktar has been proved by judgments at law issued by judicial bodies regarding Mr. Oktar. (The Istanbul 2nd High Criminal Court REASONED ACQUITTAL RULING No. 2007/7, 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals ACQUITTAL CONFIRMATION RULING No.2007/38773, Kartal 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance DEFINITIVE ACQUITTAL RULING No. 96/381 E. – 98/508 K dated 12.06.1998 and Istanbul 6th Civil Court of First Instance CONFIRMED ACQUITTAL RULING No. 01/261 E. - 02/335 K. dated 22.05.2002.) But Fatih Altayli intervened in the BAV case despite all these acquittal rulings and objected in order that Mr. Oktar be convicted. However, Adnan Oktar is a man of love, affection, kindness and compassion, for which reason he always approaches Fatih Altayli within a framework of kindness and compassion.
1) It was Rezzan Aydinoglu, the lawyer of Fatih Altayli, who told the magazine

In a statement given to the world-renowned atheist magazine New Humanist, Fatih Altayli’s lawyer Rezzan Aydinoglu said that the BAV case, at appeal at the Supreme Court of Appeals, would be resolved in October and the defendants sentenced. The question of how Rezzan Aydinoglu could know a decision to be reached by the Supreme Court of Appeals regarding a file that Court members had not even examined yet is one that troubles the public mind and conscience, and one that needs to be answered. In addition, in the first appeal in our case it took the investigating judge 1 year 3 months, in other words 15 months, to examine the 90 files in the case. Yet according to Rezzan Aydinoglu’s claim, our case now consisting of 300 files will be examined and brought to a conclusion in just 1 month. It therefore means that this ruling will be issued almost without the case file being studied at all.

that the BAV case file had been given to the investigating judge. How did Rezzan Aydinoglu acquire this secret information that was unknown even to the defendants?

2) In his statement, Rezzan Aydinoglu says the Supreme Court of Appeals will resolve the case in October and that the defendants will be convicted. How does Rezzan Aydinoglu know beforehand what the Supreme Court of Appeals will rule regarding a file that the court members have not even examined yet?

The defendants in the BAV case of course respect the ruling to be issued by the Supreme Court of Appeals and acknowledge that the final decision lies with the Supreme Court. However, as revealed in the Supreme Court of Appeals ruling cases, the BAV case examined at the 8th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals makes it necessary to overturn the sentencing decision due to various legal irregularities during the trial.

Just two of the many legal pretexts necessitating an annulment are:

1) The BAV case lasted 8 years, during the course of which,

The defendants’ rights to a defense were restricted by the rejection of their requests to present a defense, the additional defense rights granted under Article 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) were not recognized and the provision under Article 216/3 of the CCP, that “the final world shall lie with the defendant present in court prior to conviction” was not implemented. The BAV case ended in conviction through the violation of these rights bestowed on defendants under Turkish law.

Examination of Supreme Court of Appeals ruling cases with decisions numbered 2005/27, 1995/239 and 2006/180 that set a precedent for the unlawful practices in the BAV case reveals that the failure to apply even one of these rights is regarded as “ABSOLUTE GROUNDS FOR ANNULLING THE VERDICT.”

2) The rule that “procedures implemented by a court that does not have the jurisdiction are invalid and must be repeated” (CCP. Para 7) was ignored in the BAV case.

The court procedures of a previous court were not repeated by the court that took over the case in the wake of the lack of jurisdiction ruling in the BAV case, for which reason the ruling was issued on the basis of null and void procedures.

Supreme Court of Appeals General Criminal Assembly rulings No. 2008/1-90 E. and 2008/100 K. openly state that PROCEDURES CARRIED OUT BY COURTS THAT DO NOT HAVE THE JURISDICTION ARE NULL AND VOID.

These two unlawful procedures during the case closely followed by the public are both reasons for the verdict in the BAV case to be OVERTURNED. The scientific opinions provided by leading Turkish and international criminal jurists after thorough examination of the file reveal that the conviction in the BAV case MUST BE OVERTURNED. However, the final decision surely lies with the Supreme Court and members of the BAV community respect the ruling to be issued.

It is of great importance in terms of the functioning of a just judicial system for the above questions to be illuminated. The public expects light to be shed on these matters.
One of the subjects covered in New Humanist’s report about Mr. Adnan Oktar is the Turkish-Islamic Union.
Adnan Oktar’s works on Darwinism, and the Atlas of Creation in particular, have intellectually demolished Darwinism. Darwinists have suffered a huge intellectual defeat. These Darwinist and materialist circles that have no scientific answer to Mr. Oktar’s works are hoping in the face of their own rout that Adnan Oktar will be convicted.
Mr. Adnan Oktar attaches particular importance to the establishment of the Turkish-Islamic Union in his works. Materialist and Darwinist circles, on the other hand, are strongly opposed to such an excellent union that will bestow love, peace, brotherhood, plenty and abundance on the world. They imagine, at least in their own eyes, that in the event Mr. Oktar is convicted they can prevent the formation of the Turkish-Islamic Union. But the fact is that the Turkish-Islamic Union is an ideal dear to the hearts of the whole Turkish-Islamic world and that Mr. Oktar’s cultural activities are a vital foundation in its establishment.



The two different newspapers, in the reports they made in two successive days, revealed groundless claims against Mr. Adnan Oktar and the circles of the Science Research Foundation. The related news repeated the known slanders of some press organs, stating that seven anonymous witnesses testified about this subject.

Indeed, related to the investigation carried out about the testimonies of the anonymous witnesses, the Uskudar Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (No. 2008/1211) gave A VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION. This verdict was APPROVED by Kadikoy High Criminal Court No. 1 (verdict miscellaneous number 2008/1015).

Istanbul Prosecution Office with Special Authorities (formerly the State Security Court) also examined the same file (file no. 2007/3026) in the past and the Prosecution gave A VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION on 13.12.2007. This verdict was also APPROVED by the Ankara High Criminal Court Number 11 (file no. 2008/307).

The prosecution offices did not even find it necessary to open files about the statements of “anonymous witnesses”, which were merely figments of imagination. Not only about the claims of anonymous witnesses but also about those of some families who submitted false complaint petitions did the prosecution offices give VERDICTS OF NON-PROSECUTION.

Some of these are as follows:

1. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Istanbul Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no. 2007/11089)
2. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Istanbul Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no. 2007/17087)
3. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Istanbul Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no. 2007/11092)
4. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Uskudar Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no.2007/10878)
5. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Uskudar Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no.2007/6120)

While revealing these groundless accusations, these dailies would have a publishing policy based on principles, if they did not conceal the above-mentioned judicial verdicts refuting these accusations and thus provide accurate information to their readers.

The following are the subjects we and the Turkish public opinion are curious about:

1. Which dailies received a total of 1 and a half million TL each—which were drawn at five different dates from the bank accounts of the person in Istanbul known as the secret safe of the so-called Ergenekon terror organization from the bank branches in Mecidiyekoy and Sisli provinces—in order to publish groundless claims against SRF?
2. Who coerced a psychopath, who was personally involved in the murder of his own brother as well as another murder, into giving testimony against the SRF community?
3. Who promised to pay 200 thousand TL in advance and another 200 thousand TL after the completion of the task to the three wretched persons, who earn their living by getting involved in illicit relations and who showed ingratitude to the people who strived to save them from such a life?
4. Who made threats in order to prevent the publication of a book that reveals the liaisons among the so-called Ergenekon terror organization and freemasonry, and the “Baron”, a freemason, and the “the Man of Every Era”?
5. Which journalists participated in the meeting the Kapanc─▒lar from Salonica and Karakaslar made in a five-star hotel in Istanbul, Taksim province? What did the old physician and “the Man of Every Era” talk in this meeting?
6. Which dailies are the ones that are not generally known by the public to be owned by the “Baron”? Which journalists are the secret men of the “Baron” who seem to be hostile to the “Baron”? In other words, as “Baron” himself calls it, who are his “secret tools”?

If the dailies in question were to investigate the above-mentioned claims instead of the groundless claims made against the SRF circle, they would illuminate the public, display an example of successful journalism and thus make a beneficial service to the Turkish society.

To be announced to the public with respect,


Post a Comment

There was an error in this gadget