DINK MURDER TRIAL OPENS IN TURKEY

TURKEY: The 18 men accused of murdering a prominent Armenian-Turkish editor appeared in an Istanbul court this morning at the start of a trial widely seen as a test of the effectiveness of Turkey's judicial system.

The conviction of Ogun Samast, a 17-year-old from the Black Sea city of Trabzon who admitted gunning Hrant Dink down on January 19th, looks to be a foregone conclusion.

Lawyers say the 8,000-page indictment contains more than enoughevidence to ensure jail sentences of up to 48 years for two other men police believe organised the assassination.

All three chief suspects are known to have links to ultra-nationalist organisations deeply opposed to Dink's efforts to encourage debate on Turkey's last great taboo: the fate of the Ottoman empire's Armenians in 1915.

For Fethiye Cetin, however, who leads the lawyers for the prosecution, the key to the case lies in the judge's treatment of what she calls "gaping holes" in the murder investigation.

"The men in the dock are not the whole gang," she said. "Both police and military police displayed what looks very much like deliberate negligence in the case. They have not been included as part of the investigation and they must be."

Observers say the direction the trial takes largely depends on the attitude of Erhan Tuncel, one of the suspected organisers.

A former police informer, Tuncel reportedly told Trabzon police of the plot to assassinate Dink as early as February 2006. Records of a police operative calling him on his mobile phone an hour after the murder to ask whether it was "your people's work" were leaked to the press this March.

"The Turkish authorities failed to protect Dink, despite evidence his life was at risk," said Holly Carter of the New York-based Human Rights Watch. "They must now ensure that those responsible are held to account." With the trial taking place behind closed doors because of the age of the chief suspect, admirers of Dink have had to find other ways of keeping up pressure.

About 1,000 of them demonstrated near the courthouse yesterday, appealing for justice and carrying a banner that read: "We are all witnesses, we want justice". Yet, after a fortnight in which police have exposed a network of paramilitary-style organisations throughout
Turkey - many of them run by retired military men - the mood behind the slogans was pessimistic. "I'm not expecting the court to get to the bottom of this - just look at the way the investigation has gone so far," said Ahmet Insel, a friend of Dink who teaches politics at
Istanbul's prestigious Galatasaray University. "They'll jail the little men and let the big ones go, unless the little men talk, that is."

Dink's widow, Rakel, also voiced concerns about the investigation: "Today in court are these children turned killers, but where is the darkness that created them? What I call darkness is not something vague. You can find it in parts of the military police, the armed forces, the intelligence service, the police, the government and opposition, even in the press and civil society organisations. These are real people with real jobs. By endlessly pointing to enemies, they bring up children to be killers and call it a service to Turkey. . . But it's almost as though justice can't touch them or doesn't want to. Because if it goes too far, it'll see that it is a part of them."

L.A. Times Managing Editor Resigns After Killing Article on Armenian Genocide

Douglas Frantz, Managing Editor of the Los Angeles Times, resigned last week following his controversial decision in April to block the publication of amajor article on the Armenian Genocide, written by reporter Mark Arax.After killing the story, Frantz sent an e-mail to Arax wrongly accusing him and five other Times reporters (four of whom are Armenians) of signing a "petition" to their editors on the Armenian Genocide. Frantz told Arax: "You have aconflict of interest that precludes you from writing about the Armenian Genocide." Frantz also alleged that Arax and Bob Ourlian (a Times editor) had gone around the newspaper's established system for assigning and editing articles.

When this columnist first learned about the controversy back in mid-April, he contacted David Hiller, Publisher of The Times, who promised to look into the matter. Then, unexpectedly, Douglas Frantz called this writer and, talking in an abrasive manner, provided no rational explanation for his action. A week later, Jim O'Shea, Editor of The Times, met with this writer along with Zanku Armenian and Janet Janjigian to discuss the on-going controversy. The three Armenian community members told O'Shea that Frantz's accusations were false, discriminatory and illegal and that Arax and his fellow reporters had not signed a "petition." Instead, the six reporters had sent an internal memo to their editors in response to The Times' repeated mischarac- terization of the Armenian Genocide in 2005, reminding them that the newspaper was not complying with its own written policy on the Genocide. This policy mandated that The Times not equivocate whenever it referred to the Armenian Genocide. The editors at that time did not find anything wrong with the memo. On the contrary, they thanked the reporters for their very proper reminder which was in keeping with The Times' own Code of Ethics. It required that staff members bring inaccuracies to the editors' attention.

During the meeting, the three community members also told O'Shea that Frantz had falsely accused Arax and Ourlian of circumventing proper editorial channels in writing and editing the article on the Armenian Genocide. The newspaper's executives in the chain of command were fully aware of Arax's article and had slated it for publication on page one.

Furthermore, the Armenian participants brought to O'Shea's attention Frantz's long-standing ties to Turkey. He was stationed in Istanbul for several years, first as bureau chief for The New York Times and then as investigative reporter for the Los Angeles Times. He had developed close contacts with various Turkish officials, including the Turkish Consul General in Los Angeles who boasted in a taped interview with Arax about his special relationship with Frantz.
O'Shea was also told that Frantz was going to Istanbul in early May to moderate a panel that included a notorious genocide denialist. The Armenian group told O'Shea that it was Frantz not Arax who had a biased view on the Armenian Genocide. While promising to investigate these issues, O'Shea went along with Frantz and approved publication of a substitute article on the Armenian Genocide written by another reporter, thus killing Arax's original story.

Seeing that there was no resolution in sight, this writer decided to make public the censorship of Arax's article and called for Frantz's dismissal. That column was posted on scores of websites, generating great public interest. Several newspapers and radio stations interviewed this columnist, further publicizing the controversy. The reaction was fast and furious. Thousands of e-mails were sent to The Times by Armenian and non-Armenian individuals and organizations, including Jewish World Watch, protesting Frantz's discriminatory action against Arax. The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) subsequently issued a nationwide Action Alert urging the Armenian community to demand Frantz's resignation. The Western Diocese of the Armenian Church also supported this initiative by posting on its website ANCA's Action Alert along with this writer's column. It is noteworthy that several Turkish writers rushed to Frantz's defense by urging fellow Turks to write to The Times in support of Frantz's censorship of the article on the Armenian Genocide. The Azeri Press Agency (APA), not to be left behind, claimed that Frantz told its U.S. Bureau that "he is grateful to all Azerbaijanis supporting him."

David Hiller, Publisher of The Times, then held two follow-up meetings with a select group of Armenian community members. The first meeting included Editor O'Shea, Zanku Armenian of ANCA; Prof. Hrair Dekmejian, Director of USC Institute of Armenian Studies; Maria Mehranian, Chairwoman of Armenia Fund, Western U.S.; Harut Sassounian, Publisher of The California Courier; and Larry Zarian, former Mayor of Glendale. The second meeting was with Prof. Dekmejian, Raffi Hamparian of ANCA, Sassounian and Zarian). There were also more than a dozen phone conversations on this issue between Hiller, Sassounian and Zarian. Hiller told the Armenians during the second meeting that he had come to the conclusion that Mark Arax had done nothing wrong. In a written statement he issued on June 18, Hiller said that all of Arax's actions were "journalistically appropriate," including "his professional work in reporting on the Armenian genocide, and in communicating with the paper to ensure our adherence to established policy in referring to the genocide." Hiller went on to say that "The Times does not tolerate any discrimination in the reporting or editing of the news based on ethnic heritage or other basis."

Furthermore, in a earlier e-mail sent to his newspaper's staff and readers, Hiller said: "I am very proud of the reporting that The Times does on the Armenian Genocide, and also the positions we have taken on our editorial pages. I am also proud and grateful for the welcome and support my new friends in the Southern California Armenian communities have shown me since my arrival here six months ago. I look forward to continuing that fine relationship and the strong and open communications on which it is based."

Hiller also told the Armenian community members during the second meeting that the newspaper had signed a settlement agreement with Arax who has decided to retire and devote his time to writing books and taking an active role in Armenian affairs. The Fresno Bee quoted Arax's attorney, Warren Paboojian, as saying that Arax and The Times had reached an undisclosed financial settlement "to forestall a lawsuit alleging defamation and discrimination." Arax told the Bee that he could not comment on the terms because of a "confidentiality
agreement."

In a statement issued to The California Courier this week, Arax said: "I was truly humbled by the support from the Armenian community. It came from all quarters and across political and organizational divides, though I would be remiss if I didn't single out the special roles of Harut Sassounian, the ANC and the Western Diocese. This support turned one journalist's fight against censorship into a community battle, and the pressure brought to bear on the Los Angeles Times was instrumental in helping us reach a fair settlement. Despite my voluntary departure, the Armenian community should know that I am not leaving the profession of journalism. Indeed, now that I am unburdened of my newspaper work, I plan on writing even more books and national magazine stories on topics dear to me, including genocide denial. If all goes well, I plan on visiting Armenia in the near future and tracing the river valley that gave our family its name."

Throughout this ordeal, the pressure was mounting on Frantz both from the outside and apparently from within The Times organization. The well-connected "laobserved.com" website reported that the word going around Times staffers was that "Editor Jim O'Shea ordered Frantz to make a public apology and that it wasn't going down well with Frantz." It is understandable why top executives of The Times did not want to make any embarrassing public comments on Frantz's blunder. Indeed, it was clear that by absolving Arax from any wrongdoing, The Times management was implying that Frantz had censored Arax's article for reasons that had nothing to do with journalism.

Finally, the combination of escalating criticism and a job opportunity -- not surprisingly -- in Istanbul, led to Frantz's resignation last week after less than two years at his current position. It is noteworthy that just eight months ago, when several of his colleagues were leaving the newspaper as a result of management changes, Frantz was determined to stay and told his colleagues: "I am not quitting and I am asking all of you not to quit. "Curiously, Frantz did not provide a reason for his resignation. However, several newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times, made references to the Armenian controversy that preceded his departure. L.A. Times reporter Roger Vincent wrote: "Frantz recently was embroiled in an emotionally charged personnel issue. A group of Armenian Americans called for Frantz's ouster after he blocked the publication of an article on the Armenian genocide of the early 20th century." The Chicago Tribune reported that Frantz first approached The Times' Editor O'Shea a month ago offering to resign, saying that "being a managing editorwas 'not a good fit.'"

In a press release, the ANCA characterized Frantz's resignation as "an appropriate answer to his unprofessional behavior and anti-Armenian posture in the newsroom. The Los Angeles Times is a fine newspaper and deserves better than to have a genocide denier as a member of its senior staff. The fact that Frantz is returning to Istanbul tells the full story of where he stands." Armenians will now have to monitor Frantz's reportage from Istanbul in the Wall Street Journal. The Armenian community's concern is justified in view of the fact that for many years the Wall Street Journal has been more pro-Turkish than even the Turkish Daily News! Interestingly, Wall Street Journal's Managing Editor Marcus Brauchli was quoted by the L.A. Times as saying that he offered Frantz the position of Middle East and Africa bureau chief in Istanbul, "after [the Journal's] top executives reviewed his handling of the Armenian story."
Given the Turkophile perspective of the Journal's editors, they may have considered Frantz's censorship of an article on the Armenian Genocide an asset rather than a liability! Notably, Frantz's new position at the Wall Street Journal is several levels below the rank he held at the L.A. Times, going from Managing Editor to working for a Deputy Managing Editor. During the past two months, Frantz's unwarranted actions created considerable tension between the Los Angeles Times and over half million Armenian American residents of Southern California. With his departure, the Armenian community can now look forward to the renewal of the constructive relationship that had developed in recent months with Publisher Hiller and other senior executives of one of America's most prominent newspapers.

Dink Murder Trial Starts In Istanbul - AFP Reuters

Eighteen suspects went on trial in Istanbul Monday for the January murder of ethnic Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, which sparked fears of rising nationalist and anti-minority violence in Turkey.

The trial behind closed doors began as Dink's family said the procedure was flawed because it excludes security officials who knew as early as 2006 of plans to kill Dink, but failed to act.

Police in Istanbul and the northern city of Trabzon, home to most of the suspects, are responsible for "extremely grave mistakes and almost intentional negligence," family lawyer Ergin Cinmen said outside the courthouse. The defendants "are just the tip of the iceberg," he said. "If public servants are not put on trial, the ruling will never satisfy justice and public conscience."

In an emotional written statements, Dink's widow Rakel and his brotherHosrof appealed to the court to shed light on the involvement of officials. "Have the courage to challenge them... Let justice of Godwork through you so that the trial may become a point of enlightenment for Turkey," Rakel said.

"This trial is between those who defend the legal system and those who claim they are the law and the state," Hosrof said. "It will be a turning point for Turkey if the trial sheds light on the truth."

As police sealed off the street leading to the courthouse, about 2,500 demonstrators, most of them dressed in black, gathered at a nearby square and unfurled a large banner that read: "We are all witnesses. We want justice." "We are all Hrant Dink. We are all Armenians," they
chanted.

Dink, 52, a prominent member of Turkey's tiny Armenian minority, was gunned down on January 19 outside the offices of his bilingual Turkish Armenian weekly Agos, in central Istanbul. Although he campaigned for reconciliation, nationalists hated Dink for calling the killing hundreds of thousands of Armenians under Ottoman rule during World War I genocide, a label most Turks despise and Ankara officially rejects.

The suspected gunman, 17-year-old Ogun Samast, has admitted to shooting Dink because he was an "enemy of the Turks," the indictment says. Samast faces 18 to 24 years for the murder and a further eight-and-a-half to 18 for belonging to a terrorist organisation. The prosecution did not seek a life sentence because he is a minor, which is also why the trial is
closed to the public.

Samast refused to speak at Monday's hearing, Dink family lawyer Fethiye Cetin told reporters.

Two other key figures -- Yasin Hayal and Erhan Tuncel, both 26 -- are accused of leading the ultra-nationalist group Samast belonged to and masterminding the murder. They could be jailed for life without the possibility of parole if found guilty.

The indictment says Tuncel was a police informer who twice told officials in 2006 that Hayal was plotting to kill Dink, but deliberately concealed the fact that someone else would pull the trigger because Tuncel himself was part of the plot.

Hayal had earlier served 11 months for the 2004 bombing in Trabzon of a McDonalds restaurant, in which six people were injured, to protest against the US-led invasion of Iraq. He is also accused of threatening Turkey's 2006 Nobel Literature laureate Orhan Pamuk, who has also contested the official line on the Armenian killings.

Hayal and Tuncel traded accusations before the judge, lawyer Oguz Ugur Olca said. Tuncel rejected any involvement in the murder, saying he was a simple informer who did his "duty" by tipping off the police about the plot.

Meanwhile, several Turkish newspapers on Monday quoted Hayal as saying he and his comrades murdered Dink on the orders of police officers. "I do not know what this 'deep state' means. I don't know whether it's legal or illegal, but one thing is sure ` there was a group controlling us in the police," the Radikal daily quoted Hayal as saying in a letter to prosecutors.

"Although you saw this, you have not protected our rights. Now I ask you, if we were used in the service of the state, is it not the state's duty to protect our rights?"

Police have not publicly commented on the accusations.

The European Union and human rights groups have shown a strong interest in the Dink case, saying it is a crucial test for a justice system often criticised for political bias.

"We will be closely watching how the court handles any evidence that may implicate the security forces," said Holly Cartner, Europe and Central Asia director at the New York-based Human Rights Watch, in a weekend statement.

Several officials, including the head of police intelligence in Istanbul, have been sacked over their handling of the case. Shortly after Dink's murder, video footage came to light showing Samast, his suspected killer, striking a heroic pose alongside security force members apparently commending him for his act.

Is your MP among the 144 ?

Is your MP amongst the new increased count of 144 MPs who have signed

Early Day Motion 357 on the Armenian Genocide?

Please remind them to sign because the Houses of Parliament recess soon.

This is a record number but we need far more to register the UK community's strength of feeling.

To identify your MP, click on http://www.upmystreet.com/commons/l/ and type in your post code.

Then email them - a suggested proforma letter that you could use follows

It really is that simple!

Please forward this email to friends and family.

Suggested Letter (but do modify if you wish):

Dear ( name and surname of MP)

As your constituent, I write to ensure you are aware that Mr Bob Spink MP has presented an Early Day Motion ( EDM 357) and that already 144 MPs have signed it .

Your name is not among that list and I urge you to sign it before the Summer Recess, giving it the opportunity to gather enough support to call for a Ten Minute Bill Rule about the recognition of the Armenian Genocide committed by the Ottoman Government of 1915.

I will be only too happy to provide you with all the necessary documentation, UNEQUIVOCAL EVIDENCE , statements made by International Scholars, books commissioned by the British Government of the day and a list of Resolutions and Adoptions by various Parliaments and Governments, including the Welsh Parliament and the European Council.

If you wish, I could meet you in your Surgery anytime during next week to discuss with you and hopefully convince you to sign EDM 357. It is of extreme importance to me .

Otherwise, I urge you to sign the Early Day Motion now.

Thank you

Yours sincerely

Report on House of Commons Meeting held on : 22.06.07

Armenia Solidarity
British Armenian All Party Parliamentary Group
Nor Serount Publications
The Armenian Genocide Trust


Report on House of Commons Meeting on
Genocide Denial and the UK Government's "Ethical Foreign Policy"
Held on 22 June 2007


Tel 07876561398 or 07718982732
e-mails : eilian@nant.wanadoo.co.uk, eilian@nantperis.wanadoo.co.uk
norserount@btconnect.com baappg.bazil@btinternet.com

The meeting was convened on the day that a new Prime Minister took up the seals of office and in anticipation of a subsequent cabinet reshuffle. Its purpose was to focus on the present UK government policy as it affected both the Armenian Genocide recognition and the current genocide in Darfur in the hope that it could become more effective and ethical.

The meeting was sponsored by David Drew MP and chaired by John Bercow MP. The chairman gave an overview of the terrible events in Darfur and the lack of effective international action to stop the carnage. He proposed that the inability to clearly condemn earlier genocides was one factor that allowed more than 60 repetitions of such crimes against humanity in the essentially genocidal 20th century.

Ruth Barnet, a survivor of the Holocaust who works with genocide survivors, stated that a diaspora remains troubled by genocide until it is recognised by the perpetrator. Denial consists of attempts to cover the evidence and to argue the events never happened. This worsens the psychological impact as true mourning cannot commence and survivors who carry the burden of memory cannot live their lives to their full potential. These feelings spread down the generations and are carried until the proper acknowledgement is given. The murdered ancestors are a loss to the whole of humanity, not just to their own people. A ‘genocide footprint’ can measure the destruction of humanity just as a carbon footprint the destruction of the environment. Each time there is no protest at genocide, a footprint is made on the human soul for the loss of the living and the unborn. What is needed for sufficient people to protest so as to make a difference to the direction of governments and other state organisations.

Dr James Smith, Chief Executive of the Aegis Trust, brought out the startling similarities between the Armenian Genocide and Darfur even though these are over 90 years apart. Both have a victimising power that claims to be responding to a threat from a minority in the context of external conflict (1st World War, fight against terrorism), the use of irregular forces against civilians coordinated by government forces, the use of privation and violence as a means of extermination, good communication of the unfolding events to the outside world who response is high on rhetoric and low on action. In both cases, the perpetrators have not been held effectively to account, and denial continues despite the wealth of information to the contrary from reliable independent sources. The Armenian Genocide can be seen as a good prototype for denialism and Darfur follows the Turkish model of obfuscation and dissemination of confusion. Even today, Turkish denialism is rampant having temporarily closed a New York exhibition on the Rwandan genocide (because of a single reference to the Armenian Genocide) and the activities of TARC (Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Committee) aimed at diverting attention from the real issues. Denial legitimises the original murders and avoids addressing prevention. It must be met head-on.

Yet today there is an International Criminal Court which may have to wait decades before it is given the powers to prosecute the indicted of Darfur. Meanwhile, the Sudanese authorities still benefit from significant oil revenues using it to buy the hardware for repression, continue to control the irregular forces that brutalise civilians and the much talked about no fly zone has not been implemented. One wonders if the world had acted in concerted effort to stop the killing of Armenians in 1915, the 20th century may have been a different place.

Turkish society is beginning to change with some of the new generation becoming more aware of the past and challenging radical ultra-nationalistic views. The UK government is not helping this process by supporting the position of the Turkish government. The Aegis Trust would welcome an enquiry not only into the impact of the British foreign policy in failing to identify and stop the killing of Armenians during the 1st World War but also the behaviour of the British government in all subsequent genocides such as Rwanda and the Bosnia. Until we really understand the failings and lessons of these events, and bring the decision makers to account for the failure that leads to unnecessary mass murder of innocents, we will not change the future. We do have to look at history and combat denial to apply these lessons.

HE Dr Vahe Gabrielyan, Ambassador of the Republic of Armenia, applauded the convergence of many organisations to focus on all genocides and the relationship between them. The outcome of the recognition of past genocides should be not only be the moral and ethical tribute to the survivors but also lead to the prevention of potential future repetition. Because the Armenian Genocide has not been condemned, further appalling events could not be stopped. There should be a united front against all genocides across all nations backed by huge cross-border and cross-people pressure on all governments. Only then will governments, including the UK, act to the required measures.

The government of Armenia with its people adds voice to the international community to stop the atrocities in Darfur. The lessons from the Armenian Genocide should be input to this initiative so as to achieve effective action.

Meeting on Darfur & Denial of the Armenian Genocide in the UK Parliament

Armenia Solidarity
British-Armenian All-Party Parliamentary Group
Nor Serount Publications

Armenian Genocide Trust
eilian@nantperis.wanadoo.co.uk
baappg.bazil@btinternet.com
norserount@btconnect.com

Meeting on Darfur and Denial of the Armenian Genocide in the UK Parliament (in the context of an ethical foreign policy)

Police Take an aggressive attitude to Armenian Lobbyists

In London yesterday, 27.06.2007, on Tony Blair's last day as Prime Minister, British-Armenian activists lobbied parliament all day in support of Early Day Motion 357. This motion, recognising the Genocide, has now been signed by 144 Members of Parliament. Police took an unwarranted intolerant attitude, tearing a large "Recognise the Genocide" banner and detaining the director of Armenia Solidarity for half an hour under the Prevention of Terrorism Act for holding the banner too close to Parliament. The distribution of leaflets was continued throughout and the banner redisplayed where it could still be noticed by those entering the Houses of Parliament.

A meeting on Darfur and Armenia was organised by Armenia Solidarity, the British-Armenian All-Party Parliamentary Group, Nor Serount Publications & the Armenian Genocide Trust in the House of Commons, in the evening, in conjunction with, the Genocide Prevention All Party Parliamentary Group and the Aegis Trust.

In the meeting in the House of Commons, Dr James Smith of The Aegis Trust, in a major speech on Ethical Foreign Policy emphasised the parallels between Armenia and Darfur where the Turkish model of the 20th century is being successfully repeated. Ruth Barnett spoke on the psychological effects of denial and introduced the concept of reducing the present "Genocide Footprint" by addressing the issues of past genocides. The Ambassador of the Republic of Armenia, Dr Vahe Gabrielyan, emphasised the political dimensions of genocide recognition which could not be addressed by any commission of historians however eminent. The meeting was chaired by John Bercow MP of the Genocide Prevention All Party Parliamentary Group, and attended by several other parliamentarians including Lord Avebury, Lord Alton of Liverpool David Burrowes MP as well as David Drew MP, the sponsor of the meeting.

The present Armenian Genocide Recognition effort in the UK is an ever expanding coalition which is gathering momentum involving more and more Armenian and UK supporters. "Genocide recognition is a human, not merely an Armenian, issue" said Eilian Williams, a spokesman for the organisers. "We urge all Armenians to continue lobbying to obtain further parliamentary support as well as to consider joining the Aegis Trust in their Genocide Prevention Campaigns."

Petition Requesting UK Government to Recognise the Armenian Genocide of 1915

If you are a British citizen or UK resident, please add your name to this online petition requesting the Prime Minister to recognise the Genocide. The closing date for signatories is 16th November 2007.

There are already nearly 1000 names and every extra one counts!