AKP Ankara MP Tuğrul Türkeş made an internal statement regarding the Gezi Park trial. Responding to the allegations raised over his previous statement “Osman Kavala case puts Turkey in a difficult situation abroad”, Türkeş said, “As far as I know, the AK Party is full of politicians who want the law to prevail. Those who try to punch from the shadow are either crypto remnants or paid employees.”
In a statement made on his social media account, Türkeş asked 7 questions about the case and asked, “If the legal logic in the petitions appeals to you, would you contribute to the removal of this case, which is placed in front of Turkey like a stone, with your cooperation?”
‘WHAT YOU OPPOSE CAN BE UNDERSTOOD MORE CLEARLY’
Tuğrul Türkeş’s statement on the discussions and accusations against him over the Gezi Park case is as follows: “As far as I know, there are not two views in the AK Party! Therefore, there is no contradiction.
In the stories written or even dictated about the Gezi Park and the number 1 defendant, which have been referred to by mentioning my name on social media for a while, it is claimed that this issue has divided the AK Party and while I am pointed out as one side of the incident, some statements whose perpetrator is unknown are mentioned at the point where the other side is voiced. As far as I know, the AK Party is full of politicians who want the law to be manifested. Those who try to punch from the shadow are either crypto remnants or wage earners. T
heir views are not credible. What will you say if the shadowy types of the past say that tomorrow we have recanted our old ideas or that I have found a consultancy under better conditions? We are people of the cause who have defended the same views for a lifetime, who defend their cause in any case and in any place and under any condition, who can discuss in the light of day.
If you don’t believe, come out of the institutions and communities in whose shadow you take shelter.
1- Why do you object to the fact that this case is deemed to be independent from external influences within our legal system or that the legal process is carried out with objective evidence?
2- Is your objection valid only for this case? Or do you have other objections of this type that we do not know about?
3- On what ideological or security grounds do you object to the matter?
4- Do you object to the defense? Do you object to who is doing the defense?
5- Since you have no opposing opinion that we know of, have you been satisfied with the defense so far?
6- If the legal logic in the petitions appeals to you, would you contribute to the unanimous removal of this case, which has been put in front of Turkey like a stone?
7- If the journalists who bring the issue to the attention of the public are your fellow countrymen (by chance), will you evaluate what they write without prejudice? If you notice, I have not yet commented on the legal side of the matter.
Let’s discuss them too. In the light of day!!!”