19 Ocak’ta AGOS’un önünde


Üzerinden dört yıl geçti. İnsanların Hrant için, adalet için yazdıkları kitap oldu, çektikleri film oldu, belgesel oldu. Devletin adaleti yerine getirmek için kurduğu mahkemeyse sirk oldu. Hrant’ın avukatlarının ortaya koyduğu tarihi değiştirilerek imzalanmış temizlenme raporları, o raporlarda imzası olduğu halde soruşturulmasına izin verilmeyen yetkililer, avukatın sunduğu delilleri değerlendirmeyi reddeden bir mahkeme, duruşmalarda suçu birbirlerine atıp yumruklaşan sanıklar, Dink ailesinin ve hakimin önünde Ermeniler’e hakaret eden bir sanık avukatı ve tek yaptığı her fırsatta üzgün olduğunu söyleyen bir hükümet. Zannedersin çaresiz ve gıcık apartman komşusu, sadece salonda ağlayarak koltuk işgal ediyor, başka bir işe yaradığı yok. Dört yılın özeti bu aslında.

Bense hala 19 Ocak’tan önce olanlara takıldım kaldım. Sabiha Gökçen Ermeni olsa ne olur, olmasa ne olur? Ne farkeder? Yaşlı başlı gazetecilerin ‘hayıııır, değildiiii’ diye alınganlıktan bayılma raddesinde yazılar yazmaları çok acayip değil mi? Koskoca Genel Kurmay’ın resmi sayfasından oturup bu konuda çemkirmesi çok saçma değil mi? Sonra hadi bu saçma mesele büyüdü, artık Ülkü Ocakları “Hrant Dink bundan sonra bütün öfkemizin ve nefretimizin hedefidir, hedefimizdir’’ diye açıklama yaparken Hürriyet gazetesinin alakasız Asala manşetleri atması ateşe körükle gitmek değil mi? Vali yardımcısının Hrant’ı ayağına çağırtıp resmi makam odasında ‘parmak sallaması’ çok korkunç değil mi? Ama illa ki Sabiha Gökçen Ermeni olsa ne olur, olmasa ne olur?

Dava devletin elinde. Davanın seyriyse, Hrant’in ailesinin ve hepimizin kafasına vura vura yaşatılan haksızlık karşısında kalp sıkışmasına, nefes darlığına yol açsa da şaşkınlığa yol açmıyor çünkü bu devlette işler hep böyle yürüdü.

Ancak bu sefer kararlıyız, bu gidişatı değiştireceğiz, katledilmesinin dördüncü yılında, Hrant için, adalet için, Hrant’tan önce katledilen onlarca yazar, çizer, sevilmiş eşler, hala özlenen anneler, babalar için 19 Ocak’ta saat 15:00’te yine AGOS’un önündeyiz. Hatta şimdiden söyleyelim, o mahkemede adalet tecelli etmedikçe AGOS’un önüne gelmeye devam edeceğiz.

4 Comments

Add yours
  1. sbnm

    Sabiha Gokcen Ermeni olsa ne olur olmasa ne olur – cok dogru! Ve hatta keske Cumhurbaskani koltugunda oturan Abdullah Gul de 1TL’lik tazminat davasi acmak yerine “Ermeni olsam ne olur olmasam ne olur?” diyebilseydi. Diyebilecegi bir zihniyete sahip olsa ve bu zihniyetin egemen oldugu bir millet olsaydik da Hrant aramizda olsaydi.

  2. Zeynep Erdim

    Ara Hasserjian’dan.

    “We are two diseased nations, Armenians and Turks…”

    Find this quote by Hrant Dink online, and you will see that the rest of it sounds different depending on whose website you are looking at. The interpretation of those who have recognized the Genocide takes this quote down a path where Dink explains that Turks know that genocide was committed. That is, Dink’s diagnosis is that Armenians are in trauma, and that Turks are exhibiting a form of paranoia. Furthermore, dialogue between Armenians and Turks is necessary so that the two nations may “cure each other.” The Genocide-denialist variety of the same quote takes a different spin. Rather than allowing the G word to rear its ugly head, they turn it into message calling out on Diasporan Armenians to “unchain” themselves from 1915. That is, the prescription for Armenians is to ignore the symptoms and go do something else. And as for the Turks, they are just fine the way they are.

    Indeed, it has become commonplace for journalists, public intellectuals, and most commonly nationalists to mangle Dink’s words, and present their work as though it is endorsed by Hrant. Hrant has become like a commercial brand – A seal of trust that automatically validates the user as a voice for truth. What a brutal insult to the one man that both Armenians and Turks can agree was one hell of a good guy. No written piece on such an issue so loaded with nationalist biases should go without critical analysis – including this one.

    There is certainly no denying that Dink has become an icon for both those who acknowledge the reality of the Genocide and those that do not.

    For those who do, Dink is that fantastic example of the Turkish suppression of free press and free speech. His assassination was the demonstration of the deep-state that maintains its iron grip on Turkish mainstream public opinion. The imminent release of the gunman and the fact that the individuals responsible for the killing have yet to be apprehended serve as evidence that the legal will for justice still does not exist in Turkey. Dink v. Turkey (European Court of Human Rights) held that the Turkish State violated Article 2 for failing to protect Dink’s right to life and for ineffectively investigating his murder; Article 10 for unjustly interfering with Dink’s right to freedom of expression; and Article 13 for failing to effectively investigate the killing.

    For many Turks, it is Hrant Dink’s work with regards to Turkey’s other social issues that grant him his status. On the Armenian file, deniers of the Genocide frequently draw attention to the following: Dink had identified that Diasporan Armenians exhibit an obsession for Turkey to recognize their status as victims of genocide. This becomes shifted into an argument that Armenian judgement on the matter is so poisoned that they are presently the inhibitor to constructive negotiations (read: protocols) between the two nations. The Armenian Diaspora is painted as a revenge-thirsty lobby super power that ought to be feared.

    With about 5 months to go to the Turkish national elections, there are no signs of a change in sentiment from the current ruling party (see: http://www.economist.com/node/17905911). The protocol process has been stifled by the Turkish insistence that Armenia abandons its own Diaspora, and hands the Nagorno-Karabagh region to Azerbaijan. In the US, Armenian-American and Turkish-American supporters of the Armenian Genocide Resolution are angered and disappointed by the failure of Speaker Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership to honour their commitment to allow a bipartisan majority to vote on the resolution. Finally, Mr. Obama finds himself faced with the challenge of coming up with newer and more creative ways to break his promise to those of us who seek American courage on the matter, come April 24, 2011.

    Where does that leave the rest of us, as the self-proclaimed Hrant Dink’s of the world? Indeed, the group contains both deniers and advocates for the recognition of the Genocide. We could use this year to further entrench the fear and enmity we have become comfortable in having for one another. The alternative is that we work towards finding common ground, eliminating fear, and recognizing that in the absence of competing national interests, the Genocide would be a universally recognized fact.

    Armenian and Turkish national interests will continue to be steered by the politics of the region and the rest of the world. Perhaps it is naive to think that the psyches of Armenians and Turks will play a role in whether Armenians and Turks will be able to overcome the events of history. No one knows when the day will finally come that Armenian and Turkish governments realize that their interests need not necessarily run in opposition to one another. When that happens, however, it will be up to us, the thinking, talking, rationalizing, and opinion-forming public, to demonstrate that the fear and paranoia of days-past has been replaced with an anxiety to finally call one another neighbours.

    Ara Hasserjian
    January 19, 2011

+ Leave a Comment