An investigation was launched by the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor's Office against the Chairman of the dissolved Future Party, Ahmet Davutoğlu, on the charge of "insulting the President" due to his old videos and statements being re-circulated on social media.
Davutoğlu's lawyer, Hasan Seymen, announced that the videos and statements subject to the investigation were responses to the accusations of a person in a coffeehouse in Bingöl's Genç district on September 11, 2021. In the relevant video, Davutoğlu touched upon the process of leaving the Prime Ministry and its aftermath and said, "If I had remained silent, I would have remained in the Prime Ministry, I would have added billions to my billions like the ones after me. I did not eat a penny of illicit food... He made his son-in-law a minister. He made his relatives rich. He gave Türkiye away to five contractors."
Davutoğlu went to Ankara Courthouse yesterday to testify within the scope of the investigation. Saadet Party Chairman Mahmut Arıkan and DEVA Party Chairman Ali Babacan were also with Davutoğlu to support him.
Özgür Özel also called Davutoğlu and supported him.
Davutoğlu's statement to the prosecutor's office lasted approximately 1 hour. Making a statement to the press in front of the courthouse, Davutoğlu said; "For the first time in the history of the Republic, a prime minister called me to the courthouse as a suspect because he expressed his opinion and expressed his criticisms. I want this to be known by everyone. I gave my statement as a citizen of the Republic of Turkey, with the belief that no one is above the judiciary, due to my respect for the judiciary. I am not going to make a long statement now. From now on, I will never give a positive answer to the interviews of the national famous press. Because this is not my personal reputation, but the reputation of my country. I have decided to withdraw from politics. From now on, I will continue to express my views within the framework of the truths I believe in. "I promise my nation from now on that I will continue to be a friend and true to my Lord and my nation," he said.
Davutoğlu in his statement to the prosecutor's office; His purpose is not to engage in personal defence; Stating that it is to defend justice, public property, democracy and freedom of expression; "It is known to the public conscience that this investigation was initiated not for legal reasons, but for political motives, and that it aimed to discredit me and intimidate others through this investigation, rather than reaching the material reality. The fact that I learned from the media that the investigation had been opened, and the date and time at which I would testify was later leaked to the press, clearly shows the situation in which the judiciary has fallen in our country," he said.
Davutoğlu said, "What really needs to be investigated should be the allegations in my statements in the conversation, and I should have been invited to the prosecutor's office to get information, not as a suspect." "This is what should happen in a real state of law. When I learned about the investigation, my lawyer immediately contacted the prosecutor's office and informed me that we would come to Ankara on September 14 to testify due to my son's wedding on September 12, and an agreement was reached on this matter. Despite this, although there was no suspicion of escape or obfuscation of evidence and the investigation was based on a public conversation made years ago, a verbal instruction was given for September 7. This approach was implemented with the procedures stipulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure and the principle of legal security. "It is incompatible with the seriousness of the state. The tragic thing is that the prosecutor's office, which waited 5 years to open an investigation, could not wait 5 days to take my statement."
Davutoğlu emphasized that the video subject of the investigation is a speech he made in Bingöl on September 11, 2021; "The state is the common trust of the nation; public duty is the responsibility to protect this trust. This is the moral and political source of my objection. Whatever I said then about the use of public resources, nepotism, incompetence and privileges granted to certain groups, I still own and defend those words today. Moreover, the findings I made in that speech have not only maintained their currentness with the developments that have taken place in the intervening time, but have been confirmed by bitter experiences; they continue to get worse," he said.
Reminding that according to the established jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), the Constitutional Court (AYM) and the Supreme Court of Appeals, the limits of acceptable criticism towards politicians and people using public power are much wider than ordinary individuals; "Politicians, as a requirement of their duties and public positions, have to show more tolerance to harsh, shocking, disturbing and even hurtful criticism. As a matter of fact, there are hundreds of decisions of non-prosecution given by the public prosecutor's offices on the same grounds for very serious criticisms and statements made against me during the periods when I was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Prime Ministry and the chairman of the political party. The law cannot change according to individuals and political positions. While the words directed at me are considered freedom of expression, considering my political criticisms as a crime is incompatible with the principle of equality before the law."
Davutoğlu said, "The President is also the chairman of a political party and is the direct party of political discussions and polemics in active politics." "This reality must be taken into account when applying Article 299 of the Turkish Penal Code. It is incompatible with the democratic social order for a person who is a party to active politics to benefit from absolute and privileged criminal law protection against political criticism. In line with the legal, political and moral justifications I have explained, in this investigation file, whose procedure and timing indicate that the action was taken with political motives, I request a decision to be taken against me immediately stating that there is no need for prosecution, in accordance with Article 172 of the Code of Criminal Procedure."
