The statute of limitations debate continues in the case of FETO's fugitive prosecutors

There has been a new development in the case where FETO's fugitive prosecutors Zekeriya Öz, Cihan Kansız and Mehmet Yüzgeç are being tried. The 22nd hearing has been completed in the case where FETO judges and prosecutors who played an active role in the conspiracy cases are being tried and is being heard in the 5th Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals. At the hearing held on September 8, 2026, the prosecutor repeated the opinion of the Supreme Court of Appeals Chief Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the fugitive defendants and requested the "case drop" for the defendants on the grounds of statute of limitations. Announcing an interim decision, the court stated that the case would continue on October 6, giving the complainants time until the next hearing for the defense for the prosecutor's main opinion.

“CRIMES OF A SPECIAL NATURE”

Speaking to our newspaper and emphasizing that the statute of limitations should be calculated separately for each crime, Criminal Lawyer Prof. Dr. Ümit Kocasakal stated that determining the crime correctly is decisive in determining the statute of limitations. Kocasakal warned, "In an environment where the elements of the crime of bribery or extortion may be present, the general crime of abuse of power regulated in Article 257 of the Turkish Penal Code cannot be applied without discussing and taking this issue into consideration. Because these crimes are, in a sense, 'special nature' and specially regulated crimes of abuse of power."

EMPHASIS ON "QUALITY OF THE ORGANIZATION"

Drawing attention to the actual "duties" of FETO and its militants, Kocasakal said, "Especially in this context, when it comes to prosecutors or judges who are members of the organization, the crime of abuse of power in general can be quite meaningless." Considering the determined nature and objectives of the organization; "Crimes such as violating the constitution (TCK 309), being a leader or member of an armed organization (TCK 314), political and military espionage (TCK 328) come into play," he said.

'MUST NEVER BE FORGOTTEN'

Underlining that it should not be forgotten even for a moment that FETO is the darkest and most insidious espionage organization in history, which was able to attempt a coup against the constitutional order, Kocasakal said, “This reality should not be forgotten, and we should not be weakened in the fight in any way. "Therefore, completely within the law, the militants of this organization who pose as judges and prosecutors should be held accountable for all the crimes they have committed, accurately, in accordance with the law and in a manner that will satisfy the sense of justice."

"According to Article 67 of the Turkish Penal Code, in cases where investigation and prosecution are subject to permission or where the perpetrator is determined to be a fugitive, the statute of limitations stops until this decision is lifted," said lawyer Dr. Onur İste said, “When the reason for suspension ends, the statute of limitations continues from where it left off. "It is necessary to distinguish between the suspension of the statute of limitations and its interruption," he said.

'HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED WHEN THE DECISION WAS MADE TO LEAK'

Stating that it was seen that the suspects had escaped in the incident in question, İste said, “The crimes in question; He determined that "a fugitive decision should have been given within the framework of the procedure in Article 247 of the CMK, for reasons such as being linked to crimes against the security of the state, against the Constitutional order and, most importantly, within the framework of the activities of an armed organization." "If it is decided that the suspects are fugitives, as it should be, the statute of limitations process has stopped with the fugitive decision," said İste, adding, "In this case, since the days will not continue to be counted in the statute of limitations, it cannot be said that the extended statute of limitations has expired." used.

'THE PROCESSES SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED SEPARATELY'

İste stated that the second reason for the stop was to continue the investigation after permission was given for these crimes, and concluded his words as follows:

“As far as it is understood, this investigation has been continued with the decision of the HSK Second Chamber dated 2021. Until this permission is granted, the statute of limitations is considered to have stopped. The statute of limitations has stopped in the period between the date of request for permission to prosecute and the date in which the permission to prosecute is granted in 2021, and this period should not be included in the calculation. In order to prosecute judges and prosecutors, permission for investigation and permission for prosecution must be obtained separately. Both periods of leave stop the statute of limitations separately. "Even if the statute of limitations had never stopped, the statute of limitations for these more serious crimes should have been taken into consideration and a longer statute of limitations should have been applied, since these crimes were not individual crimes, they included crimes such as violations of the Constitution, and were committed within the framework of armed organization activities."