The Woman Vs. The State

The extra­or­di­na­ry case of Pınar Selek.

On the after­noon of July 9, 1998, a fatal explo­sion took place in the Spice Bazaar, one of the lar­gest mar­ket­places in Istan­bul. Minutes before, a sud­den down­pour had dri­ven a crowd of shop­pers to huddle at the heart of the explo­sion, a doner shop cal­led Unluo­glu Bufe at the entrance of the bazaar. The blast clai­med seven lives and left 127 people inju­red. The Istan­bul Police Depart­ment imme­dia­te­ly laun­ched a foren­sic inves­ti­ga­tion into the source of the explo­sion. The ques­tion on everyone’s lips was obvious : was this a ter­ro­rist attack ?

Two days later, a 27-year-old anti-mili­ta­rist socio­lo­gy gra­duate named Pınar Selek was col­la­red by police on the street and taken to the sta­tion. She’d been put­ting toge­ther an oral his­to­ry of the Kur­dis­tan Wor­kers’ Par­ty (PKK), an out­la­wed insur­gen­cy group that has fought an armed struggle for self-deter­mi­na­tion against the Tur­kish state in the sou­theast of the coun­try since 1984 (the vio­lence has sub­si­ded since the cea­se­fire in March 2013.) As part of her research, Selek had been tal­king to mem­bers of the PKK to find out why they had cho­sen this path of radi­ca­lism and vio­lence. When the police arres­ted her, they deman­ded she reveal the iden­ti­ties of the guer­rilla figh­ters she had been tal­king to. She did not ; she refu­sed to put her inter­vie­wees at risk. The police accu­sed her of aiding and abet­ting the PKK, and kept her in cus­to­dy. After seven days of tor­ture, she was locked up. She was nei­ther accu­sed of, nor inter­ro­ga­ted about, the Spice Bazaar explo­sion, but one eve­ning, 20 days into her incar­ce­ra­tion, she was wat­ching TV in the pri­son ward when she saw her­self on the news and heard the anchor­man refer to “the Spice Bazaar bom­ber, Pınar Selek”.

Pınar Selek was born in Istan­bul in 1971 to a human rights lawyer father and a phar­ma­cist mother. Theirs was a modest bour­geois fami­ly with a strong socia­list lineage. Her grand­fa­ther, Cemal Hakkı Selek, was a lawyer and senior lea­der in the Wor­kers Par­ty of Tur­key (TIP), the first socia­list par­ty to enter the Tur­kish par­lia­ment, and – most­ly by vir­tue of endor­sing a Mar­xist, pro-Kur­dish rights stance – a long-stan­ding arch-ene­my of the anti-com­mu­nist Tur­kish mili­ta­ry. Her father, Alp Selek, fol­lo­wed in the foots­teps of his father and became a TIP exe­cu­tive. Selek’s first encoun­ter with pri­son came at the age of nine when she would visit her father, who, fol­lo­wing the mili­ta­ry coup of the 12th of Sep­tem­ber 1980, was jai­led for five years for being a TIP mem­ber. “I thought of pri­son as a place to hang out with intel­lec­tuals. There was a sense of soli­da­ri­ty in pri­son as there was in our hou­se­hold,” she says over Skype from her stu­dy in Stras­bourg, where she now lives in exile. It looks to be a cosy room, with book­shelves cram­med with phi­lo­so­phy books. I expec­ted a har­de­ned scho­lar, but I’m gree­ted by a soft-fea­tu­red, mother­ly woman who wel­comes me with a big smile and ins­tant­ly calls me “my dear Esra”.

Selek grew up among the intel­li­gent­sia of the time. Scho­lars and authors would frequent her fami­ly home, which she says was more like a com­mune, where poli­tics was a natu­ral part of life. “To me, the 12th of Sep­tem­ber marks the end of that warm and cheer­ful envi­ron­ment,” she says. The idea of not trus­ting the offi­cial ideo­lo­gy and the mains­tream media was ins­til­led in her at a very young age. She wit­nes­sed the rise of extreme fas­cism in her pri­ma­ry school after the 12th of Sep­tem­ber. “My tea­cher stop­ped coming to my mum’s phar­ma­cy after my father was locked up. I’d hear people reve­ring Kenan Evren [the coup lea­der and then-pre­sident] as a pasha, but back home my mum and her friends would watch his tele­vi­sed speeches and say he was lying.”

When she was 11, a senior fami­ly friend, Tur­kish author and trans­la­tor Adnan Cem­gil (also a foun­ding mem­ber of TIP), gave her a copy of Denis Diderot’s The Nun. Upon rea­ding it she came to the conclu­sion that she wan­ted to see a nun in real life, so she deci­ded to apply to Notre Dame de Sion, a French high school, which was foun­ded by French sis­ters. Her ear­ly anta­go­nism with the military’s ideo­lo­gy began around this time. “After the coup, the Minis­try of Natio­nal Edu­ca­tion assi­gned real­ly fas­cist tea­chers to classes like his­to­ry and lite­ra­ture in these schools [bilin­gual high schools],” she says. Once, in a natio­nal secu­ri­ty class, a now-defunct course where a colo­nel would edu­cate stu­dents on the Tur­kish armed forces and mat- ters of natio­nal secu­ri­ty, the tea­cher orga­ni­sed a field trip to a mili­ta­ry school. She refu­sed to go along and meet the sol­diers and was given her first deten­tion.

But her most for­ma­tive years came towards the end of high school. One day she met a home­less boy near her school. She asked him for a ciga­rette and they struck up a friend­ship. Then, gra­dual­ly, she met others. “I was a sto­ry­tel­ler, so I star­ted tel­ling sto­ries to these kids,” she says. “We main­tai­ned a friend­ship for years, then one day – I was at uni­ver­si­ty at this point – they said : ‘You go home at night and put on your slip­pers, don’t you ? Why don’t you stay with us one night?’ So I star­ted slee­ping rough to keep them com­pa­ny.”

Slee­ping on the streets of Istan­bul, she says, defi­ned her out­look on life. « I trus­ted the home­less. We were friends. They saw me as their sis­ter. » I ask if power poli­tics was invol­ved in the rela­tion­ship. “It was an orga­nic rela­tion­ship, not a ‘pro­ject’. I never han­ded them out any money,” she says. Accor­ding toSe­lek, the kids were wea­ry of jour­na­lists and resear­chers who capi­ta­li­sed on their sto­ry. So she tried not to ana­lyse them, fea­ring a stu­dy would objec­ti­fy them. Ins­tead, in 1994, she foun­ded an art col­lec­tive cal­led Street Artists’ Work­shop. “I knew lots of dif­ferent groups in the streets, inclu­ding sex wor­kers, most of whom were trans­gen­der people,” she says. “We all got toge­ther, about 50 people, and we squat­ted in an aban­do­ned buil­ding in Tak­sim and made art. It brought us toge­ther. Until 1998.”

Just as the cama­ra­de­rie of her child­hood hou­se­hold was ended by the mili­ta­ry coup in 1980, when the police appre­hen­ded Selek near the Street Artists’ Work­shop on the 11th of July 11 1998, she was taken away from her col­lec­tive and eve­ry­thing she’d wor­ked towards. “The intel­li­gence depart­ment had tap­ped the phones of the PKK mem­bers I tal­ked to – that’s why they star­ted fol­lo­wing me,” she explains. The police inter­ro­ga­ted her to extract infor­ma­tion about her research. She had a few flop­py disks contai­ning her work, but she hadn’t used her inter­vie­wees’ names, cal­ling them “X”, “Y” and “Z” ins­tead. The police told her they’d release her if she gave them names and they advi­sed her to for­get about her research. But Selek refu­sed to dis­close the inter­vie­wees’ iden­ti­ties, and so the police tor­tu­red her. “They applied elec­tric shocks to my temples,” she says. “What’s fun­ny is I’d always been against psy­chia­try, I’d done research on men­tal ins­ti­tu­tions and I’d par­ti­cu­lar­ly been against shock the­ra­py. Sud­den­ly I was being given elec­tric shocks to my temples!”

She gives a half-sup­pres­sed, iro­nic laugh, and then goes on to des­cribe her tor­ture in a mat­ter-of-fact, almost cli­ni­cal man­ner. “The worst was when they hung me by my arms and dis­lo­ca­ted one of them. They put it back shod­di­ly and my shoul­der was torn. For the first four months in pri­son I couldn’t even move my lit­tle fin­ger.” After a week in cus­to­dy, during which her lawyer says no legal assis­tance was offe­red, Selek was arres­ted by the State Secu­ri­ty Court (later repla­ced by Istan­bul Hea­vy Penal Courts) and was sub­se­quent­ly incar- cera­ted. On the 28th of July 1998 she was indic­ted for mem­ber­ship of an ille­gal orga­ni­sa­tion.

While this was going on, an inves­ti­ga­tion had been laun­ched into the Spice Bazaar explo­sion. Within the first ten days fol- lowing the blast, an ini­tial crime scene inves­ti­ga­tion report, an expert-opi­nion report of the cri­mi­nal police labo­ra­to­ry pre­pa­red by the police bomb experts, and a final police crime scene inves­ti­ga­tion report all sta­ted that there were no fin­dings indi­ca­ting a bomb. But 15 days after Selek’s indict- ment for “mem­ber­ship of an ille­gal orga­ni­sa­tion”, some­thing strange hap­pe­ned.

On the 12th of August, the Tur­kish police had arres­ted a young Kur­dish man who alle­ged­ly had been plan­ning to escape to PKK camps in Greece via Edirne, a pro­vince in the Tur­kish Thrace near the Greek bor­der. Under tor­ture, he had named seve­ral alle­ged guer­rilla mem­bers, one of whom was Abdul­me­cit Ozturk, ano­ther young Kurd. When the police took Ozturk into cus­to­dy, he made a sur­prise confes­sion : he and Selek were the main per­pe­tra­tors behind the Spice Bazaar explo­sion, and they had made a bomb toge­ther at his aunt’s place.

Ozturk then went to trial, where it trans­pi­red that his sta­te­ment was taken under police tor­ture and he renoun­ced his tes­ti­mo­ny in front of the State Secu­ri­ty Court judge. He told the judge that he was tor­tu­red into signing a false tes­ti­mo­ny and that he didn’t even know Selek. While still in the cour­thouse, the police repor­ted­ly took him aside and once again threa­te­ned him with tor­ture. He went back before the judge and retur­ned to the ori­gi­nal tes­ti­mo­ny, which incri­mi­na­ted both him­self and Selek.

Fol­lo­wing Ozturk’s coer­ced tes­ti­mo­ny, the public pro­se­cu­tor indic­ted Selek for the Spice Bazaar explo­sion, in addi­tion to her prior charge and appoin­ted a new team of experts to fur­ther inves­ti­gate the source of the explo­sion. On the 2nd of Novem­ber 1998, a new report said that there were fin­dings of nitro­cel­lu­lose at the crime scene, a che­mi­cal sub­stance that is com­mon­ly asso­cia­ted with explo­sives. This was later refu­ted by Istan­bul University’s Ana­ly­ti­cal Che­mi­cal Depart­ment, which conclu­ded that nitro-cel­lu­lose was also com­mon­ly found in eve­ry­day mate­rials from ink, var­nish and lea­ther to meat pro­ducts.

In a court hea­ring the fol­lo­wing year, the chief ins­pec­tor and head of the police bomb dis­po­sal bureau said that no trace of a bomb was found and that this kind of explo­sion could have been cau­sed by a gas leak. This sta­te­ment was fur­ther backed by two new reports pre­pa­red by the Cer­rah­pa­sa Facul­ty of Medi­cine, which conclu­ded that the wounds of the Spice Bazaar vic­tims were incon­sistent with those of a bomb blast. In addi­tion, ano­ther foren­sic report pre­pa­red by a new team of experts com­mis­sio­ned by the court sta­ted that the explo­sion could be tra­ced back to a gas leak in the doner shop. In light of these fin­dings, on the 22nd of Decem­ber 2000, the court orde­red Selek’s release from pri­son.

During her two and a half year incar­ce­ra­tion she stayed in Umra­niye Pri­son in a three-sto­rey buil­ding that held around 300 women, all poli­ti­cal pri­so­ners, most of them Kur­dish. Each floor hou­sed a com­mu­nal ward com­pri­sed of a kit­chen, an acti­vi­ty area and a dor­mi­to­ry hou­sing 80 to 100 women. In Selek’s ward there were elder­ly Kur­dish women who were locked up on charges of being PKK accom­plices because they’d shel­te­red their guer­rilla figh­ter sons. These women mas­sa­ged her woun­ded arms and shoul­ders eve­ry day for months. She lear­ned Kur­dish to be able to com­mu­ni­cate with them. “I am indeb­ted to them for hea­ling me,” she recalls. “I had love­ly encoun­ters in pri­son. Not once in those two and a half years was I bored. I wor­ked hard, I wrote books – they were all confis­ca­ted except for one, which I mana­ged to sneak out with the help of a friend,” she says. I did not expect her to talk so fond­ly of pri­son. The way she talks about it, it’s almost as if she refuses to ack­now­ledge that her situa­tion had been for­ci­bly impo­sed upon her. By accen­tua­ting the posi­tive in her expe­rience, she seems to turn the punish­ment on its head.

On the day she was relea­sed, she was gree­ted by a crowd of home­less kids and trans­gen­der friends. Selek said she didn’t have the strength to be hap­py about her own release given the war that was pla­guing Tur­key and the condi­tions of the other pri­so­ners she was lea­ving behind.Instead of mar­king her free­dom, howe­ver, her release was the begin­ning of a Kaf­kaesque struggle with the Tur­kish jus­tice sys­tem. In 2001, four months after her release, the Minis­try of the Inter­ior and the Istan­bul Police Depart­ment sent a let­ter to the court and sub­mit­ted ano­ther expert-opi­nion report pre­pa­red by the cri­mi­nal labo­ra­to­ry of the gen­dar­me­rie, clai­ming the explo­sion was, in fact, cau­sed by a bomb. This report was found incon­clu­sive and refu­ted by four uni­ver­si­ty experts’ reports in the fol­lo­wing year, tra­cing the explo­sion back to a gas leak. On the 8th of June 8 2006, The Istan­bul 12th Hea­vy Penal Court acquit­ted Selek on all counts, citing lack of cre­dible evi­dence lin­king her to the explo­sion. Ozturk, her alle­ged accom­plice, was also acquit­ted of bom­bing the Spice Bazaar.

A year later, howe­ver, the 9th Cri­mi­nal Cham­ber of the Supreme Court – a higher court – revo­ked the acquit­tal on the basis that no ver­dict had been given. The case went back to the lower court the fol­lo­wing year, and Selek and Ozturk were once again acquit­ted on all counts, again citing a lack of evi­dence. On the 10th March 2009, the Supreme Court qua­shed Selek’s acquit­tal once again. This time the pro­se­cu­tion confir­med Ozturk’s acquit­tal, but over­tur­ned Selek’s, mea­ning that his coer­ced confes­sion was used to incri­mi­nate only Selek.

When she found out that the Supreme Court had revo­ked her second acquit­tal, she went to visit her father, who is also one of her lawyers. He advi­sed her to leave the coun­try imme­dia­te­ly in case the pro­se­cu­tion deman­ded an emer­gen­cy deten­tion – she had been tried for life impri­son­ment. Selek flew to Ber­lin where she was gran­ted a PEN Wri­ters in Exile scho­lar­ship and stayed there until 2011, when she moved to Stras­bourg to begin a PhD in poli­ti­cal sciences.

In the first few months of her exile, she lived out of her suit­case, staying in dif­ferent places and conti­nuing to write. In an article des­cri­bing her years in exile she drew com­pa­ri­sons to the laby­rin­thine archi­tec­ture of the Gar­den of Exile in the Jewish Museum in Ber­lin to des­cribe the fee­ling of not being able to grasp the ground below your feet when you’re without a coun­try.

Gra­dual­ly she car­ved out a new life for her­self and tur­ned her exile to her advan­tage. “I call it dŽsexil,” she says, resor­ting to French to des­cribe a fee­ling she first encoun­te­red in ano­ther lan­guage. “It means I’ve risen up to it. I’ve kept wor­king and got invol­ved in new acti­vist net­works,” she says. I ask her if being a thin­ker in exile grants her a spe­cial sta­tus in her per­so­nal rela­tion­ships, and whe­ther she sways bet­ween fee­ling like a vic­tim and a hero. Could this lead to a form of nar­cis­sism ? “I became aware of that [pos­si­bi­li­ty] ear­ly on when I was relea­sed from pri­son. I pro­mi­sed myself that I’d never play that game,” she says. “But I never for­get that I am a vic­tim. Dis­tan­cing your­self from your vic­tim­hood doesn’t mean you ignore it, but you don’t build an iden­ti­ty upon it. Ins­tead I focus on my work while the soli­da­ri­ty group [Jus­tice for Pınar Selek] takes care of the poli­tics.”

In her absence she was still being tried in Tur­key. Two years after her self-impo­sed exile, the Supreme Court deman­ded the annulment of her acquit­tal once more. In 2012, a new­ly appoin­ted, tem­po­ra­ry com­mit­tee – for­med when the case’s ori­gi­nal judge was on sick leave – of the Hea­vy Penal Court annul­led its own acquit­tal deci­sion, and the back and forth ended on the 24th of Janua­ry 2013, when the same court sen­ten­ced Selek to life impri­son­ment. The fol­lo­wing sum­mer, the court issued an inter­na­tio­nal war­rant reques­ting France hand over Selek, which Inter­pol refu­sed to act on.

“Pınar’s case bears simi­la­ri­ties to the Guild­ford Four case,” says Akın Ata­lay, one of Selek’s lawyers, refer­ring to the group who were wrong­ful­ly convic­ted of bom­bings car­ried out by the IRA in two pubs in Guild­ford in 1974. He says that Selek’s case is a clas­si­cal example of judi­cial mis­car­riage. “The poli­ti­cal cli­mate in Tur­key still allows for this,” he says, poin­ting out that there are so many people who have been incri­mi­na­ted without cre­dible evi­dence. “Pınar’s luck is that she had the public opi­nion and the inter­na­tio­nal com­mu­ni­ty behind her.”

Selek believes her incar­ce­ra­tion was part of a cam­pai­gn car­ried out by the Tur­kish state under the tute­lage of the power­ful mili­ta­ry elite. In the late 90s, the mili­ta­ry moni­to­red the civi­lian govern­ment and sus­pec­ted anyone who they dee­med a threat to natio­nal secu­ri­ty. Since the foun­ding of the Tur­kish repu­blic in 1923, the Tur­kish mili­ta­ry has vie­wed itself as the guar­dian of the secu­lar state and has gui­ded it on the strict prin­ciples of Kema­lism, to which Kur­dish sepa­ra­tism is one of the main threats. In those days, when the Kur­dish-Tur­kish conflict was at its bloo­diest, her research explo­ring the roots of PKK vio­lence fell under the radar.

Res­pon­sible for four coups (in 1960, 1971, 1980 and 1997), the mili­ta­ry has control­led civi­lian rule in order to fine-tune the secu­ri­ty poli­cies in forei­gn affairs, defend secu­la­rism and fight PKK sepa­ra­tism. But the defi­ni­tion of who is consi­de­red a PKK mem­ber remai­ned lar­ge­ly ambi­guous. In a bid to sup­press PKK ter­ror, they oppres­sed anyone who dared to explore the issue, inclu­ding scho­lars, jour­na­lists and authors.

It’s worth noting that in Tur­key the days of mili­ta­ry tute­lage appear to be over, since the AKP and its lea­der, Prime Minis­ter Erdo­gan, assu­med power in 2003 and gra­dual­ly cur­tai­led the military’s influence through new poli­cies and the wide­ly pub- lici­sed Erge­ne­kon trials. (Though they now repla­ced it with their own auto­cra­tic rule, rather than res­to­ring demo­cra­cy.) The AKP comes from a conser­va­tive, Isla­mist lega­cy and now repre­sents the more reli­gious sects of the Tur­kish socie­ty, who, along with mino­ri­ty groups, were alie­na­ted by the mili­ta­ry elite, in an attempt to pro­tect the secu­lar esta­blish­ment. Selek says the Supreme Court’s deci­sions are a han­go­ver from the late 90s.

Selek’s first conscious memo­ry of the Kur­dish conflict was in her late 20s when she was at uni­ver­si­ty. A friend from Sive­rek, a town in the sou­theast of Tur­key with an eth­nic Kurd popu­la­tion, told her that he had been taught Tur­kish in school but that he had lear­ned it by force. In the sum­mer of 1993 he invi­ted Selek to his vil­lage. She was overw­hel­med by what she saw. “Nobo­dy spoke Tur­kish. I came across a com­ple­te­ly dif­ferent people, a whole other culture. I was confron­ted with my own igno­rance.”

She ended up staying three weeks and lear­ned about Kur­dish folk­lore. Upon her return to Istan­bul she edu­ca­ted her­self on the Kur­dish-Tur­kish conflict, and in 1997, after wor­king with the trans­gen­der groups in Tur­key, she deci­ded to find out why the majo­ri­ty of Kurds, under the PKK, had cho­sen a path of vio­lence. “It was an ana­ly­sis of a social move­ment. I’m an anti- mili­ta­rist, I’m against vio­lence, but my aim wasn’t to cri­ti­cise it. As a socio­lo­gist, I wan­ted to explore the moti­va­tions behind their radi­ca­li­sa­tion.

“You know how they’re always label­led as ‘forei­gn ene­mies’. They were ter­ro­rists but they weren’t ‘ghosts’ or ‘ene­mies’ – they’ve been living in these lands. The roots of their social move­ment were inherent in the socia­list move­ments that were led by Mahir Cayan, Deniz Gez­mis and the Tur­kish left of the 70s [model­led] after Latin Ame­ri­ca. They took Kur­dis­tan as a star­ting point, and deci­ded to take to the moun­tains. I wan­ted to unders­tand the genea­lo­gy of this social move­ment.”

Her desire to unders­tand the dif­ferent sects of Tur­kish socie­ty cost her 16 years of judi­cial harass­ment and, to an extent, her free­dom. A month ago, her lawyers appea­led to the Supreme Court and she is awai­ting its deci­sion on June 11. If the Supreme Court revokes her life sen­tence, she will be retried in the Hea­vy Penal Court. On the first inter­view we conduct after her appeal trial on the 30th of April this year, she looks drai­ned, but keeps up a good-humou­red front. “If the life impri­son­ment is not revo­ked, the state will have offi­cial­ly slan­de­red me as a ter­ro­rist,” she says.

Selek has become one of most dis­cus­sed women in Tur­key, both mali­gned and cham­pio­ned, and her sto­ry has occu­pied the Tur­kish conscience for almost two decades – so much so that, iro­ni­cal­ly enough, the public often for­gets the other, Kur­dish defen­dants invol­ved in her trial.

Over the course of our inter­views, I found myself dee­ply preoc­cu­pied with her sto­ry, trying to work out the moti­va­tion behind her per­ilous jour­ney to the per­iphe­ry of Tur­kish socie­ty and her constant gra­vi­ta­tion towards mino­ri­ty groups and the under­pri­vi­le­ged. For a serious scho­lar who has writ­ten nume­rous books, she comes across as quite a roman­tic, dis­playing the kind of self-sacri­fi­cing, some­times naïve, idea­lism that oppres­sive socie­ties can often breed. How did this well-mea­ning, anti-mili­ta­rist woman end up being accu­sed of such a hei­nous crime ? “In Tur­key,” she says, “they’re more sca­red of people who want peace.”

by Esra Gur­men

https://www.vice.com/en/article/wdaqnw/the-woman-vs-the-state





© copyright 2016  |   Site réalisé par cograph.eu