Kenan Ayaz, a Kurdish man accused of being a PKK member in Hamburg, has been deprived of the right to speak when he criticised an expert opinion. The defendant called Erdogan a fascist and said that the court was obviously not interested in the truth.
In the PKK trial against the Kurdish politician Kenan Ayaz before the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg, the presiding judge has cut off the defendant from speaking. Ayaz is charged with membership of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) under sections 129a/b of the German Criminal Code (StGB). He was arrested in Cyprus a year ago on the basis of a European arrest warrant requested by the Federal Court of Justice and extradited to Germany at the beginning of June 2023. Since then, he has been in custody in Hamburg. The trial was opened last November and is provisionally scheduled to run until mid-May.
Statement on questionable expert opinion
In the final main hearing on Monday, Kenan Ayaz made the third attempt to make a statement on the expert opinion of the court-appointed expert Dr Günter Seufert. In the fifty-page expert report, Seufert gives his opinion on the following questions: ‘a) Genesis and development of the Kurdish conflict in Turkey; b) Ideology and goals of the PKK/KCK organisation; c) Organisational and leadership structures of the PKK/KCK organisation, including the structures in Europe (including the creation of an organisational chart); d) Financing and public relations work of the PKK/KCK organisation; Military and terrorist procedures and activities of the PKK/KCK’.
The expert opinion was presented on four trial days, the expert was also questioned by the defence and the defendant himself. Kenan Ayaz was interrupted twice by the presiding judge, who told him that his questions were too long and contained statements that he could make after the end of the evidence, but that he was only allowed to ask questions now.
Irritating interventions by the judge
Ayaz has been trying to make such a statement in connection with further motions for evidence for three days of the trial. However, his criticism of gaps in the expert report and false statements made by the expert witness is constantly interrupted by the presiding judge. On Monday, too, the judge quickly intervened harshly, arguing that the defendant was exceeding his right to make statements. Kenan Ayaz and his defence lawyers Antonia von der Behrens and Stephan Kuhn each made clear in statements the connection between the passages in question and the expert report. The defendant patiently explained which of the expert’s statements he was referring to and repeatedly emphasised that the expert had taken a different position in his old texts – which Ayaz had requested to be read out – than in his expert opinion given at the hearing.
Excited reaction to the women’s revolution in Rojava
It seemed to become unbearable for the judge when Kenan Ayaz stated in his opinion on the statements in the expert report in relation to Rojava (autonomous region of North and East Syria): ‘The revolution in Rojava is a revolution led by women. Its character is determined by the fact that it is based on women’s freedom.’ The Turkish state is attacking ‘children, women, schools, hospitals, water treatment plants, factories, electricity plants and similar places; it is attacking the living spaces of five million people. These attacks constitute war crimes under international law. Nevertheless, he is carrying out his attacks openly in full view of humanity.’ At this point, the next interruption followed, and the judge, visibly agitated, thought aloud about withdrawing the defendant’s right to speak.
Kenan Ayaz: ‘Everyone is talking about Kurds, can I speak as a Kurd myself?’
Kenan Ayaz, who has already spent ten years in Turkish prisons, reacted with his usual aplomb and once again pointed out his points of criticism with astonishing patience: The expert had censored his own earlier writings for the court report and reversed his old views. Apparently, the court did not want the truth to come to light. In the proceedings, the Kurds were being talked about all the time, the court should listen to this topic ‘from the mouth of a Kurd’. The judge then said: ‘You don’t have to lecture me, I’m conducting the trial.’
Judge: ‘I’m not answering your questions!’
When Kenan Ayaz asked whether the problem was that he was calling Turkish President Erdogan a fascist, the judge did not want to answer (‘I’m not answering your questions!’) and accused the defendant of obviously wanting to prepare his own expert opinion. Finally, the presiding judge cut off Kenan Ayaz and argued that his previous statement had consisted mainly of opinions and his own judgements. The judge’s order was objected to by the defence after a break in the proceedings. The federal prosecution then argued in favour of also hearing the rest of the defendant’s statement. Following the objection to the order by the defence, a decision must be made by the panel of three judges. The trial was adjourned until today.
Defence: Misinterpretations lead to false conclusions
The defence complains that their client is being accused of abusing his right to make a statement. Kenan Ayaz had analysed and criticised the expert witness’s statements and classified their relevance to the proceedings from his point of view, according to the defence lawyers in their statement of objection:
‘Mr Ayaz clearly assumes that comprehensive knowledge of the historical conditions of the Kurdish conflict makes its modern manifestation, which is the subject of the present proceedings, comprehensible and that only against this background can the conditions and scope of action of today’s actors be classified: For example, the realisation that the conflict cannot be resolved by a state, but only transnationally. Another key point is that the analysis of Turkey’s inadequate democratic and constitutional development suggests that a solution to the Kurdish question is only possible in conjunction with the democratisation of Turkey. Finally, he analyses the conflict as one that is being pursued by Turkey with a practice that is also based on the physical destruction of the Kurds. It is obvious that such a starting point leads to different conclusions regarding the possibility of a complete renunciation of the possibility of armed resistance. However, the defendant must develop and explain all this from the historical conditions in order to be able to show at which points the expert reaches false conclusions or assessments of his analysis of the causes or circumstances of the conflict, the actions and ideology of its actors through a shortened historical approach, misinterpretations of the historical or current situation.’
Further trial dates
Due to a court order, the ID cards of visitors are currently being copied. The background to this is that the presiding judge does not readily tolerate the solidarity expressed towards the accused through clapping. Further hearing dates are
Tuesday, 12.3.2024;
Wednesday, 20 March 2024;
Friday, 12 April 2024, from 1 pm;
Wednesday, 17 April 2024;
Friday, 19.4.2024;
Monday, 22.2.2024;
Wednesday, 24.4.2024;
Friday, 26 April 2024
Thursday, 2 May 2024
Wednesday, 15 May 2024
The trial will take place on the 1st floor of the OLG at Sievekingplatz 3, either in room 237 or 288, the hearings usually start at 9.30 am.
Postal address and donation account
The website kenanwatch.org provides information in Greek, English and German about the trial and the protests in Cyprus and Germany. Kenan Ayaz is happy to receive mail. Letters can also be written in languages other than Kurdish or Turkish, as translation is guaranteed. Please note the spelling of the authority’s name ‘Ayas’ so that the letters can be delivered.
Kenan Ayas
Hamburg remand centre
Holstenglacis 3
20355 Hamburg
Donation account:
Rote Hilfe e.V. OG Hamburg
Keyword: Free Kenan
IBAN: DE06200100200084610203