Ahmet Özer made a defense: My meeting with my own nephew was attempted to be used as evidence.

On October 30, Esenyurt Mayor Ahmet Özer, who was arrested on charges of "membership in a terrorist organization" and replaced by a trustee, defended himself by connecting to the Istanbul 3rd Criminal Court of Peace via SEGBİS from prison.

"I HAVE NEVER BEEN A MEMBER OF ANY TERRORIST ORGANIZATION IN MY LIFE"

In his defense, which was not fully recorded in the minutes, Özer stated that he was unjustly and baselessly detained, saying: "In your presence, I am being held in detention on the grounds of an accusation of supposedly being a member of a terrorist organization, which is quite unjust and unfounded. I have never been a member of any terrorist organization in my life, I have never adopted their ideas and methods, and as someone who stands for peace and human rights, I have always opposed all forms of violence, including terrorism. I have not abandoned these beliefs today, and I will continue to advocate for peace and brotherhood under all circumstances throughout my life.

"I BELIEVE YOU WILL SEE THAT THE ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST ME HAVE NO TANGIBLE BASIS"

Despite all these issues, I cannot accept being raided at my home in the early morning, before the sun has even risen, as if I were an armed terrorist, being rushed to the courthouse, and being held in detention based on completely abstract, unfounded, and illogical accusations. If you even review these allegations made against me once, I believe you will also find it unacceptable, and when you examine the petition and its annexes submitted by my defenders, you will conclude that I am innocent, and you will easily arrive at the conclusion that I have been accused based on completely arbitrary and forced interpretations. I am already of the opinion that none of the allegations presented as evidence against me have any tangible basis, and you can easily see this even by looking at the questions directed to me.

"HOW CAN MY NAME BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST ME IN A CONVERSATION I WAS NOT A PART OF?"

In his defense, Özer referred to the digital data allegedly seized in a prison in Diyarbakır, stating: "For example, in the search conducted at the Diyarbakır D-Type High Security Closed Prison, it is claimed that in the content of certain digital data allegedly seized, during conversations between the convicted Abdullah Öcalan and the delegation visiting him, the delegation allegedly conveyed that 'some academics wanted to contribute to democratic autonomy,' and in response to Öcalan's question 'can you name someone?' it was claimed that 'Ahmet Özer from Mersin University' was mentioned. The police asked me during my statement, 'It has been understood that you wanted to contribute to democratic autonomy in the conversation with Abdullah Öcalan read to you above...' Just this question alone is enough to show how heavily prejudiced the investigation is. As can be seen, the police claim that it has been 'understood' that I wanted to contribute to democratic autonomy based on things said in a conversation I was not even a part of. How can my name be mentioned in a conversation I was not a part of and used as evidence against me without my knowledge? I have never had any work related to democratic autonomy in my life, I have never expressed a desire to work in this direction, and I have never had such a wish or thought.

"A PHONE CALL I AM ALLEGED TO HAVE MADE IS ALSO BEING USED AS EVIDENCE FOR THE MEMBERSHIP IN A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION"

Özer continued his defense: "Moreover, a phone call I am alleged to have made is also being attempted to be used as evidence for the membership in a terrorist organization. First of all, I do not remember making such a phone call. However, even if it is accepted that these phone conversations were made by me and the sentences mentioned were spoken by me, it is completely illogical and unreasonable to say that these conversations indicate membership in a terrorist organization. As can be clearly understood from the recording, this conversation is obviously a condolence call made with completely human considerations. It is absolutely unacceptable to attribute a meaning completely detached from the context to a single sentence mentioned in this conversation and accuse me of membership in a terrorist organization. It is absolutely unacceptable for someone to be deprived of their freedom based on a sentence that refers only to the maternal status of the deceased and is clearly stated with human thoughts and courtesy. Moreover, as understood from the prosecutor's request for detention, it has been stated that only 2 conversations are suspicious despite approximately 2 months of surveillance on me, and it is quite clear that these do not contain anything that supports the allegations, but are completely ordinary conversations made with human considerations. However, the fact that there is no conversation that could be used as evidence for the membership in a terrorist organization among the hundreds of conversations made by someone who is not even aware of being listened to for 2 months is clear evidence that the person is not a member of the organization. Dear Prosecutor, instead of pulling a word out of context from a phone conversation with forced interpretations, if you had looked at the entire recordings, you would easily understand that there could be no talk of membership in a terrorist organization. Because despite 2 months of phone surveillance on me, the fact that only 2 recordings appear suspicious and that they are far from supporting the allegations clearly shows that I cannot be accused as a member of a terrorist organization.

"HOW CAN A PERSON'S MEETING WITH THEIR LAWYER OR NEPHEW BE INTERPRETED AS AN ORGANIZATIONAL CONNECTION AND USED AS A REASON FOR ARREST?"

Another issue I want to address is the so-called evidence obtained as a result of technical surveillance. From what I understand, my election trip to Van was closely monitored step by step, but since no evidence could be found to support the claim of an organizational connection during this trip, even my meeting with a lawyer or even my own nephew has been attempted to be used as evidence for membership in a terrorist organization with quite indirect and arbitrary interpretations. For example, in the prosecutor's request for my detention, it was claimed that I had met with a lawyer named Şevket Tuci and that this person could be connected to PKK members because he is a lawyer. Or my meeting with my own nephew was attempted to be used as a basis for the accusation against me on the grounds that this person was allegedly involved in an organizational connection regarding a relative.

However, I ask you; how can a person's ordinary meeting with their lawyer or their own nephew be interpreted as an organizational connection and be accepted as grounds for arrest? How can assumptions about these individuals be directed as accusations against me? It is far from serious to extract a few individuals from the thousands of people I met during my election campaign and claim that I am accused of being a member of an organization based on their familial ties. This situation alone clearly shows that the investigation was designed from the very beginning to portray me as guilty, that I was being tried to be condemned in advance, and that efforts were made to find evidence for this, and when such evidence could not be found, attempts were made to fabricate evidence through forced interpretations.

"I HAVE HAD MANY MEETINGS WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE PERIOD, MINISTERS, GOVERNORS, AND MAYORS"

As I mentioned earlier, various conversations and meetings, the content of which is even uncertain and about which there are serious doubts regarding their occurrence, have been presented as if I belong to a terrorist organization. However, the overlooked point is this; outside of these questionable meetings, I have had many meetings with the President of the period, ministers, governors, mayors, writers, artists, and even military personnel, both in terms of their existence and their content. Why is this not taken into account? For example, a New Year greeting sent to me by Major General Yaşar Bal, who later served as the Chairman of the Mehmetçik Foundation, has been submitted to the file. In this sense, is it possible for a person who is claimed to be a member of a terrorist organization to be in close contact with someone who is a military personnel and who also heads a foundation that provides the greatest support to the families of martyrs, to the extent of receiving a New Year greeting? This situation alone is sufficient to demonstrate that the accusation of organization membership is unfounded.

MY 13-YEAR HTS RECORDS HAVE BEEN EXTRACTED

Moreover, somehow my 13-year HTS records have been extracted and attempted to be used as a basis for the accusations against me. It has been claimed that I have had conversations with individuals who are allegedly being processed for organization membership in the HTS records. However, no details have been provided regarding this. Who are these individuals? When did I meet them? Did they call me, or did I call them? What did I talk about with these individuals? None of this is clear. However, as you can appreciate, I am an academic working on the southeast, I am from Van, and I am a politician. Dozens of unknown individuals call me every day. I do not know most of these individuals. Even if the caller is someone I know, I cannot determine whether they are a member of an organization or not. It is impossible, as you can imagine, for me to conduct a background check on the caller before every phone call; I neither have such authority nor is it technically feasible. Under these circumstances, how can accusations be made against me based on ambiguous HTS records? Today, if you look at the 13-year HTS records of any random person you stop on the street, it can be said that they have spoken with hundreds of individuals with criminal records for various offenses. This fact alone reveals how far-fetched the allegations are. Being detained based on such an allegation is an absurd and inexplicable situation.

Another forced piece of evidence is my account transactions. Somehow, the rent payments coming to my account due to the house I rented under a lease agreement and the election aid received during the election campaign have also been viewed as suspicious and presented as evidence for my detention. These payments, which have a clear source and for which there is not a single suspicion that they were obtained for purposes other than those I have stated, being used as a basis for the alleged organizational connection clearly demonstrates how unlawful my detention is.

"EVEN A FICTIONAL NOVEL THAT CAN STILL BE PURCHASED ONLINE HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED TO BE USED AS EVIDENCE FOR ORGANIZATION MEMBERSHIP ALLEGATIONS"

In fact, even a fictional novel published in 2016, which can still be purchased online, has been attempted to be used as evidence for organization membership allegations. However, this novel is a literary work that deals with blood feuds, is entirely fictional, and has no relation to real people or institutions. I find it difficult to understand how a few words extracted from the dialogues of the novel's characters or the setting of the story can be used as a basis for accusations against me.

I can provide further examples of how unjust the accusations against me are. However, my lawyers are already examining all the evidence in their petitions and clearly refuting them. Additionally, I would like to add that neither the law enforcement nor the prosecutor nor during the detention interrogation was I asked about it, but later I learned that the sole reason for the rejection of my objection to detention was based on the statement of a secret witness. I have no knowledge of what kind of allegations this witness has made against me, from the moment of the search of my home until the minute I was arrested, and even while I am defending myself before you today. Therefore, it is impossible for me to respond to an allegation that I am unaware of. And as you can see, this situation alone demonstrates how unlawful my detention is and how deprived I am of my right to defense. Being detained without being informed about this statement, which is claimed to be so significant that it could lead to my detention, despite having no knowledge of its content, is clearly an extrajudicial execution.

"NONE OF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AS GROUNDS FOR MY DETENTION CAN BE USED AS BASIS FOR ANY CRIMINAL ALLEGATION"

As I have stated, none of the evidence presented as grounds for my detention can be used as basis for any criminal allegation. Unfortunately, attempts have been made to fabricate evidence against me through completely unfounded and forced interpretations. However, throughout my life, I have never been a member of any terrorist organization, I have never adopted their ideas and methods, and as someone who stands for peace and human rights, I have always been against all forms of violence, including terrorism. I have explained everywhere and even in the Turkish Grand National Assembly commissions for years that violence is not a solution, and I continue to express this in every statement.

Despite my years of struggle to end this, I consider being associated with terrorism as a disgrace today. I would like to state that I have no affiliation other than the academic community and the CHP to which I belong. I have never been a member, affiliated, or sympathetic to any terrorist organization, nor have I ever been. I have never surrendered my will to anyone or any organization, nor will I ever. For the reasons I have stated, I request the annulment of this unlawful detention decision and my release.