MHP's Feti Yıldız: Abdullah Öcalan can be released under one condition.

On December 28, Saturday, while the DEM Party delegation was continuing its political party visits after meeting with terrorist leader Abdullah Öcalan in Imralı, the process also brought along claims of Öcalan's release.

Feti Yıldız, the Deputy Chairman of the MHP responsible for Legal and Election Affairs, who answered questions from journalist Barış Pehlivan, stated that he had raised the issue of sick prisoners during the discussions of the Ministry of Justice budgets last year and in 2022, but it did not attract attention because Öcalan's situation was not discussed.

"IF THERE IS A FORENSIC REPORT, AHMET CAN BE RELEASED, MEHMET CAN BE RELEASED"

Feti Yıldız responded to Pehlivan, who reminded him of his words, "The postponement of the execution should not be a matter of discussion until recovery," and asked whether this was related to PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan, saying, "There is one condition for Öcalan to benefit from this. A forensic report is needed to prove that he is sick and unable to meet his own needs. If that exists, Ahmet can be released, Mehmet can be released." Yıldız rejected the claims of a general amnesty by stating, "There are no conditions for a general amnesty in Turkey."

AK PARTY'S GÜLER: AMNESTY IS NOT ON OUR AGENDA

Recently, a noteworthy statement regarding the ongoing discussions also came from Abdullah Güler, the AK Party Group Chairman in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. Güler stated, "I do not find it correct to approach these events with conditional, interconnected processes like 'If that doesn't happen, nothing will happen.' There is no such issue as an amnesty on our agenda right now. In our penal execution law, there are already certain matters that fall under the authority of our President for prisoners who have become so sick, bedridden, and in need of care that they cannot maintain their vital functions. When this is tied to the forensic medical board report, certain illnesses are already released, just like in the cases of February 28, and they are released for their care and treatment; that possibility already exists.

However, I do not think it is very correct to conduct this solely based on that from today. In the current penal execution regulation, you cannot evaluate this by making a distinction between crimes. You do not determine the form of the execution regulation based on the crime committed by the person. Whether it is a terrorist criminal or a common criminal, the same punishment must be executed within these conditions, in the context of the same human rights characteristics; you cannot make that distinction. But it is not right to bring this and tie it to that. We need to bring it to a higher level, to a situation that transforms and changes social peace. Just saying, 'There is one person, let's make an execution regulation regarding this, let's tie it to this' would be very simplistic."