Although the Constitutional Court ruled that officials at the official level should be prosecuted, the Ministry of Interior refused to investigate the governor. As for AFAD officials, the inspectors appointed by the Prime Ministry Inspection Board decided not to authorise prosecution.
And the great wheel of the judiciary moved. Investigations into the deaths of people and collapsed buildings in the recent Southeast earthquake have begun. There are detentions and arrests.
Very soon, a legal process that can be summarised under the title of ‘Earthquake Trials’ will begin.
Bayram Hotel Case
In this context, it is necessary to recall the Constitutional Court’s (unpublished) decision in the Bayram Hotel Case, which collapsed in Van in 2011, resulting in the deaths of 24 people.
601 lives were lost in the 7.2 magnitude earthquake that occurred in Van on 03 October 2011. After the earthquake, aftershocks continued and about a week later, the Bayram Hotel building collapsed due to a new tremor of 5.6 magnitude. Twenty-four people staying in the hotel had lost their lives as a result of this collapse. Immediately after the incident, an investigation was initiated and it was determined that no damage assessment had been made on the hotel building after the first earthquake. In the expert report, it was stated that one floor was built extra according to the construction licence and that the building could not withstand the aftershocks due to the load caused by this extra floor.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office filed a public case against the hotel operator, but the request for a preliminary investigation against the Governor of Van and AFAD officials was not allowed. The Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Court of Cassation ruled that the complaints against the Governor and AFAD officials were not based on concrete information and documents.
Not only that, but the appeal filed by the plaintiffs was rejected by the Council of State without being examined, stating that “the law does not foresee any way of appeal against the decision in question”.
The Ministry’s objections
And the case came before the Constitutional Court (AYM).
In its defence, the Ministry stated that the state had fulfilled all its responsibilities in the incident. It also argued that there was uncertainty about the time when the risks that may arise due to a natural disaster such as an earthquake could materialise and said, “In this respect, the responsibility of the state should be evaluated by taking into account the uncertainty in question.”
Court’s judgement
The Constitutional Court justified the applicants, not the Ministry, and summarised the following in its sample judgement
“The State has a positive obligation in respect of the right to life. The Governor and AFAD officials have primary responsibility for these measures to be taken in the face of an earthquake. Since the 7.2 magnitude earthquake was followed by aftershocks and the hotel subject to the lawsuit is one of the facilities with the highest bed capacity in the region, it is obvious that disaster victims would want to meet their accommodation needs. Therefore, the threat to the right to life is foreseeable for public authorities. After the earthquake, damaged buildings should have been immediately identified, dangerous buildings should have been evacuated and, if necessary, demolished, people who had suffered or were likely to suffer from the disaster should have been evacuated immediately and temporary accommodation should have been provided to these people.”
State protection of civil servants
The judicial process has begun in relation to the recent earthquake in the Southeast. Investigations into the people who lost their lives and the collapsed buildings are ongoing.
Again, the question on everyone’s mind is “Will the real responsible parties be tried?”.
Because, Tevfik Bayram, the owner of the hotel, was sentenced to 11 years and 1 month in prison by Van 2nd High Criminal Court for his personal responsibility, but the state does not allow its officials to be tried.
Although the Constitutional Court ruled for the prosecution of the officials, the Ministry of Interior refused to investigate the governor. The inspectors appointed by the Prime Ministry Inspection Board decided not to authorise the prosecution of AFAD officials. The families’ second application to the Constitutional Court was rejected and they applied to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The families are waiting for the ECHR’s judgement.
The Bayram Hotel, which was destroyed in the earthquake, still has an ongoing legal story.
Today
Today, investigations and arrests are continuing at the civilian level. The building owners will be prosecuted, possibly imprisoned along with a few others responsible for the construction.
It seems that there will again be a big gap in the identification of those officially responsible.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking