Turkish Prosecutors Face Threats in Newborn Gang Case
A Turkish court has heard disturbing testimony about threats made against prosecutor Yavuz Engin during his investigation of the notorious Newborn Gang case, highlighting the dangerous pressures facing judicial officials who pursue serious criminal enterprises.
Thirteen defendants, including Mustafa Kemal Zengin, appeared before the Bakırköy 21st High Criminal Court on charges related to threatening the prosecutor in his office during the investigation phase. The case reveals a troubling pattern of intimidation tactics used against those seeking to uphold the rule of law.
Witness Testimony Reveals Intimidation Network
Key witness Zeynep Tuhan testified about the close relationship between defendant Aylin Arslantatar and prosecutor Yavuz Engin, describing how Arslantatar received information about threats from Zengin. The testimony suggests a complex web of relationships that may have compromised the integrity of the investigation.
"Mustafa Kemal Zengin has a very wide circle; he told me about the prosecutor's threat incident," Tuhan stated, indicating the defendant's extensive network of contacts and influence.
Court Clerk Confirms Threatening Phone Call
The prosecutor's court clerk provided crucial testimony about a threatening phone call received during their work on the newborn case. The caller warned that "these people are very dangerous; they know everything about you," demonstrating the serious nature of the threats faced by judicial officials.
This testimony underscores the courage required of prosecutors and court staff who pursue cases against organized criminal networks, often at personal risk to themselves and their families.
Defendants Face Serious Charges
Prosecutors have requested substantial prison sentences for the main defendants. Zengin faces 2 to 4 years for illegally obtaining personal data and an additional 4 to 8 years for resisting official duties. Arslantatar faces 2 to 4 years for illegally obtaining personal data.
Defendant Arslantatar claimed she was "acting with the instinct to protect babies" and fulfilling her "civic duty," though her methods appear to have crossed legal boundaries according to prosecutors.
Implications for Judicial Independence
This case highlights the critical importance of protecting judicial independence and ensuring that prosecutors can conduct investigations without fear of intimidation or retaliation. Strong institutions and the rule of law are fundamental pillars of any stable society.
The case has been adjourned to February 17 to allow defendants to prepare their defense against the indictment. Eleven other defendants are expected to receive acquittals.
Such cases remind us that maintaining order and justice requires unwavering commitment to legal processes and the protection of those who serve the public interest, even when facing personal danger.