Click to read the article in Turkish/Kurdish
Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) Şırnak MP Aycan İrmez has submitted a parliamentary inquiry about the four mules seized in Uludere, Şırnak.
Stating that four mules belonging to a citizen in Yemişli village were sezied on the ground that the mules were carrying smuggled cigarettes, İrmez said:
“Mules’ owners, who tried to get information about what happened to their mules, were told by law enforcers that their mules were taken into custody and they would be sent to Uludere Prosecutor’s Office following the detention procedures”.
The inquiry
- Do the mules detained in Yemişli village in Uludere, Şırnak have criminal capacity?
- How were the detained mules deposed and how were they communicated with?
- Is there a legal justification for the detention procedures applied to the mules? Otherwise, by what legal norm they were detained?
- At what stage are interrogations of the mules is? Have they been designated a lawyer by the bar association?
97 mules sentenced to death had escaped
Charged with being used by smugglers in Onbaşılar village in Yüksekova, Hakkari, and sentenced to death by Yüksekova 1st Criminal Court of First Instance, 97 mules had escaped from the tents in which they were kept on January 21, 2015 and gained their freedom.
Soldiers from Yüksekova 3rd Infantry Division Commandership captured nine smugglers and seized 97 mules and 160 bins of diesel oil.
No legal action was taken against the murdered mules
34 people and 59 mules were killed in Roboski village in Uludere, Şırnak on December 28, 2011.
On March 23, 2015, soldiers fired at mules, killing eight mules and wounding 20 others. The Animal Rights Monitoring Committee (HAKİM) had filed a criminal complaint for the soldiers who killed the mules to be found and penalized.
Uludere Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office issued decision of non-jurisdiction and sent the file to military prosecutor’s office.
Şırnak Governorship didn’t allow an investigation to be carried out into the civil servants, and that the animal rights defenders objected to this decision. (EKN/TK)
