DEFENSE IN RELATİON TO THE ESSENCE OF THE LAWSUİT

1 [ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE TABLE OF CONTENTS AND SECTIONS 5 AND 6 OF THE TRIAL BRIEF SUBMITTED BY FETHULLAH GÜLEN S ATTORNEYS] DEFENSE IN RELATİON TO THE ESSENCE OF THE LAWSUİT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. CRIME ALLEGED AGAINST OUR CLIENT 2. CHARACTERISTICS OF FETHULLAH GÜLEN S WORKS AND ACTIVITIES I. Fethullah Gülen as religious worker II. Fethullah Gülen as a thinker 3. ACTIVITY BEFORE THE LAWSUIT 4. ACTIVITY DURING THE INVESTIGATION 5. OUR RESPONSE TO THE INDICTMENT I) Content of the indictment and how it was prepared. II) Our response to the claims in the indictment 1- Our response to the Nurculuk section 2- Evaluation of the decision of Penal Plenary Assembly about Nurculuk 3- Our response to the Fethullah Gülen Group section 4- Evaluation of the decision of Military Appeal Court about Fethullah Gülen 5- Our response to the Fethullahism according to a Nur student section 6- Our response to the Fethullahism according to his books section 7- Our response to the claims about the video cassettes 8- Our response to the Schools in Middle Asia section 9- Our response to the Works to infiltrate Maltepe Military High School section 10- Our response to the claims about the Abant Meetings 11- Our response to the indictment s Evaluation and legal status section 6. EVALUATION OF THE EVIDENCE I) TESTIMONY FROM THE WITNESSES 1) Eyup Kayar 2) Huseyin Ekiz 3) Serhat Ozkan 4) Yalcin Eseni 5) Metin Sariarslan WITNESSES RELATED TO MERTER-FATIH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 6) Huseyin Dovmeci 7) Memduh Akkus 8) Hasan Tuncel 9) Sadettin Ozcan 10) Mithat Isbilir 11) Yilmaz Yigit 12) Sezai Tepecik 13) Rafet Yilmaz

14) Cevdet Saral 15) Osman Ak TESTIMONY FROM POLICE CAPTAINS AND COMMISSIONERS WHO WORKED ON THE REPORT PREPARED BY ANKARA POLICE DEPARTMENT 16) Selat Ozturk 17) Ayhan Ozturk 18) Aydin Batu 19) Zeki Guven 20) Ersan Dalman 21) Zafer Aktas 22) Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan 23) Tamer S. Yerlikaya 24) Cavit Cevik WITNESSES RELATED TO MALTEPE MILITARY HIGH SCHOOL 25) Murat Yanik 26) Mustafa Soysal 27) Hasan Yakup Kemertas 28) Yemen Acikgoz NOLLE PROS DECISION OF IZMIR OFFICE OF THE STATE PROSECUTOR 29) WıTNESS OF MEETıNG WıTH POPE: Monsignor George Marovitch 30) Serpil Genc 31) Ergun Poyraz OUR CLIENT WAS SUBJECTED TO THE PLOT OF AN ORGANIZATION, FABRICATING CRIME AND EVIDENCE II) VIDEO AND AUDIO CASETTES ATTACHED TO THE FILE 1- Our response to the cassettes at the evidence list (J, K,L M, N) 2- Our response to the cassettes at the evidence list (O) i. Our response to the video and audio cassettes presented at the July 16, 2001 hearing ii. Legal expert evaluation by Prof. Dr. Cetin Ozek about the cassettes. III) OUR RESPONSE TO THE BOOKS, COMPUTER PRINT OUTS, AND CDs IN THE FILE 1- Our response to the Yeni Hayat Magazine s claims in the indictment evidence list Z-Ac 2- Our response to the newspaper excerpts, at Attachment 4, presented at the December 4, 2000 hearing 3- Our response to the newspaper excerpts, at Attachment 6, presented at the December 4, 2000 hearing 4- Our response to the newspaper excerpts presented at the July 16, 2001 hearing IV) OUR RESPONSE TO REPORTS, NOTES, AND DOCUMENTS IN THE FILE 1- Indictment evidence P Report prepared by Ankara police headquarter dated April 21, 1999 about Fethullah Gülen and his organization 2- Indictment evidence S Report by Police Headquarters 3- Indictment evidence Sh Investigation file about the works of infiltrating to Maltepe Military High School 4- Indictment evidence T Report and Documents from the General Military Staff 5- Indictment evidence U Report and Documents from the Gendarmerie Headquarters 2

3 6- Indictment evidence Y Findings by Police Headquarter related to Fethullah Gülen s companies, schools, preparatory courses and foundations 7- Indictment evidence Z Writings and attached documents from the Police Headquarters related to Nurculuk activities abroad 8- Information from the Police Headquarter, dated October 13, 2000 9- Information from the Police Headquarters, dated August 21, 2001 10- Information from the Police Headquarters, dated September 21, 2000, entitled Activities of Fethullah Gulen group in whole country presented at the hearing on December 4, 2001 11- Information from the Police Headquarters, dated October 7, 2000, entitled Activities of Fethullah Gulen group in whole country presented at the hearing on December 4, 2001 12- Document entitled Fethullah Gülen s past-present-targets 13- Document entitled Information about Fethullah at file 11(lines 776-812) 14- Document entitled schema of organization conducting Nur education and attached copy document at file 11 (lines 743-775) 15- Document entitled Terrorism, PKK, DHKP/C and religious organization s activities in Europe 7. NOLLE PROS AND ACQUITTAL DECISIONS. I. Nolle pros decision by Konya State Security Court chief prosecutor office (No. 1987-60 E; No. 1987-21 D, June 15, 1987) II. Nolle pros decision by Izmir State Security Court chief prosecutor office (No. 1986-51 E, dated May 20, 1987) III. Nolle pros decision by Ankara State Security Court chief prosecutor office (No. 1992-256 E; No. 1992-137 D, dated October 14, 1992) IV. Nolle pros decision by Ankara State Security Court chief prosecutor office (No. 1995-334 E; No. 1995-232 D, dated November 20, 1995) V. Nolle pros decision by Ankara State Security Court chief prosecutor office (No. 1997-18 E; No. 1998-24 D, dated March 20, 1998) VI. Nolle pros decision by Istanbul State Security Court chief prosecutor office 1998-1283 E, No. 1998-209 D, dated June 25, 1998) VII. Acquittal decision by Ankara 2. State Security Court (No. 1999/146 E; No. 1999/191 D) VIII. Acquittal decision by Ankara 2. State Security Court (No. 2000/36 E; No. 2000/140 D) IX. Acquittal decision by Ankara 2. State Security Court (No. 2000/106 E, No. 2001/106 D) X. Nolle pros decision by Ankara State Security Court chief prosecutor office (No. 2000-283 E; No. 2000-112 D) XI. Acquittal decision by Adana 1. State Security Court (No. 2001/263 E; No. 2001/281 D) XII. Nolle pros decision by Malatya State Security Court chief prosecutor office 2001-229 E; No. 2001-79 D, dated October 8, 2001) XIII. Nolle pros decision by Canakkale Chief prosecutor office (No. 2002-2441 E; No. 2002-916 D, dated July 9, 2002) (No. (No. 8. LEGAL EVALUATION

4 I. Legal evaluation based on European Convention on Human Rights II. Legal evaluation based on international documents and conferences III. Legal evaluation based on 1982 Constitution IV. Legal evaluation based on the Anti-Terror Law 9. GENERAL EVALUATION ABOUT OPINIONS ABOUT ESSENCE OF THE LAWSUIT 10. CONCLUSION AND DEMAND [ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF SECTIONS 5 AND 6 OF THE TRIAL BRIEF SUBMITTED BY FETHULLAH GÜLEN S ATTORNEYS] 5. SECTION OUR RESPONSE TO THE INDICTMENT III) Content of the indictment and how it was prepared. Ankara State Security Court Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel prepared the indictment (1999/420 Pr). Before responding to claims in this indictment, I would like to identify elements required to be in the indictment based on CMUK (Penal Procedural Law). As it is known that CMUK s 163. article explains the elements required to be in the indictment. Based on this, in the indictment how the alleged crime was committed, with legal bases and its evidence required to be presented. But the claims against our clients are just subjective evaluations. In the indictment, no legal base was presented for the obtained judgments. As it is known, criminal investigations are essentially established on concrete actions resulting crimes. But in this investigation instead of concrete actions, individual was taken as an essential element. In the indictment there is no mentioning of existence of execution motion related to concrete actions resulting crimes. In the indictment, without making connection with concrete actions resulting crimes, our clients social activities and his aims (all in legal framework) were investigated. The legal expert opinion, prepared by Prof. Dr. Cetin Ozek, states related to our client, if there is a crime involved, the indictment does not state what type of crime was committed, which methods were used, or which purposes were targeted. I also would like to express that, related to the crime alleged against our client, the indictment does not allege clearly when and where the crime was committed. The beginning of the indictment gives the crime date as Since 1989. But in the indictment, activities during 1960s were taken as essential element also. This also shows that even in the method of determination of the crime date, no concrete data was taken as essential. Essentially, this indictment lacks the legal elements of a crime. It just claims that our client s opinions are not correct and are dangerous. This indictment is a document devoid of legal justifications.

5 As it was written in the Legal expert opinion prepared by Prof. Dr. Cetin Ozek, in the indictment, the characteristics of the following statements and similar sentences and statements contains elements not suppose to be in the indictment It is concluded that it is condoned (p.17), it is thought (p.18), possibility must not be forgotten (p.18) this public opinion (image) was given (p.23), people supporting Fethullah Gülen was first conscious of economic opportunities in Turkish republics (p-27), I believe there will be separations (p.28) my observation is this (p. 28), my personal opinion (ps.29), Turkish people and Turkish bourgeoisie who are lacking of capacity of investigation and analysis (p.29), I believe it will be counteracted (p. 29), programs must be prepared in the state televisions and secular press (p.29), it can be reflected to press (p. 30), deception for religious purposes was applied (p.42). Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel printed many copy of this indictment as a book, and, before presenting it to the court, delivered it to the press. Therefore, he violated Press Law s 30. article and worked to create a public opinion against our client. Although our client s arrest warrant was abolished by Istanbul 2. SSC (2000/560) on 08/28/2000, this was not presented in the indictment dated 08/31/2000 and our client was presented as arrested in absentee and as a fugitive in front of public opinion. Prosecutor Yüksel s effort to create public opinion against our client continued after the lawsuit was started. As it was written in our petition dated 5/15/2001, at Star Newspaper dated April 24, 2001 in page 1 and page 4 there was an article attributed to Prosecutor Yüksel titled Fethullah Gülen is listening my phones ; this article was one of the products of his efforts. The Istanbul Police Anti-Terror Unit executed a search warrant of the Istanbul State Security Court on the Contemporary Education Foundation on June 3, 2002. The media reported that the search yielded a blackmail video cassette, showing Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel having sex with a woman. Related to cassette Yüksel was taken a decision of stopping to broadcast. After the investigation initiated by Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Council of Judges and Public Prosecutors issued a disapproval (condemnation) penalty to Yüksel. Related to this video cassette, prosecutor Yüksel organized press release and continued his efforts with claiming relation with this cassette and our client even this cassette was found at the Contemporary Education Foundation. As we wrote in our many petitions, Prosecutor Yüksel carried many fake evidence created by this foundation. This question comes to our mind that Yüksel interestingly collected evidence created by this foundation and this video cassette was found in this foundation Whether this prosecutor was blackmail by this foundation? Many rules in the constitution and penal codes related to criminal investigation and prosecution was prepared to protect individuals from unfair procedures. One of the most important rules is the presumption of innocence. Based on this nobody can be declared as criminal without confirmed decision of authorized courts. If there is a suspicion about the crime, individual can be investigated in accordance with judicial

6 rules. Authorized prosecutor offices officials required to perform their duties independently, objectively and in accordance with judicial rules. In this process, any accusing broadcasting, attitude against the suspect is the violation of personal rights and it is against the law. All the activities described above show that that the prosecution s methods were not objective and independent. II) Our response to the claims in the indictment All the claims in the indictment are groundless and false; and, since Prosecutor Hamza Keles repeats the same claims in his opinion to the court, we will explain those and respond to the indictment and the opinion together. 1. Our response to the Nurculuk section (pages 3-5 in the indictment) At the beginning of the indictment (pp. 3-13), there is an analysis of Nurculuk and claims that: Nurculuk wants to govern Turkish Republic with the Islamic principles, bring back the Sultanate and Caliphate, and not have any constitution but the Qur an (p.5); Nurculuk is a movement against Atatürk and the Secular State (p.4); and, Fethullah Gülen is a Nurcu (p.3). But the indictment does not explain how it arrives at this judgment or how our client is identified as a Nurcu. In the indictment, related to our clients works and activities in every chance he expresses himself as a disciple of Nursî and it is claimed that the organization alleged to be founded by him based on Nurculuk teachings (p.40). But there is no statement about where or in which books Fethullah Gülen says about this teachings. Our client never said or wrote in his books and statements about being disciple of Said-I Nursî or being a Nurcu. He never had a statement that he is establishing organization based on Nurculuk thoughts. This clearly shows that claims in the indictment bases on abstract assumptions. Our client in his deposition on 11/6/2001 indicated that he is not a Nurcu and he is against to this type of separatist evaluations (naming); I am not involved or member of any trend including Nurculuk, I am just a regular Muslim, expressions like... ci,..cu means separatist statements, he repeatedly expressed he is not Nurcu and repeatedly has emphasized this opinion in public. For example, on June 6, 1998, in an interview with Aksiyon weekly magazine, he clearly repeated this statement; and, on June 11, 1998, Yeni Asya newspaper printed an article under the title of Fethullah Hoca: I am not Nurcu. The indictment (p. 40) claims that Fethullah Gülen is the continuation of Said Nursî, Fethullah Gülen on every occasion has said that he is the disciple of Nursî, and, throughout this lawsuit, Fethullah Gülen is the caliphate of the Said Nursî. Prosecutor Hamza Keles also said in his opinion (p. 16) that Fethullah Gülen is one of the caliphates of the Said Nursî and Gülen hides it in his books and works that he is Nurcu. As evidence to his claims, he

7 only shows that Fethullah Gülen praises Nursî. To prove this, he cites Gülen s book Fasildan Fasila 2 (p. 200). He claims it is a crime since Gülen uses the Bediuzzaman nickname for the Said Nursî. But in the sentence following the one Keles quoted, our client writes that the most important reason he appreciates Said Nursî is because of his extraordinary effort to solve anarchy problem. Our client never has said he is a continuation, caliphate, or disciple of Said Nursî. This claim is totally false. Our client in his deposition on November 6, 2001, clearly indicated he is not the caliphate of Said Nursî. Our client wrote this statement in his deposition: In the indictment, given information about Said Nursî and interpretations from Nursî s books are all false. Those are not even belongs to Said Nursî s books. All these quotes are false, as it was done to my books; they are twisted, distorted from the real meaning and falsely interpreted. If the honorable court consults to an expert, this false can easily be identified. I am not caliphate of anybody. To appreciate Said Nursî as a religious scholar does not mean that I am caliphate of him. Our client s frame of mind, attitude, and behavior show that he does not seek to be caliphate or disciple of anybody. In his many works, he expresses his aim as servitude to God (Fasildan Fasila-1, Izmir 1996, p.71; Fasildan Fasila-2, Izmir 1996, p.101; Prizma-3, Izmir 1999, p.129). He writes that people should decide to believe or not believe any faith with their own free will. As a free person, he believes he needs to improve himself; and he always emphasizes that he is just a regular Muslim. He says that the claim of being a caliph is false and groundless. With this conjecture that our client is Nurcu, many crimes were attributed to him in the indictment. However, the subject of the trial is not being Nurculuk. The indictment and the opinion raises the subject of Nurculuk. Even though this subject is not related to the case, we briefly will respond to each claim because our findings show that the indictment is based on false information. In the indictment, accusations about the Nurculuk base on the books Risalei Nur written by Said Nursî. But Risale-i Nur books are not banned books. There are many acquittal and nol-pros decisions by courts and prosecutor offices about these books. For instance, Istanbul chief prosecutor office with investigating 35 Risale-i Nur books and based on experts report prepared by Prof Dr. Kayihan Icel, Prof. Dr. Erol Cihan, Prof. Dr. Koksal Bayraktar gave nol-pros decision. (this nol-pros decision was presented at the attachment 9, 1984/173 K, 11/20/1984). These books were also bought to State libraries by Fikri Saglar, Minister of Culture, and announced via press. I would like to emphasize that our aim in this section is not to discuss the opinions mentioned in Nursî s books. But in the indictment and in the opinions, these books were referred and our client was accused with having the same opinions. According to our determinations, almost all quotes taken from these

8 books to the indictment are false. Although we explained above that our client is not Nurcu, but to display these false quotes will also show that all the accusations to our client are groundless. We will briefly touch upon them. First, I would like to express that Prosecutor Yüksel did not directly quote these books himself; he just excerpted books written about the Risale-i Nur books. Therefore, false information was arranged in the indictment, the statements and topics which do not exist in Said Nursî s book were shown as it is in the Said Nursî s books. Prosecutor Keles did not do any investigation about this matter either; he just repeated the quotes in the indictment. Initially last name of the author of these books was written as Okur, in the 3. page of the indictment it was changes to Nursî. The prosecutor s mistake with even the last name of the author is also an indicator of the false accusations in the indictment. At the 3rd page of the indictment, it is claimed that Said Nursî Conducted sheikhdom activities and he has a cult. Based on our determination, Said Nursî never conducted sheikhdom activities; on the contrary, he was always against to this. Said Nursî in his books informed people about the danger of these types of people. In his book he says: O you whose view is restricted to this world! Why do you struggle against me? Why do you not leave me to myself? If you say: The shaykhs sometimes interfere in our business, and they sometimes call you a shaykh. Good sirs! I am not a shaykh, I am a hoja (teacher). The evidence is this: I have been here four years and if I had taught a single person the sufi way, you would have had the right to be suspicious. But I have told everyone who has come to me: Belief is necessary, Islam is necessary; this is not the age of sufism. (Mektubat page 66) (attachment 10) In the same page of indictment and in page 11, it is claimed that Said Nursî is not a Turk, he does not have any relation with Turks, and Nursî claims that there is a Kurdish nation in Turkey ; he does not accept Turkishness and Turkish nation, he is proud of being Kurdish. Based on our investigations and determinations, Said Nursî with his belief is against to any racial segregation, in the book named Bediuzzaman Said Nursî (tarihce), this is explained in a way that totally opposite with the indictment. In Tarihce page 135, (Attachment 11) In the 4 th page of the indictment, Said Nursî claimed to say With meaning Atatürk, one eyed Deggial, either believe or you will be laughing stock of the world and in page 12 s 3rd paragraph claiming that Nursî said with behaving Ataturk like an enemy, resembling him to Ebu Sufyan and Deggial, one eyed Deggial, either believe or you will be laughing stock of the world. But when we look at the Barla Letters page 53, we don t see such a statement or similar statement about Ataturk. (Attachment 12)

9 In the indictment s page 5, it is written that in the Tiryak Risale page 65 Turkish political regime is working to extinguish the felicity of Nur, Kemalist are characterless and anarchist people. But in that page and in whole book there is no statement like this one. (Attachment 13) Again in the indictment s page 5, it is written that in the book named Mucize-i Kuraniye (page 191-192) for Muslims no need to have any constitution but Quran and it is claimed that this statement is also in the Tiryak Risale page 65 But in both books there is no statement like this one. (Attachment 13) In the indictment page 6, it is written that Secular Republican system was born with 20 years long revolutions and it caused great damage to the religion Munazarat page 135-141) But in this book there is no statement like this one. (Attachment 14) In the indictments page 7 s 14 th article, it is written that at the book named Munazarat page 90-100, Islamic nation is only nation for Islamic State, Islamic state will eventually rule over whole world and convert it to Islam. This world nation will be based on spiritual values. So, such an Islamic State would be founded under the auspice of the Islam and its nation and thanks to Nur tract of the Sheikh, who is struggling for the purpose of İttihat-ı Muhammedi (Union of the followers of the Prophet Mohammed) But in this book there is no statement like this one. (Attachment 14) In the indictment s page 8 s 17 th article, it is written that at the book named Munazarat page 109-131 According to Said Nursî, Makka of the Islamic State will be peninsula of Arabia, and the fact of Ottomanship would be transformed in Medine-i Münevvere (enlightened civilization). in this book there is no statement like this one. (Attachment 14) In the indictment s page 10, it was referred to a book titled Nurculuk according to Islamic religion claimed to be written by Ministry of Religion and it is also referred to a book titled About Nurculuk without giving the name of the author. But Ministry of Religion does not have such a book. Prosecutor Hamza Keles in his opinion page 10-11, as if there is such a book by Ministry of Religion, without investigating, repeated the same claims. In the indictment s page 11, without giving the name of the book, claiming that Said Nursî proposed and presented to establish an Islamic State which will be only governed with Sharia rules including Turkey with the center of Makka in his Nur books, None of the Nursî s books contains such an proposal, his claim is totally false. In this condition, Prosecutor Hamza Keles repeated the same false claims in his opinions related to the essence of the lawsuit, in the page 1-4 with the sections titled History of the Nurculuk movement and Statements of Nurculuk Movement against Ataturk and Secular Republic As it is known, during the opinions related to essence of the lawsuit, with the new evidences given during the trials, the claims in the indictment need to be confirmed or denied. But in the opinion, there is no

10 evidence proving these claims about Nurculuk is true. On the contrary, at the response of our client, all the information in the indictment was proved false. Nevertheless, in the opinions about the essence of the lawsuit, all these facts were disregarded. Even if defendant has not presented any prove during all hearings, the same claims in the indictment were repeated. Both Prosecutor Yüksel and Keles have not brought any document to prove these claims. All documents showing these claims are false are presented at the attachments of this response. 2- Evaluation of the decision of Penal Plenary Assembly about Nurculuk (p-5-13) In the indictment page 5, there is a decision dated 9/20/2005 with the title of the decision of Penal Plenary Assembly about Nurculuk. In the indictment, this decision and the book (By Prof. Dr. Cetin Ozek) referring to this decision were presented as evidences against my client. Mentioned decision of Penal Plenary Assembly was based on abolished Turkish Penal Code s Article 163 and today this article is not valid and this decision cannot be presented as binding and as a precedent. Related to this section, at the expert legal opinion by Prof. Dr. Cetin Ozek, he expresses his opinion: Now at the indictment related to the lawsuit opened against Fethullah Gülen, with attributing to that decision and to my work, it was assumed that defendant is representative of Said Nursî and Nurculuk, with this assumption it was concluded that defendant established a terrorist organization to change secular state. This conclusion in the indictment is false in many aspects and it is not compatible with basic judicial principles of the criminal law Firstly, in my referred researches and examinations, Nurculuk was not stated as one of the terrorist organizations using methods of violence or force, in my works, it was clearly indicated that any movement or initiations which is not favoring secularism cannot be described as terror organization. To establish the crime of terrorist organization, using methods of violence and force is pre-conditioned and existence of issues mentioned below is also required. Secondly, in my mentioned investigation, my topic was related to possibility of the violation of Turkish Penal Code 163 th article. Today this article is abolished. Today propagation against secularism is not crime, therefore my statement in my book is not related the essence of this lawsuit. On the other hand, principle of lawfulness in crimes and penalties is one of the principles in the constitution. Using old court decision based on abolished code in ongoing lawsuit conflicts with the principle of individuality of punishment defined in our constitution s 38 th article. Because years after the acts related to the mentioned decision, for ongoing lawsuit, Fethullah Gülen wanted to be responsible. This means being responsible for somebody else s act that this is not compatible with the principle of individuality of punishment.

11 In front of Law, without discriminating individuals and their choices; if there is a crime, how Fethullah Gülen committed this crime in the definitions of which law, which methods he adopted and which aims he targeted; not with some other peoples books or works, with his own works, acts, attitudes, behaviors; with solid and acceptable manners, required to be presented. In the criminal law, determination of responsibility based on assumptions is contrary to fair trail principles Section 5 (3) 3- Our response to the section of Fethullah Gülen Group in the indictment (pp.13-20) In the indictment (pages 13-20), under the title of Fethullah Gülen Group 1. Aims, 2. Strategies, 3. Organization, 4. Activities in Turkey, 5. Activities abroad, 6. Financial sources, 7. Fethullah Gülen s political targets, 8. large establishments of Fethullah Gülen Group were written and accusations about our client were presented. Aims, Strategies In the indictment page 13, the aim of the Fethullah Gülen Group was stated as establishing theocratic Islamic dictatorship via having control over states all systems with Islamic rules. To claim someone is aiming this goal, can only be accomplished with solid evidence or based on his statements, attitudes, or behaviors. In the indictment no ground (evidence) was presented to prove this claim. On the contrary, our client in his works and activities displays that he is against the idea of an Islamic dictatorship. Deposition of our client also rejects all these false claims. We can give examples of our client s thoughts in his books and statements in the file. Our client stated that a theocratic system is not Islamic; it is a big mistake to own this governing system on behalf of Islam (Fasildan Fasila-1, Izmir 1997, p. 223) There is no coercion in the spirit and in the core of the religion, In Islam willpower and free choice are taken as essential principles in belief and in rituals, all conducts with coercion are not accepted in Islam (Asrin Getirdigi tereddutler-4, Izmir 1998, p. 164) Religion cannot be made an instrument to reach worldly goal, even religion should not be made an instrument to enter the heaven, therefore when religion is politicized, faith as a holy source will be taken as a reference to reach to the political opinions, then political opinions will be seen from this perspective, it will lead to see our own interpretations, our own governing opinions sacred, this will damage the religion, political opinions should not be based upon religion (Osman Ozsoy, Fethullah Gülen le Cani Yayinda Gundem, pages 30-32; 4.16.1997, Channel D, an interview with Yalcin Dogan at Guncel Programi)

12 Religion is a relation between person and God with the foundation based on sincerity, aiming to work God s sake, more than people s relation with world, it is related to our innermost part, it is wrong to use religion as a vehicle to show up like a ceremony. (4.16.1997, Channel D, an interview with Yalcin Dogan at Guncel Programi). In secular state Turkey to politicize Islam will be betrayal to the spirit of Islam, religion cannot be used as instrument of politics. People claiming to govern the State on behalf of religion betrays (1.25.1997, Hulusi Turgut, Sabah Newspaper) Our client s above statements show that, accusation of establishing a theocratic Islam with abolishing secular system is false and groundless. Prof Dr. Cetin Ozek in his legal expert opinion, related to the book Fasilsan Fasila which was displayed in the indictment as evidence for accusation, determined totally opposite understanding with the indictment: author presents his personal opinions, statements and evaluations related to the historical, sociological, cultural topics. Themes he underlined; national unity and solidarity; the importance of education in the subjects of historical, religious and philological conscious; very interesting note in his book is that theocratic system cannot be claimed with Islam. Social and individual moral advices and warnings; the importance of belief and faith; nobody can be forced related to his individual choices and wills related to faith; Islam does not accept the belief which was gain by force; all member of Islamic faith must be very moderate (careful) in their all actions; he advises to have good dialogs and to be tolerant to other people Indeed, in the indictments 13 th page, under his Strategy title, with the sentence of with maintaining his legal path, prosecutor who prepared the indictment declares that our client does not have any illegal acts. Again Prosecutor Keles in his opinion about the essence of the lawsuit, page 4 under the title of his method, writes that our client acts with using democratic rules, in this sentences we clearly see that Prosecutor Keles is in contradiction with his claims. Because in one side, prosecutor is claming about a terrorist organization trying to change constitutional system with violence and claiming our client is the founder of this organization, on the other hand he claims that our client wants to use democratic rules to reach this goal. As it is known, for a political movement which is adopting democratic methods, the crime cannot be mentioned. Moreover our client does not pursue any political aims and acts; these were proved with the documents in the file. Again in the same section, it is claimed without showing any evidence that Fethullah Gülen is an enemy of democracy, and have thoughts and activities against democratic republican regime, it is claimed that he said republic system is unbelievers system (indictment p.14). But our client never said republic system is unbelievers system. In his books and in his statements at press, he repeated his opinion related to the democracy and republic:

13 A true republic is a form of ruling by elevated spirits and is the most suitable for humanity's honor. The republic can be the mother or governess of freedom. The republic provides a foundation that elevates us with uplifting values. That republican rule is not contrary to the Islam (Olcu ve Yoldaki Isiklar-3 (Pearls of wisdom), Izmir 1997, pages 26-29; 4.16.1997, Channel D, an interview with Mr. Yalcin Dogan at Guncel Programi) In this explanation, it is understood that our client does not involve in any thought and act against republic regime. Therefore all the claims in the indictment under the title of Fethullah Gülen group s aims and strategies are false and groundless. Our client wrote several books, articles, spoke at conferences, explained his opinions through sermons, but he never mentioned about destroying regime and establishing sharia state. Organization In the indictment, it is claimed without supporting with any evidence that there is an organization, at the top Fethullah Gülen and succeeding advisor cadre, city imams, imams organizing business people, imams responsible form districts, imam responsible from the house s order, imams controlling individuals (p. 14). Our client is not in any such kind of organizations and he does not manage any organization as claimed in the indictment. As other claims, this claim also does not based on any concrete evidence. During whole lawsuit, no evidence about this claim was submitted or presented. Although it was all based on assumptions (intangible claims), and no evidence was presented, in the opinion about the essence of the lawsuit, with fabricating phrases like city imams, imams for businessmen, imams for courses, district imams, an hierarchical structure was mentioned. This also shows that this opinion was prepared without being aware of the content of the file. This imaginary structure and the claim of advisory committee were based on Aydinlik magazine. The characteristics of this magazine were explained in details in the section of progress during the investigation. At the opinion about the essence of the lawsuit, (page 11), it is said that organization was made up with 12 advisory committee members. At the pages 9 and 13, advisory committee consists of 7 members. And the names claimed as these 12 advisory committee members are different from the names claimed as these 7 advisory committee members. This condition shows that claims are unserious, legally speaking it cannot be accepted and the opinion was prepared carelessly. The activities that our client for years as a public worker and as an author carried out openly in front of public opinion were intellectual works which were given to everybody by the constitution as rights and

14 freedom. To show these activities as illegal organization, society or initiation is not legally possible. Our client does not also accept and adopt naming any society with his name. Prosecutor Hamza Keles at the 16 th page of his opinion, under cemaat (community) title mentions about the advocate group consisting of people adopted organization s philosophy, with the same methods of cutting pieces form our client s books with ignoring beginning and ending of the same paragraphs, he made up accusations about our client. At the dictionary prepared by Ministry of Education (Vol.1 pages 440-441), cemaat defined as Community, people; people gathered to listen sermon, religious ceremony or pray together; community consist of people of same religion or same ancestor and examples of Islamic cemaat or :Christian cemaat were given. (Attachment 15) At the Islamic encyclopedia printed by Department of religious affairs (vol 7. page 228) cemaat is defined as unity and solidarity based on Islamic brotherhood; people following imam for prayer. (Attachment 16) In this case, prosecutor Hamza Keles with quoting form our client s book Fasildan Fasila-1 the cemaat is an unity of individuals sharing the same feeling, thoughts, ideals, aims and ideas and adjusting their life along this line of unity, at the 17 th page of his opinion, he claims that cemaat term means an illegal organization, this is totally false and groundless. Because cemaat term is commonly used in Turkish daily life such as Armanian cemaat, Turkish-Orthodox cemaat, Friday cemaat, Prayer cemaat and all society knows that cemaat does not mean illegal organization. In ordinary daily life, it is very normal that people carrying out similar thoughts or believing same religion can be involved together in some activities within the legal framework. Our client uses the term cemaat as religious terms such as Islamic cemaat, Muslim cemaat especially about people gathering for Islamic rituals or prayers, not as certain type structuring or organization. For instance, people during the Friday or Holy day prayers, come together and form cemaat in mosque to pray, similarly people became cemaat to go together to the pilgrimage. At the 21 th page of the opinion, a sentence was taken from the interview printed by Sabah newspaper dated 6/25/1995, and our client was accused, Fethullah Gülen from his statements above, is not in individual movement, it is understood that he is organizing like cemaat. Mentioned interview s related part is exactly like this: Nuriye Akman: Before you went to pilgrimage (Hajj), you were writing your love to Muhammad to the letters and giving them to the pilgrims to throw these to tomb of Muhammad. Did you receive any respond from prophet?

15 Fethullah Gülen: Estagfirullah (May God forgive my faults). Related to this question where I am and where the respond is. This was a petition from servant to his master. I was fulfilling my longing to him in this way until God destined me to go. Nuriye Akman: When you were given sermon, Muhammad was coming there, because you were saying to cemaat that How can I talk when you are present, O messenger of God. You even mentioned one of your dream to cemaat I was waiting in front of hell s door with my arms are open. I was trying to stop people flooding to the hell. At the end I could not hold on anymore and stood aside. But there was no body from this cemaat in those people. Of course it was not possible that cemaat will not gush with this saying. Why do you think Prophet Muhammad was coming to your sermons? Fethullah Gülen: I might have mentioned about some other people s observations. This was a dream. Some people may say yakaza (Islamic term to see while you are awake). I may articulate some other people s feelings. As seen in this interview, the term of cemaat was used by Nuriye Akman. It is very clear that she meant congregation-people gathered in mosque. There is no way that she means organization. This interview was presented at the attachment of our petition dated 1.26.2001. In the same section of the opinion, two quotes were taken from our clients poems (from the book Kirik Mizrap) with cutting beginning and end of the poems. These were presented as evidences for organization. First quote (Kirik Mizrap (Broken Plectrum) -page 38) Friends, friends, Sefk mezhebi is path to us (Our path is path of Light) First, this poem has 7 quatrains (attachment 17), Prosecutor Keles took just 2 lines with taking out of context. But even in these two line, where does it mention about organization? In addition to this, as it was put in parentheses by Prosecutor Keles, sefk yolu does not mean path of light. In the dictionary prepared by Ministry of Education, Sevk defined as desire, wish, cheer, joy, excitement, excitement for the sake of God. In this dictionary, poem by Yahya Kemal Beyatli was given as an example Bell, scarf and rose, in this garden all speeds of dance, at the night of Sevk, Andalusia is red three times (attachment 18). The meaning of sevk mezhebi in our client s poem is an excitement for the sake of God. When we read the poem as a whole, it is all about love of God and it ends with We learned Him, we found Him, we escaped from sadness of desperation; we were blurred, and became clear, His mercy is an ocean for us. Second quote (Kirik Mizrap (Broken Plectrum) -page 171)

16 Run get on for take part in, to the army of light and saved There is only one way get on for immortality caravan In this poem, there is very clear distortion. Last two couplets of this poem is; Run get on for, to the army of light and saved Unbound from slavehood, be slave only to God Everything is going to deadly looking and everything is perishing, There is only one way: get on for immortality caravan As it is seen above (attachment 19), at the opinion, sentences of Unbound from slavehood, be slave only to God and Everything is going to deadly looking and everything is perishing were professionally removed from the poem and our client s sentence advising people to be a servant to God is depicted as organizing. In addition to this, the word Take part in was also added by prosecutor to the poem. It is very normal that people can read or listen our client s works, it is very normal also that people having enough financial power from these people can serve to their countries in different areas in legal frameworks. Therefore exchanging of views, helping one another, and all activities in legal framework based on mutual love and respect cannot be shown as an terrorist organization or hierarchical cemaat established to commit crime. In addition to this, in the indictment, it is mentioned about a terrorist organization with the name of imams. This is totally false and groundless. Our client uses this term with the meaning of guide and mentor for the religious rituals done with congregation (cemaat). This is a religious term used by every Muslim and it does not have hierarchy meaning. Activities in Turkey and Abroad At the 15 th page of the indictment, it is claimed that to settle in military service, students in military high schools were targeted by Fethullah Gülen, a system was established to arrange meetings and marriages between sympathizer, devoted, intellectual (highly educated) ladies who are not using hijab (headscarf) and military student, So that in 10 years, Fethullah Gülen will have a voice in Turkish Military Forces. This claim is totally false and tragicomic. Whether, as it was written in the indictment, is there a single military student who is married with a woman who is sympathizer of Fethullah Gülen and is not using hijab? If there is, why there is no example presented in the indictment and throughout all lawsuit? Do prosecutor not know that military students cannot marry legally, if they marry, they will be fired?

17 At the 16 th page of the indictment, under the title of activities abroad it is said that Fethullah Gülen deliberately organizes abroad, in this plan these purposes were targeted: to create a political base in socioeconomically most needy Turkic countries, to diminish influence of Iranian Shi a propagations, to create economic opportunities for the companies which will provide their financial needs, to raise bureaucratic cadres in these countries, to establish Turk Islam Union and it is added that to establish World Islam Union, Fethullah Gülen organized activities in non Muslim countries also. The aims of these activities are; to create loyal bureaucratic channels, as consequences of globalization to use information transferring for his targets, to increase welfare of people who are loyal to him, to extend his area of influence. Prosecutor Hamza Keles repeats the same claims in 19 th - 20 th pages of the opinions with the title of activities abroad. All these claims are intangible, all based on assumptions, on the other hand it is full of contradictions. For example, it is claimed that our client is targeting to form Turk Islam Union, on the other hand it is also claimed that he is targeting to establish World Islam Union. Moreover, there is no explanation about what these Unions mean. Does mentioned union mean to unite all Islamic countries in One country, or does it mean cultural union, or to establish international organizations as it is happing today, these are not clear in the indictment. Today, to establish political, economic, cultural unions with Turkic countries is Turkey s official government policy. Turkey is one of the members of Organization of Islamic Conference as other Islamic countries. While official authorities, other individuals and organizations are carrying out this governmental policy; our client as a thinker advises close relations with these countries and nations which are connected to our country historically and culturally. Why this advises was presented as felonious elements? Why does desiring to prevail dialog, reconciliation, peace between countries and nations criminal subject of the indictment? Although this desire is compatible with Ataturk s principle of peace at home, peace in the world, does the idea of strengthening peace and brotherhood became criminal subject when it was expressed by our client? At the 16 th and 17 th page of the indictment, after saying Fethullah Gülen group which started international opening in 1992 organized in 32 countries with 279 educational institutions, with the title of aims of schools abroad, aims are claimed to raise qualified cadres who will govern these countries, to provide with these cadres sympathy to Islamic State which will be established in Turkey, in long term to gain political support to political Islam which will be founded in Turkey. These claims are totally false, they don t base on any evidence. Our client in every occasion addresses importance of science, he sees scientific work as one of the essential principles to solve problems, and he points out that the cure for ongoing educational and teaching problems in our country is a system based on science and modern curriculum essentials. As a matter of fact, since 1971, when he has been emphasizing on the importance of this subject, he has described teaching and learning as two holy duties and advocated not only giving scientific knowledge but also knowledge of goodness and loveliness to youth

18 this will protect them from corruption and vices. (Cag ve Nesil-1, Izmir 1997, pages 101-108, articles published in Sizinti magazine, 1970, volumes 9, 10, 11, with the titles of Our Education and Teachers in Our Education ) It is very clear that these opinions, education according to contemporary scientific and educational essentials, to educate youth with positive (hard) science and to protect youth from corruption and vises are not contradicting with the constitutional provisions. Any responsible citizen caring about national problems has right by constitution to express their thoughts. But in the indictment, these thoughts were presented as establishing terror organization, legally speaking this cannot be explained. Moreover, our client several times, in his statements to public opinion, expressed that he is not owner of any school or foundation, he does not have any organic and physical relation with these mentioned schools, as a citizen caring about national problems, he advocated citizens who have financial opportunities to support educational-teaching activities, he advocated that citizens should help government in this subject. About this topic, we would like to give below correction-tekzip decision as an example. At the Nokta magazine dated 21-27 September 1997, at the article written by Nese Saridogan, false accusations about our client were claimed. First of all, I would like to express that our client in every occasion, emphases the needs for searching solutions in the framework of dialog, tolerance based on mutual respect to different believes and thoughts to the problems of our country. It is clear that this thought which is being one of the main principles of democratic state of law based on human rights oppose to any desire of totalitarian regime or violence and terror acts. As a responsible citizen, our client s statement never aimed to pursue political purposes, never aimed to support any political party or to damage any political party. Therefore, as Fethullah Gülen repeatedly express to public opinion, he does not pursue any worldly or political expectation or desire. But because of the current difficult situation of our nation, as a person feeling concern and affliction, as every citizen, he expresses his opinion about these subjects as his right and duty. So our client advocates everybody who has opportunities to contribute to the solution of problems of education. As a matter of fact, people from all walks of the life who think these advises as reason, in Turkey and abroad established schools using modern education technologies. At these schools which are totally under inspection and supervision of Ministry of Education and other official institutions, there is no possibility of imposing any political, ideological, religious opinions.

19 Scientific successes of students in these schools in Turkey and international competitions are the clearest evidence of this. Fethullah Gülen does not owe or manage any of these schools, except his mentioned advises, he does not have any relations with these schools. As it was understood in this explanation, our client does not have any relation with these schools which were attributed to him, except his advises to all citizens to contribute education. In Turkey, information about the owners of private schools can be obtained from the records of official institutions inspecting and giving permit to these schools and from their registration numbers. In these records, it is certain that our client does not own any school or educational institutions. There is no possibility to prove the claim of being owner of schools with showing our client s intellectual encouragements. Some individuals and organizations have established educational institutions in Turkey and abroad with intellectual encouragement of our client s thoughts and advices. These institutions continue their educational activities under inspection and supervision of Ministry of Education. Our client does not have any role in management of these schools and at the determination of their curriculums. Schools in other countries are inspected based on the procedures of the countries they were established. Therefore with speaking of law, there is no way to claim that these schools are legal structure of a terrorist organization. On the other hand, foremost our president, government officials call private persons for investments to the field of education, Congress passes law for this purpose, official intuitions give incentive schemes. At constitution law no 42 and its reasoned explanation, opening private school was accepted by constitution, these schools required to be compatible with educational quality of public school, government is obliged to take measures to maintain these standards. At Private Education Institutions law and its regulations; who can establish private education institution and opening conditions are determined. According to this, private education institutions are under inspection and supervision of Ministry of education and it can only be opened with the permit of this Ministry. Also according to this law, private education institutions can conduct educational activities with a curriculum accepted by Ministry of Education, this curriculum has to be compatible with Ministry of Education goals. In the legal regulations, all procedures such as how these schools will be inspected, who can be teacher in these schools, how their fees will be arranged, were determined in details. Since the records of Ministry of Education and all other official institutions are open and fixed, there is no illegal activity in mentioned schools. On the other hand, after visiting these schools state officers, authors, businessman, and artists expressed in their statements that there is no illegal or religious activities in these schools. These statements are published by press. In this condition, to encourage, advice people to

20 work on educational activities which were permitted by constitution and endorsed by State as a duty cannot be considered as a matter of discussion. When the statements of our presidents, prime ministers and meetings at the congress were paid attention, it will be seen that, these schools are carrying out secular, democratic, state of law principles and Turkish national and cultural values to all over the world. (taken from Prime minister press center Statements of Prime minister Bulent Ecevit, Statements of State Minister Abdulhaluk Mehmet Cay (commissioner responsible from Turkic Republics) on 05.02.2001 at general council, statement of Congressman Necati Cetinkaya from recording of congress were presented at the attachment of our petition on 5.17.2001.) Because of these reasons, as it was written at Milliyet Newspaper on May 3, 2001 and Turkish daily news on May 12, 2001, Taliban government in Afghanistan which was in office during that time closed these school since they resisted holding above mentioned principles. (Copies of these newspapers were presented at the attachment of our petition on 5.17.2001) Again about this subject, at the program 32 th day prepared by Mehmet Ali Brant at CNN Turk, the closing of Turkish schools in Afghanistan by Talibans, since they were raising secular people who are sympathizer of Turkey, and teaching Turkish language and Turkish national values, were investigated in details. (attachment 21) The minutes of the international meetings related to these education institutions (which continue their operations under supervision and inspection of Ministry of Education) organized by State Ministerium were collected at the book, and officially published. In these books, It is expressed that the education given in these institutions are compatible with the standards determined by Ministry of Education, these institution introduce Turkish culture to all over the word. (The books of report of meeting with representatives of private education institutions established at Turkic republics by Turkish citizens and second meeting with representatives of private education institutions established abroad were presented at the attachment of our petition on 5.17.2001) These books clearly show that the claim of these schools will have activities to assure sympathy to shari state which will established in Turkey at the future is false. Again, it can be clearly seen at the report of Ministry of Education s Middle Schools Head Office about the list of students ranked in international science fairs in 1998 and 1999 which was presented at the attachment of our petition on 5.17.2001, most of these students are from private education institutions established by individuals or foundations. Moreover, at the summary charter of education commission of 9 th collaboration convention of Turkic nations and societies stated that the schools operating with the principle of secular Turkish republic, opened

by the republic and volunteer institutions at Turkish world need to be supported. These documents itself is enough to prove that the claims against these schools are false (attachment 22) 21 Financial Sources: The claims at the indictment (p.17) under the title of Financial sources are made up of baseless, conflicting and false predictions. For example, at the indictments, it is written that Fethullah Gülen conditions believers to be rich, instead of very rich individuals, puts in action the opinion of establishment of incorporated companies with big capitals. Because very rich person may be busy with world that he may neglect or hinder the purposed works. How advises of being rich is defined as crime was not explained in the indictment and it is not easy to understand this either. Besides, our clients advises are not specific to certain segments or to people who has definite world views, his statements are to all public without discriminating anybody. At the 17 th page of the indictment, it is written that Fethullah Gülen Group has huge real estate fortune; huge rental income is obtained from these estates. For example, Akyazili foundation which is affiliated with the group, owns many houses, offices, schools, companies, courses, shops, dormitories in 23 cities. There are speculations that this group gives political supports to political parties. In 1997, Asya Finance which is connected with movement received 553 billion Turkish Liras incentives from government. When these two issues evaluated together, it is concluded that political parties and bureaucrats were used to receive financial support and with these people state opportunities were used But these claims are totally false and groundless; they are based on intangible assumptions. Because no evidence was presented about how and when does our client used which political parties and bureaucrats, as a result of this which type of state opportunities were used. State supports and incentives to financial institutions are fulfilled with related legislations, they are inspected by many state offices. There is no relation between any incentive and our client. At the same section, it is said that to finance education Fethullah Gülen collects monthly and annual payments with the name of taxing from people and organizations which are affiliated with him. Especially for the Fethullah Gülen s school in Kazakhstan, 1 million dollar was transferred, it is known that same activities were organized in the cities of Afyon, Malatya, Kayseri and Izmir, but no source for this information or evidence was presented. These claims are totally false and throughout the lawsuit no evidence was presented to support this claim. In addition to this, collecting money with the name of taxing is also false and no concrete evidence was presented about this claim also. Same accusation was made at the 18 th page of the indictment big income was obtained in the universities abroad, middle schools, elementary schools, language centers. It is thought that this income was

22 used to finance and improve these institutions. As a matter of fact, the statement such as it is though that also shows that this accusation does not based on any concrete evidence, it is made up with intangible assumptions or predictions. These accusations are totally false and groundless, these can also be understood from the terms expressing assumption used in the indictment such as it is know that, it is thought that. At the 18 th page of the indictment incomes of big organization such as Isik Insurance, Asya Finance and donations of members of ISHAD, GIAD hold big share in Fethullah Gülen s financial sources. In addition to this, large income was obtained in the area of broadcasting and publishing such as television, radio, newspaper, and magazine. But no information was given about how these companies connected with our client. Our client has no share or connection with these companies. No explanation was given about this and how these legally operating companies connected with our client. Again at the same page, it should not be forgotten that foreign forces more likely directing Fethullah Gülen for their own purposes in return for their support abroad. This accusation totally based on assumption. Which foreign forces, where, when and how does these forces support or used our client for their own purposes? To claim such a big accusation without any evidence also shows that this accusation is totally false. Our client expresses his opinions related to development of our country in the field of economy. In his many statements and works, the spirit of trade was expressed as honesty, trust and to comprehend the current conditions. These opinions were not targeted to certain people or certain point of views, it was expressed to all public opinions. These opinions were expressed to whole society without discriminating anybody or anything? These opinions which are advising commercial activities with the principles of honesty, trustworthiness, depending on ethical values, working in legal framework do not contain any political, ideological, economic structuring advises. Political targets At the 18 th page of the indictment, it is written that Fethullah Gülen identified that initially he cannot reach his targets with fighting with State, therefore instead of destroying current system, with organization compatible with State model, he targeted to establish a system which is alternative to the State. Therefore, he targeted to organize in all State organs, local administrations, and civil sectors. To take State administrations under his control in the future, he targeted to bring his advocates to all administrative cadres, or try to influence people currently holding these cadres. The claims in this section conflict with the claims in other parts of the indictment. In other parts, it is claimed that our client is aiming to destroy current system (p.13, p.55, p.76, p.78), but in this section, it is expressed that our client does not have intention to destroy current system.

23 In this section, it is said that our client established organization compatible with State model instead of destroying current system. This has to be clarified; what does the term of organization compatible with State model mean? The model of State has secular, democratic, social, and state of law model, if there is a model compatible with the State model, how does an organization with this model form crime? At the 19 th page of the indictment, it is written that it is though that Fethullah Gülen with establishing good relations with all religions and nations aimed to prevent counter initiatives from them, and gain their supports, addition to this in page 16, it is stated that Fethullah Gülen with the knowledge of government and invitation of Pope met with Pope John Paul II on February 9, 1998. This meeting led up to inter religious dialog and Fethullah Gülen in international platform became the leader of Muslims in Turkey. These claims do not base on any evidence. One more time it needs to be emphasized that our clients thought to see people as brother of each other comes from his loving and tolerant personality. Therefore as an intellectual, to meet with people from all walks of life and exchanging of ideas are all in legal framework, and also one of the basic human rights for everybody. The purpose of all these meeting is to strengthen dialog, tolerance and reconciliation in Turkey and in the World. Meetings with members of different religions are necessary act for these thoughts. They are aiming to support affords of inter religious dialog based on mutual respect and tolerance. Key concept of meetings with representatives of different religions such as Pope John Paul II, Patrik I. Bartholomeos, Rabbi Bakshi Doron is a longing for a world in which people living in mutual love, brotherhood, respectfully accepting members of other faiths in their own conditions, and reconciliation. These meetings were done during the idea of clash of civilization was intensified and Turkey was mentioned as the center of this clash and under the accusations of fanatics. The purposes of these meeting are to show that Islam is not a religion supporting conflict, fight, violence and terror, on the contrary it is a religion based on the principles of love, mercy, forgiveness, tolerance, to show that these are also main principles of all religions, to stop all so called religious historical wars, with the starting of warm dialogs, to create better, peaceful, happy tomorrows to this world which is fed up with fights and wars. In the indictment this dialog effort was evaluated as preparation leading up to formation of World Religion Union and as a strategy to be representative for Islam in the international platform. Meeting with Pope is a consequence of idea of interfaith dialog with the members of religions. As it was said in the indictment (p.17) happened with the knowledge, and permit of our State. Testimony of Vatican Istanbul Representative George Marovitch proves also that these accusations are false. The claim of Effort of leadership with Pope in the indictment is false. Our client states that there is no clergy (priesthood) in Islam.

24 In addition to this, the term of World Religion Union was introduced by prosecutor, but no evidence or prove was presented about existence of this Union. If there is such a Union, our client does not have any relation with this Union. Large establishments (companies) At the 19 th page of the indictment, under the title of Large establishments of Fethullah Gülen s Group, with saying according to determination of Police headquarter, Fethullah Gülen Group organizes as a network in all cities in Turkey, with its companies, foundations, schools, dormitories, and media companies. The most important of these establishments can be listed as, some establishments names were given. At the mentioned writings by Police headquarter, the owners and list of some companies, foundations, schools, dormitories, media companies operating all over the Turkey were written and it is stated that these establishments were claimed to be connected with Fethullah Gülen Group. Our client is not owner, shareholder, manager of these companies and he does not have any relation with these companies. No information or evidence about this claim was presented in the file either. Moreover in these writings and in other information and documents in the file, there is no information or evidence presented about our client involvement in any illegal activity. There is no information or evidence presented either about those companies alleged to be affiliated with our client were involved in any illegal activity. In this condition, all claims in the indictment and in the opinion about this matter are false and do not depend on any concrete evidence. And yet, prosecutor Keles in his opinion about essence of the lawsuit (page 5) with saying Fethullah Gülen formation with controlling many foundations, organization, private school, companies, courses, dormitories, printing companies, newspaper, TV station, interest-free finance institution, insurance agency, radio station in Turkey organizes on purpose, secretly and deliberately, repeats these intangible claims, legally speaking this does not carry any value. 6. SECTION EVALUATION OF THE EVIDENCE V) TESTIMONIES OF THE WITNESSES As it is known, witnessing is declaring of information acquired with witness s sense organs in front of court. In this sense, witness related to the subject of the lawsuit, out of prejudices, hatred, subjective evaluation, should present objectively his knowledge in front of court. But during this lawsuit, witnesses demanded by the prosecutor and accepted by the court were lack of this objective witnessing and behaved

25 with the influence of the prejudices imposed by some other people, this was determined with the documents and information in the file. During the evaluation of these evidences, this condition should be paid attention by the court. Our explanations below state expressly that testimonies of the witnesses called by prosecutor are full of contradictions and lies about our client. 1) Eyup Kayar Eyup Kayar was listened at the hearing on 1.29.2001, and his demand of getting involved to the lawsuit was accepted, his intervening was decided. At the file, there are his testimony (File 11, line 715) taken by prosecutor on 8.13.1999 as a witness during the investigation and his 5 pages written testimony which was given to the court on 1.26.2001. In addition to this, transcript of his talk at Channel 6 TV on 11.6.1998 is at the file (File 5, at the continuation of line 154). His statements published by Cumhuriyet newspaper on 4.8.1997 and 4.9.1997 were also put into the file by us. All these statements and his mother Arife Kayar s statements at the hearing on 12.4.2000 and her 5 pages written testimony dated 11.8.2000 were evaluated together: Contradictions related to Eyup Kayar s Fethullah Gülen Cemaati (society) claim and about who introduced Eyup Kayar to this cemaat. Eyup Kayar in his testimony on 8.13.1999 (page 1) at prosecutor office, he says in 1991, when I was middle school student, I met first time with the cemaat through my friend Tamer Dokumaci At the 1 st page of his petition on 1.26.2001, he states that I met first time with Fethullah Gülen Cemaat in 1989 at the Istanbul Neslisah Elementary School At the channel 6 TV, he stated that I met first time with this cemaat at 6 th grade, this happened through my teacher in Religion Mustafa Yekebas and this man stepped in at first hand. (This section is somehow not in the transcript of this video cassette prepared by prosecutor office; we presented this section with our petition on 3.22.2001 with quoting 206 th page of the book written by Hulki Cevizoglu who was the anchor of this program) At the statements published in Cumhuriyet Newspaper on 4.8.1997, he says that Mustafa Yekebas surprised when he saw me at the house at 8 th grade. In his other statement Mustafa Yekebas was the person introduced him at 6 th grade but he also surprised when he saw him at home at 9 th grade. In Eyup Kayar s statements, the dates, places, people, and incidents about how he met with Fethullah Gülen Cemaati contradict with each other.

26 Contradictions on statements about Eyup Kayar s meeting with Fethullah Gülen. Eyup in his statement at Channel 6 TV, He met with our client Fethullah Gülen 6 th grade at the sermon at Fatih Mosque, he kissed Gülen s hand, he also met with him at 9 th grade and 11 th grade, he says he sit close (knee to knee) with Fethullah Gülen. At the testimony taken at prosecutor office (page 1) at 6 th grade Fethullah Gülen came to sermon at Fatih Mosque, they introduce me to him at the balcony of the mosque, they made me kiss his hand, this incident happened again at the 8 th grade At the hearing on 1.29.2001, we demanded to be asked Eyup Kayar when, where, how many times has he seen Fethullah Gülen?, he answered that I met with Fethullah Gülen twice, first meeting was at Sirinevler Fatih Private High School in 1994, 2 nd meeting was at the room reserved for Fethullah Gülen at the top floor of Istanbul Cemberlitas branch of FEM preparatory courses in 1995 (hearing proceeding, p.10). As it is clearly seen, the claims about meeting of Eyup Kayar with our client differentiate at dates and places of the meetings. At Channel 6, he says he saw him at Fatih Mosque, at 6 th, 9 th and 11 th grades, at the testimony at prosecutor office, we repeats that it was in Fatih Mosque, but at 6 th and 8 th grades, but as we see at the statement at Channel 6 he claims he met him 3 times, but at the prosecutor office he says 2 times. But at the hearing at the court, the place, date and content of the meeting are totally different. Before he mentioned that he saw our client at an official sermon, but later (he goes to years later) at the private college and course, and even at the private room reserved to our client. Eyup Kayar, presents contradicting statements related to dates, place, times of meeting with his alleged imaginary leader Fethullah Gülen of his claimed imaginary cemaat of which he was a member once upon a time. If there is a structure like this, meeting with the leader of this structure should be very important and should be explained to our courts in details with accuracy. Contradictions about Eyup Kayar participation in women meetings Eyup Kayar in his written testimony on 1.26.2001 (page 3), he claims that It is prohibited to watch TVs because of women speakers; they don t sit to the seats on buses if a woman sit there earlier because they believe that when women stand up, Satan sits there; at his testimony at prosecutor office (page 2) Fethulah Gülen Cemaat is very strict about women, at page 3 a school principle at the city of Astrahan was fired because he danced with a women.

27 At the hearing on 1.29.2001, Eyup Kayar said that he has been at the women meeting and distributed tea to them. At the written testimony of Arife Kaya (his mother) given to the court at the hearing on 11.8.2000 (page 3), she states that Eyup Kayar has been going to the houses of Russian girls and staying overnight with them. When these statements evaluated together, many contradictions with Eyup Kayar s statements are seen. If this cemaat aiming to establish such a strict, thick and impassable barriers not to bring women and men together, such as forbidding to watch TVs due to women speaker, how did Eyup Kayar participate to the women meeting which he calls women disciples meeting and serve them with preparing tea for them? How has Eyup Kayar, when he was a member of such a strict cemaat which strictly prohibits meetings with woman, been going to the houses of Russian girls and staying overnight with them? On the other hand at the testimony of Husem Ekiz which was taken with the order of Adana State Security Court No.1 (on 8.31.2001, at the file with 2001/22 order number) he states that I know Eyup was hanging around with Russian women and staying overnight at their houses. This also shows that Eyup Kayar s statement about this subject is not true. Contradictions on statements of Eyup Kayar that He became Ihvan-i Resulullah (friend of the God s Messenger) At the Cumhuriyet newpaper on 4.8.1997, statement of Eyup Kayar is that Later Eyup Kayar attends to Vatan High School. Fethullahist told him that, now you became Ihvan-i Resulullah At the testimony at prosecutor office, Eyup Kayar states the same incident that at the end of 8 th grade, the responsible person of the house of light took me to the side and told me that you became Ihvan-i Resulullah. In this condition, was Eyup Kayar become Ihvan-i Resulullah at 8 grade or at Vatan High School? Contradictions on statements of Eyup Kayar about Houses of Light At the testimony (page 1) at prosecutor office, Eyup Kayar related to his claimed house of light Only me and Tamer from Neslisah Elementary School was going to the houses of light. At the written testimony given to the court, page 1 he states that I was surprised when a see one of my classmate at this house. In other word activities were extensive. On the other side at the written

testimony given to the court, he added that he was the chair of 9 people. But in his statements at Cumhuriyet newspaper, Channel 6 TV, prosecutor office, no such a statement was presented. 28 Contradictions on statements of Eyup Kayar how he was sent to Middle Asia Eyup Kayar, at the Channel 6 TV (transcript of the cassette p. 22) said that in 1995, I was ordered to go to Tajikistan, I also had visa to Tajikistani, my visa was taken as a teacher, since I was not even 18 years old, permit from my family was taken, my flight ticket was purchased, but at the last day, Kadir Tufan, representative of Cag Education Services wanted 10 million lira, therefore my going was cancelled At the Cumhuriyet newpaper on 4.9.1997 at the column that Hikmet Cetinkaya citing on Eyup Kayar s written statements, as totally contrary to the previous one, Eyup says that FEM Cemberlikaya branch was charged with sending people to Tajikistan, a person with the named Kadir Tufan initiated my visa procedures on behalf of Cag Education Services. We went together to Ufa, capital of Bashkortostan. At the TV talk, Kadir Tufan was the person caused problem and stop his going, but at the newspaper he takes him to Bashkortostan. Eyup Kayar constantly extended his statements. Eyup Kayar added new names which were not mentioned at the statements at Cumhuriyet Newspaper and Channel 6 TV to his statement at the testimony given at prosecutor office and he expanded number of people and his claims. For instance the name of Sabri Ulker placed first time at the statement at prosecutor office. He was mentioned as best friend of Fethullah Gülen and Eyup claimed that Ulker hidden Gülen at his home, when there was an arrest warrant on Gülen. Eyup mentions this incident as if he personally saw it but he is not sure if this house is in the city of Ankara or Izmir. At the top of that, based on Eyup s birth day, there is no possibility that he can see this event. The name of Aydin Bolak placed first time at the statements at prosecutor office and also other names which were not mentioned before such as Talga Tecettin which was claimed as Muslim leader of Russian Federation, Roger Karadue from France, Cat Stevens from England, and Yahya Vatanyar Saidovic. Eyup added the name of Ihsan Kalkavan at the hearing on 1.29.2001. Eyup Kayar lied about the Ataturk Bust At the 4 th page of the written testimony presented to the court, Eyup states that in 1994, before the World Bashkurd Congress, 15 minutes before coming of the committee including retired soldiers, Ataturk bust was placed, I saw this and I learned this

29 But, previously Eyup stated that (petition on 1.26.2001, page 3), he went to Bashkortostan on 9.25.1995. As it is seen here that, Eyup cannot see this event based on the date of his coming to Bashkortostan, but he stated this as if he saw it. Contradictions between statements of Eyup and His mother Eyup Kayar in his testimony at prosecutor office (1 st page) he claims that at the 6 th grade I started to fast even though I was sick and stopped my medication But his mother state in her written statement (1 st page) that Eyup never fasted, but he did not tell this to them Contradictions about claims of Meeting Group At the hearing on 1.29.2001, Eyup said, Fethullah Gülen Group has meeting council consisting of 6 people (hearing proceedings, page 9) but in his talk at Channel 6 TV, he claimed 7 (transcription of the cassette, page 10). We demanded to be asked, Eyup said that he did not participate any of these alleged meetings, he stated that his claims does not based on his seeing. With this turn of phrase, it is very clear that he fabricated the names he wanted and the events he wanted, to justify his slanders. Related to this topic Eyup also fabricated names such as Mr. Bekir as imam of US, Sait as Imam of the world, but he says he does not remember their last names (hearing proceedings p.10). On the other hand in his talk at Channel 6 TV (transcription of the cassette, page 2 and 10), he claims that to give last name was strictly prohibited, therefore he does not know the last name of the person he said Sait, if it was prohibited how did he gave the last names of other people in his statements? But on the other hand at the evidence given by prosecutor, 18 th page of the article written by Necip Hablemitoglu at Yeni Hayat magazine dated August 2000, it was claimed that a person with the name of Ismail Buyukcelebi is the imam of US. These contradicting names also indicate that these claims are false and groundless. Which countries have Eyup Kayar gone and what was his aim? At the testimony given at the prosecutor office (page 7), Eyup says that the same camps which were opened at Azerbaijan, were also opened at Netherlands. In the hearing on 1.29.2001, he says that I have not been Azerbaijan but to investigate Gülen cemaat I went to some countries such as Netherlands, Belgium, France etc. and then he said that about my master topic, I have been in these countries,

30 Claim of money laundering is a slander. Eyup Kayar accused our client with money laundering at Cumhuriyet Newspaper on 4.9.1997. A letter dated 7.20.2000 from headquarter of Ministry of Finance Financial Crimes Investigation Board and the writing dated 8.16.2000 of the prosecutor who investigated this claims were presented as an evidence that this claim is false. Eyup s statements about Rose Age are false. He stated that the aim of the Fethullah Gülen s group as it is explained in his poems and books to establish a State which will cherish the Rose age. The Rose age is the age which messenger Muhammad lived in. Rose age is not compatible with Secular Republic; this can only be established with Caliphate State. These statements are some other distortions of Eyup Kayar, they are all fabricated to accuse our client. These all based on subjective interpretation and not based on any visual witnessing. Who is the caliph in Gülen s poem, Caliph in the book of Broken Plectrum? Eyup Kayar using Gülen s poem, Caliph at the book of Broken Plectrum, claims as an expert that our client opposes to abolishment of Caliphate, wants to reestablish the system of Caliphate. But when mentioned poem was investigated, it would be seen that it is an eulogy to Messenger Muhammad. According to Islamic faith, human being who is the most superior creator of God, is a representative of God in this world, in other word he is Caliph. In the Islamic faith, Messenger Muhammad is the most superior human being. Therefore, the title of a poem praising Prophet Muhammad was called Caliph. This book published many times for years. For the requirement of Press Law Article 35, he passed the investigation of public prosecutors. Except Eyup Kayar, Nobody has drawn conclusion of the longing of caliphate from this poem. As it happened in his other claims, he makes a special effort to accuse our client with this poem. Mentioned poem was presented at the attachments of our petition on 3.22.2001. At the footnote of the book also, the meaning of caliph was written as spiritual rank given to humanity by God which was initially given to first human being. Department of Religious Affairs also declares that the rose is the symbol of the Messenger Muhammad, therefore every year at the week of Holy Birthday roses are delivered. At the Commentary of Qur an by Department of Religious Affairs, related to verse in Qur an Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a caliph on earth, it is explained that humanity was meant with caliph which literary means representative, regent. (Publications of Department of Religious Affairs, Quran and Turkish commentary, Chapter-The Cow: 2:30, Ankara 1985)

31 His claims at the subject of secrecy are false Our client s intellectual and scientific activities have been happening openly for 30 years in front of public opinion. Our client even faced with threats and criticisms of some radical groups because of his statements about his love to his country, nation and about his attachment to his country. On the contrary to these facts, Eyup s claims, everything is done under the counter for the future Caliphate State and similar claims are false. On the one side Eyup Kayar says everything is done under the counter, on the other hand he says in his statement on 1.26.2001 (page 1), our teacher wanted to talk to our parent for us to go these houses. If everything is under the counter, why do the members of alleged organization want to meet and talk to the parents? In this subject also, Eyup Kayar s statements are contradicting. Suspicions about Eyup Kayar s source of living Eyup Kayar stated to the court that he visited many Europian countries. Eyup and his mother said also that they are having financial difficulties. It is an enigma that who was the sponsor of these trips which can be afforded by people with high income level. Or are these trips imaginary? The claims that Eyup Kayar was kicked out from school and threatened by gun are false. Eyup Kayar, at his statements until the hearing, had claimed that when he was returning from Bashkortostan to Turkey, he was forced to ride taxi and beaten up, but at the hearing somehow he remembered an incident that someone held a gun to his head. If such an incident had happened, it would not have been forgotten. This incident was not in the statements given to newspaper, TV and prosecutor office but it was remembered first time at the court, this shows that he was directed at this point to add a dimension of armed actions to the lawsuit. Therefore his claim that a person who pointed gun to his head went to Bulgaria later and came with two teachers death bodies is also false and imaginary claim. It is recorded at court hearing that Eyup Kayar claims that this alleged incident happened in 1997 and this treatment ended 3.20.1997 and until the hearing on 1.29.2001, he has not applied to any authority to complain. Later, in his statement, he mentioned about he filed a complaint about death threat. When complaint s petition (file 11, line 714) was investigated, it is seen that this complaint has no relation with our client. Plaintiff in this petition is Arife Kayar and defendant is a person with the first name Hasan and the last name unknown. This petition has no connection with our client; it is about fighting with neighbor.

32 Eyup Kayar, dropped out from Bashkortostan State University, with the decision (decision no. 278) of Dean Office (based on Bashkortostan State University s State Higher Education Department s rules, article 4.7 paragraph 2 ) due to lack of continuity and failing with the signatures of President, Dean, Chair of Education Department, Chair of the Department of the University. Bashkortostan Passport authority cancelled his residency on 3.15.1997 and prepared return visa based on Bashkortostan state laws due to the letter (2.25.1997, No: 235) sent from Bashkortostan State University. These mentioned documents and their authorized translations were presented at the attachment of our petition on 12.25.2001. But Eyup Kayar distorts these progresses to accuse our client, and says that he was forced to ride taxi, with gun pointed his head and he was deported. Actually Eyup Kayar was dropped out from university due to lack of attendance and failing, and residency cancelled because of this reason, he was sent to Turkey based on State laws. Husem Ekiz who was accused to point gun on Eyup Kayar s head, presented to the Adana No. 1 State Security Court with the stamps on his passport that he was not at Bashkortostan when Eyup Kayar was deported. Nurettin Ozturk is a university friend of Eyup Kayar at Bashkortostan State University. In his petition (page 2 and 4) dated 7.13.2001 he stated that Eyup Kayar was dropped out from university due to lack of attendance, managers of Turkish companies made effort to stop deporting, but based on state law he was deported. Dispossessing of his passport, beaten up, pointing gun on his head are totally fiction. In the same petition, Nurettin Ozturk also states in details that With Eyup we planned to earn big financial benefits using this dropping out from university and deporting, therefore we went to Hikmet Cekinkaya from Cumhuriyet Newspaper, then we met with Gulseven Yaser and Hasmet Atahan, later we heard that Serhat Ozkan and Ismail Ozdemir received 2 million dollars from these people, to receive the same money we read Fethullah Gülen s books and we prepared accusations to draw these people s attention, we were paid back well financially for this work, Since Eyup Kayar was more ambitious, Gulseven Yasar paid special attention to him, she arranged program at Channel 6 TV for him. With the reasons explained above, Eyup Kayar s statements about our client do not stem from his knowledge and observation, it is because of financial benefits he received and they are totally false and fabricated. At the search at Contemporary Education Foundation on 6.3.2002 by Istanbul Police Headquarters Anti-Terror Department with the order of Istanbul SSC Prosecutor Office, a letter sent by Eyup Kayar to Gulseven Yasar was found (prosecutor office, file 4, line 186). In this letter some of the financial benefits supplied to Eyup Kayar and his new demands were clearly written. Copy of this letter

33 summoned to Ankara 31. Civil Court s 2002/423 E. numbered file is presented at the attachment (Attachment 30). Prosecutor Hamza Keles in his opinion to the essence of the lawsuit presented statement of Eyup Kayar on 8.13.1999 given to prosecutor during investigation as evidence against our client to the court. Hamza Keles also stated that Eyup Kayar repeated the same statement to the court on 1.29.2001. We presented all of contradictions, lies of Eyup Kayar one and one. In this condition, it is seen that the opinion to the essence of the lawsuit was prepared without extensive investigation of whole file, all of our evidence such as letter form Bashkortostan University and other letters, Nurettin Ozturk s petition, statement of Husem Ekis and his passport information, broadcasting of Isik TV were totally ignored. Eyup Kayar and his mother Arife Kayar with their petition on 3.4.2002 stated that they gave up their claims and complaints. The court also decided to abolish their intervener role at the hearing on 3.11.2002. This progress also shows that these people was directed by some people from the beginning, most probably because of stoppage of their financial benefits, they put an end to this. Faultiness of these witnesses were determined with the contradictions of their statements, statement of Husem Ekis and his passport information, letter form Bashkortostan university, Nurettin Ozturk s petition, video cassette of Isik TV, letter from Eyup Kayar to Gulseven Yaser which was captured during the search at Contemporary Education Foundation by Istanbul Police Headquarters Anti-Terror Department with the order of Istanboul SSC Prosecutor Office, petition of renouncing intervening. Therefore statements of Eyup Kayar and Arife Kayar against our client cannot be credited. 2. Husem Ekiz Husem Ekiz is the person who was claimed by Eyup Kayar that he pointed gun on his head and deported him with force. Husem Ekiz wrote a petition dated 5.18.2001 and sent to the file, in this petition I learned that Eyup Kayar presented false claims about myself to your court. Eyup Kayar was dropped out from University due to failing, most probably because he frightened from his father, he accused others, I would like to be witness about the thing I was witnessed. At the hearing on 7.16.2001, with interim decision no 10, Husem Ekiz was decided to be heard officially. At his statement taken by Adana No. 1 State Security Court on 8.31.2001 (with the precept file no 2001/22), in summary he stated that I am a manager of dormitory at Bashkortostan autonomous Republic which is connected to Russian federation. Eyup Kayar came to this country in 1995 or 1996 to attend university and he stayed at the dormitory. But Eyup Kayar was hanging out with Russian girls, staying overnight at their houses and not studying to his classes. Because of his failures at classes he was dropped out from university. He accused other people because he was afraid of his father. I did not confiscate his

34 passport, I did not make him to sign empty paper, I did not threaten him with pointing gun on his hand, at the dates Eyup Kayar claimed that this incidents happened I was in Turkey, I presented my passport to court to prove this, Eyup s claim that I killed two teachers in Bulgaria is false, we established the dormitory in Russia with our 4 friends, Fethullah Gülen does not have any connection with this dormitory, I never received any order from Fethullah Gülen when I was in Russia Statements of Husem Ekiz also clearly confirm that Eyup Kayar s claims are false. 3- Serhat Ozkan Serhat Ozkan was listened at the hearing on 3.28.2001, and his demand of getting involved to the lawsuit was accepted, and his intervening was decided. Serhat Ozkan at the hearing also presented 32 pages of written testimony. Previously, he also gave his testimony to prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel on 9.26.2000. When these statements taken at different dates were compared, it is laid bare that Eyup Kayar s statements are false and dictated by some other people. At Serhat Ozkan, this same situation is so clear that it is not even necessary to talk about. The same 32 pages of Serhat Ozkan testimony without signature was captured during the search at Contemporary Education Foundation by Istanbul Police Headquarters Anti-Terror Department with the order of Istanboul SSC Prosecutor Office on 6.3.2002 (prosecutor office file 4, line 96-97). At the attachment (attachment 31), we are presenting this non-signed document which was summoned to Ankara 31. Civil Court 2002/423 E numbered file. This document also laid bare that who did prepare this document. In this section we will explain all progress which started at Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office related to Serhat Ozkan. Serhat Ozkan s testimonies at Fatih Prosecutor Office We applied to Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office related to the accusations to our client at the book HOCANIN okullari written by Serhat Ozkan, Ismail Ozdemir, and Gulseven Yaser, president of Contemporary Education Foundation. Based on this, Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office took testimony of Serhat Ozkan on 3.6.1998 for the file 1998/3415 preparation. At the testimony in this file, Serhat Ozkan stated in detaits that I don t have any connection with Fethullah Gülen and with foundation schools related to him and then Gulseven Yaser, president of Contemporary Education Foundation supplied financial benefits to me and Ismail Ozdemir, for these benefits and for the promised future opportunities, we created fantasies about Fethullah Gülen and spoke to Gulseven Yaser and she created a book from these talks.. We presented this testimony to the court with our petition on 1.29.2001.

35 Documents for Financial Benefits Serhat Ozkan presented check copies and receipts about these financial benefits to the file at Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office with his testimony. We presented to the court copies of these documents received from this file at the hearing on 3.28.2001. Serhat Ozkan does not know our client and has no connection with him in anyway. On the contrary of this statement given to Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office, his new testimony to Ankara SST Prosecutor Office is based on financial benefits supplied to him. Serhat Ozkan in his constantly changing testimonies looks for excuse to his false statements, with saying I was threatened in previous statements. He goes further in these claims that at the hearing on 9.26.2000 at SSC prosecutor office related to the book HOCANIN okullari prosecutor at on duty during that time had been angry to me, he said you are changing your testimony, we are eating these peoples bread and then talking against them, also judge did not want to hear my statement (page 3). He accuses prosecutors and judges who are asking about changing his testimony. Again at the petition he gave to the court on 3.28.2001 he stated this false accusation (page 4), I was forced to go Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office to give my testimony with Fethullah Gülen s lawyers. On the other side, for the reason why he could not graduate from university, Serhat Ozkan claims that because of Fethullahists. Who did this and how this happened has not been explained in any of his statements. But until this lawsuit was opened, he has not applied to any authorities to complain; after lawsuit was initiated he applied to the court to accuse our client to cover his own failure. It is very open that Serhat Ozkan chose to obtained financial benefits for his life expenses with accusing our client from Gulseven Yaser who feels enmity toward our client. The statement of Ismail Ozdemir who is friend of Serhat Ozkan on 7.6.2001 Serhat is still working as Gulseven Yaser s private driver confirms this condition. (Copy of this statement was presented at the attachment of our petition on 12.25.2001). Statements of Suat Ozkan When Serhat Ozkan gave his testimony to Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office, his brother Suat Ozkan was also with him. At the same investigation file, there is also Suat Ozkan s statement. At this statement, Suat Ozkan says that Gulsever Yaser has supplied great benefits to Serhat Ozkan and Ismail Ozdemir, she also promised them to give 5 billion lira for their education in America, and she pressed them close with mentioning big figures. We presented this statement with our petition on 1.29.2001. Related to this investigation, at the lawsuit opened by Fatih 2. Civil Court (1998/606 E), Suat Ozkan stated that I confirm that my statement at prosecutor office is correct and I am repeating the same (this statement presented at attachment 4)

36 Serhat Ozkan with his petition on 3.5.2002 stated that Since I was deceived by some people, I am withdrawing from my complaints and being intervener for this lawsuit and at the hearing on 3.11.2002 his intervener role was abolished. Statements of Ismail Ozdemir Testimony of Serhat Ozkan s friend Ismail Ozdemir was taken at Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office (at file 1998/3415 preperation) on 6.3.1998. In both statements at Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office and at the Fatih 2. Civil Court (file no. 1998/606 E), he stated that with the directions of Gulseven Yaser, we fabricated scenarios about Fethullah Gülen to obtain financial benefits supplied by Gulseven Yaser, we created fantasies, Gulseven Yaser allocated her BMW (plate no. 34.UPY.65) to us in acknowledgment of this information, in every meeting we received huge money, she bought us computer, cell phone and promised us life in US. Ismail Ozdemir repeated the same statements in details in the petition he presented to the court on 7.10.2001. Nol-Pros Decision of Uskudar Republic Prosecutor Office For the thought of an excuse for changing his statements, Serhat Ozkan in his statement at DGM prosecutor office and at the court claimed that He and his friend Ismail Ozdemir were kidnapped by Fethullah Gülen cemaat, leaned on participating TV program and forced to interview, and forced to give testimony at Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office, he said later on he applied to official complaint. The date of Serhat Ozkan s testimony at Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office is 3.6.1998. Due to supplied financial benefits, his complaint to the prosecutor office is on 11.23.1998 with claiming that kidnapped by Fethullah Gülen cemaat, forced to interview, and forced to give testimony at Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office. Between the complaint and testimony there are 8.5 months. Uskudar Republic Prosecutor Office investigated with having examined by expert, determined no evidence or sing for possible forced interview, since complaint was found groundless, nol-pros decision was given on 10.1.2001 (2001/6713 Pr, 2001/10741 D). This confirmed nol-pros decision was presented at the attachment of our petition on 12.25.2001. In this mentioned file, testimonies of Serhat Ozkan and his friend Ismail Ozdemir were taken also. The testimony of Ismail Ozdemir was presented to the court and matches with his statement at his petition dated 12.25.2001. Testimony of Ismail Ozdemir at Uskudar Republic Prosecutor Office was presented at the attachment of our petition on 12.25.2001.

37 Since Serhat Ozkan s testimonies in front of official authorities are totally contrary to each other, these testimonies cannot be valid in law as witness testimonies. It adds also insult to injury. Because he made effort to implicate lawyers, prosecutor and judge with making no bones. Since Serhat Ozkan with his petition on 3.5.2002 stated that Since I was deceived by some people, I am withdrawing from my complaints and being intervener for this lawsuit, this shows that as he was used related to the book HOCANIN okullari, he was used again by some people, his statements about this subject also confirms this. But Prosecutor Savci Keles ignored all these progress testimony of Serhat Ozkan at Fatih Republic Prosecutor Office with the presence of his lawyer, testimonies of his brother Suat Ozkan and his friend Ismail Ozdemir, documents showing financial benefits they received, content of file of Uskudar Prosecutor Office, expert report, nol-pros decision, statements of Serhat Ozkan broadcasted at Isik TV in which he is stating that he received financial benefits, and also Serhat Ozkan s petition about Since I was deceived by some people, I am withdrawing from my complaints and being intervener for this lawsuit, these evidences were not mentioned at all in his opinion at the essence of lawsuit. Because of all the reasons explained above, all claims alleged by Serhat Ozkan at SSC Prosecutor office and at the court confirmed false. This is proved with the his official statements in front of his lawyer and his brother, his brother Suat Ozkan and his friend Ismail Ozdemir s consistent testimonies, not signed copy of Serhat Ozkan s statement which was captured during the search at Contemporary Education Foundation by Istanbul Police Headquarters Anti-Terror Department, copies of check, receipt and invoice which are showing Serhat Ozkan received financial benefits, nol-pross decision of Uskudar Republic Prosecutor Office and expert report. Therefore Serhat Ozkan s claims against our client cannot be credited since he also withdrawn from the case with the statement of I was deceived. 4. Yalcin Eseni Yalcin Eseni claimed that he is a friend of Serhat Ozkan and gave his testimony to Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel on 11.16.2000. His statement was taken by Osmaniye High Criminal Court on 2.14.2001 (file no. 2001/4) with the precept. Yalcin Eseni in his testimony at prosecutor office, presented a letter which was claimed that he sent to his friend Serhat Ozkan as evidence. But, when the content, writing format, his addressing format of the letter was investigated, it looks like a given statement to an inquiry instead of a letter to a friend. He claims that they finished the same school together, they knew each other since they were children, but how the letter starts Firstly let me introduce myself. My name is Yalcin Eseni. I was born on 01.19.1975 at Osmaniye. I graduated from Osmaniye Dervish Pasa High School clearly shows that this is not a letter to a friend.

38 This person also claimed some accusation to our client with the influence of people who have enmity against our client, and fabricating fake evidence against our client, then these accusations was put in the file as if this is a letter written to his friend Serhat Ozkan. When his statement was examined, it is clearly seen that he does not have any acquaintance, connection, and relation with our client, there is no visual witnessing in any subject that he is claiming. Prosecutor Keles s presentation of Yalcin Eseni s statements against our client without mentioning any of these facts cannot be accepted by law. 5. Metin Sariarslan Metin Sariarslan worked as a security personal (external) at Merter-Fatih Elementary School and fired because of his undisciplined behaviors. Metin Sariarslan was unemployed for a while,he also lost his child during this time and fell into depression. When he fired from the school, with the thought of not getting enough compensations he applied to some places and came to Ankara Prosecutor Office Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel. Metin Sariarslan who was presented as a public witness by Prosecutor Yüksel somehow was firstly sent to Gulseven Yaser (based on witness s own statement) by Prosecutor Yüksel before his testimony was taken. This was also proved with the video recording when he came to receive his compensation from the school. This recording and its notarized transcription were presented with our petition dated on 5.15.2001. At it is seen at the recording, Metin Sariarslan at that time, I called prosecutor Yüksel. He sent me to Gulseven Yaser from Contemporary Education Foundation After he was sent to Gulseven Yaser, with her directions he came back to prosecutor office. After all these progress, testimony of Metin Sariarslan including all accusations against our client was taken by prosecutor. But in this testimony there is no mentioning about his previous application to Prosecutor Yüksel s office. In speaking of law, how his sending to Gulsever Yaser before obtaining his testimony can be explained. At the hearing we requested to be asked to Metin Sariarslan whether he met with Gulseven Yaser or not he stated that He met with Gulsever Yaser and talked. This also shows that Metin Sariarslan was directed by the people who have enmity against Fethullah Gülen. Metin Sariarslan on 10.18.2000 gave his testimony to prosecutor Yüksel (file 13, attachment 2). He was heard on 3.28.2001 by the court. This person, in his statement about his employment as security personnel at Merter-Fatih Elementary School stated that (briefly) I heard that this school belongs to Fethullah Gülen, workers are defaming Ataturk, principal of the school Memduh Akkus is retired lieutenant colonel fired from army, there is an inspector report related to mischievous activities in school, parents says that school belongs to Fethullah Gülen, there is no Ataturk library at the school, at the religions festival they force students to request money to buy sacrifice animals and request furs of sacrificed animals from parents, the students who rejected this request were kicked out from school, all parents, students and teachers were forced to be subscribed to Zaman Newspaper, even he was the security personal for outside of the school, he

39 participated to listen meetings, students with the age of 17-18 were invited to a meal to brainwash them against Ataturk, I was fired because of some disagreements Based on his statement above he looks like more than security personnel at gate, he looks like an extraordinary person doing all jobs as school s principle, responsible from library, responsible person for relations with parents, telephone operator, and driver. At the attachment of our petition presented on 5.15.2001, responses from Merter-Fatih Elementary school and records of his indiscipline history, reports of Ministry of Education s inspectors, inventory list of Ataturk books in library, documents showing that Memduh Akkus was retired from Ministry of Education s Board of Education and Discipline, and other documents were presented. This also shows that all his claims are false and groundless. Based on inspector s reports, many inspections about school have been condcuted and there is no record of mischievous activities violating law in school. Also based on these reports and inventory list of library there is a very extensive Ataturk section in library. School principle Mehduh Akkus is not fired from army or retired lieutenant colonel. In addition to this, mentioned school does not have any connection with our client. Because of the reasons we mentioned above, these accusations which were not based on any visual observation of Metin Sariarslan who was working at a private school which has no connection with our client, who claimed these accusation with other peoples directions have no legal value. As we will mention below, testimonies of other witnesses related to Metin Sariarslan also shows that his accusations against our client are false. But, prosecutor Keles in his opinion related to essentials of the lawsuit ignored all these evidences, all testimonies of other people and written testimonies of 7 witnesses and he accused our client based on Metin Sariarslan s statements. On the other hand, all these evidences and testimonies of these 7 witnesses prove that all his accusations against our client are false. WITNESSES RELATED TO MERTER-FATIH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. At our petition dated 7.13.2001 to determine accuracy of Metin Sariarslan s statements, we requested to be heard all people mentioned in his statement as witness, Huseyin Dovmeci, Memduh Akkus, Hasan Tuncel, Sadettin Ozcan, Mithat Isbilir, Yilmaz Yigit, and Sezai Tepecik. On 7.16.2001 it was decided that these people shall be heard related to Metin Sariarslan s statements. These witnesses in their statements which were taken by Istanbul 4. State Security Court (file no. 2001/75 precept) on 9.4.2001 stated that: (in briefly)

40 6. Huseyin Dovmeci At the testimony of Huseyin Dovmeci, he stated that I am one of the founders of Merter-Fatih Elementary school, I know Fethullah Gülen from the press, I don t have any relation or connection with Fethuulah Gülen. Directly or indirectly no order or suggestion has been received from Fethullah Gülen, there is no activity against Atuturk in our school. School is a private company, everything in school has been performed following Ministry of Education s rules, all in his companies there are Ataturk busts, all accusations at the Metin Sariarslan s statements are false. 7. Memduh Akkus Witness Memduh Akkus is the general principle of the school, in his testimony he stated that I am not retired or fired from army as Metin Sariarslan claimed. I am retired from Ministry of Education s Board of Education and Discipline. There is an Ataturk library at the school on contrary of Metin s claims and I presented the inventory list of library, nobody in school has been defamed Ataturk, if there has been, I would have informed them to the Police. Our school does not collect sacrificed animals furs, on the contrary to Metin s claims school does not even have a vehicle to collect sacrificed animals furs, it is not logical to drop out student with sacrificing tuition of 4-5 billion (around $3000) for sacrificed animals furs, school is for 7-14 years old of students, there is no student at the age of 17-18 years old. Students are not brainwashed against Ataturk. School operates during daytime, there is nobody staying at school at night, nobody was made subscription to Zaman Newspaper in our school, the sentence, this school belongs to Fethullah Gülen, has never been stated, all inspectors reports about school are positive, cultural level of Metin Sariarslan is not capable of making these statements, he might be directed by some other people. 8. Hasan Tuncel Hasan Tuncel in his testimony stated that I am a retired police officer. I am working as the chief of security personals at the school. Metin s claims that I defamed Ataturk and police are false. In different occasions, I recorded that I caught him slept at the switch or left his duty, therefore he slandered against me. I have never witnessed the accusations that he claimed in his testimony at the school. 9. Sadettin Ozcan Sadettin Ozcan in his testimony stated that I was school s principle during that time, but changed my job later. I had never witnessed any Metin s alleged claims. I have never heard any statement against

41 Ataturk at school, I have never seen collection of animal fur or subscription of Zaman Newspaper at school, Metin s claims that, to watch TV or listen radio in school was prohibited at school since they are sin, are false. There is no board member at the school. Therefore Metin s claims that, school s board member sponge on parent s moneys, are false, I know Fethullah Gülen from press. 10. Mithat Isbilir Mithat Isbilir in his testimony stated that Metin s claim that inspectors prepared report against the school and this report was sent to post office via personnel named Mithat Isbilir are forged, this incident has never happened, I newer witnessed slanders against Ataturk, collecting money from parents, saying to parents that this school belongs to Fethullah Gülen. 11. Yilmaz Yigit Yilmaz Yigit in his testimony stated that I was school s assistant principle during that time, but changed my job later. I never seen any connection or relation of school with Fethullah Gülen, There are many books at the school s library about Ataturk s principles and revolutions. The claim that these books placed to library before inspectors came is false. I saw these books always in the library. I never seen any activity against Ataturk at school, if I saw it I would have informed this to the authorities right away. 12. Sezai Tepecik Sezai Tepecik, in his testimony stated that I was school s cook during that time, but changed my job later. Metin s claim that Hasan Tuncer said to police state s dog, therefore I did not let him to eat from school s kitchen, therefore Hasan Tuncer and I fight and I left school is false. I saw many books about Ataturk at school s library. I did not give meal to the students at the age of 17-18. I know Fethullah Gülen from the press. With the testimonies of all these witness it is confirmed that there is no illegal activity at the Fatih- Merter Elementary school as Metin Sarikaya claimed, our client does not have any connection with this school. 13. Rafet Yilmaz Witness Rafet Yilmaz first gave his testimony to Prosecutor Yüksel at the preparation file 2000/507 Pr. Rafet Yilmaz is a police officer, at the statement taken by Prosecutor Yüksel, related to the years he attended police high school and police academy he claimed accusations against our client. At the hearing on 9.17.2001, with the demand of prosecutor, he was decided to be heard as a witness with an interim decision

42 no. 10/a. Rafet Yilmaz at his testimony taken at Tunceli High Criminal Court (2001/102 precept) on 10.31.2001 states in brief; I don t know existence of an organization called Fethullah Gülen organization and I don t believe its existence, I don t have any relation with this organization, I have not seen any of my friends in this organization, I have not run across with any of these organization s activity, claims were resulted from some of the administrators because of their conflicts with the other administrator cadre of the police academy, since I was fired from the academy they deceived me with the promises of my return to the academy, my statements at the Ankara State Security Court Prosecutor Office at the file 2000/507 are false, the journalist called Zubeyir Kindira reached me using chief constables, Zubeyir wanted me to confirm his book Fethullah s Bludgeons, he threatened me that I have to do this, later Zubeyir took me to meet with Minister of Internal Affairs, Minister told me that this is very important, you must work with Zubeyir Kindira, He told me that I will take you from Tunceli to Ankara, then we went to Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel, and I gave my testimony with the directions of Zubeyir Kindira This person s statements confirm our responses from the beginning of these claims that this person gave his testimony with the direction by prosecutor and encouragements, directions and orders of a specific group who are involved as intervening witnesses, to deceive the court. This testimony also confirms that organization at Police Academy is false. Actually his statement at Tunceli High Criminal Court is not new. Rafet Yilmaz already went to Notary on 9.2.1991 and gave his testimony (roll no. 49446) and gave his testimony to State Security Court s Prosecutor Office s 1992/256 pr. File. On 10.12.1992 he also gave a petition with his hand writing to the same file. His testimony at Tunceli High Criminal Court confirms his these two statements. At our petition dated 1.29.2001 nol-pros decision of Ankara SST prosecutor office (1992/256 pr, 1992/137 D, 10.14.1992) was presented. The incident related to the claim of organization in Police in details as following: Police Academy student, Rafet Yilmaz, in 1991 was dropped out from school because of his low grade in discipline based on Police Academy Discipline regulations No. 16. This person initiated lawsuit at Ankara administrative court, but the courts rejected his request since the court decided that school administrative is right. At this time, there was news at press about religious organization in police department. Some people who thought his dropping out from school can be a good material, they advised Rafet Yilmaz to write a advice letter (notification) about Fethullah Gülen s disciples are organizing at Police Academy and he was dropped out since he did not want to be in this group to return to the school. Rafet Yilmaz who believed in this that he can return to school with this method, wrote that advised notification, But later on due to pressure of his conscious stated in front of a notary that the content of this

43 notification is false. Then with giving petition to Ankara State Security Court s Prosecutor Office, he explained everything in details with giving names of these people. Ankara SST prosecutor office (1992/256 pr, 1992/137 D, 10.14.1992) gave nol-pros decision stating defendant police staff do not have any connection with Fethullah Gülen. Based on this notification letter, Police Headquarter performed administrative inspection and decided that no need to open investigation about defendant police staff based on decision of High Disciple Council (1993/01, 01.7.1993). At the same time Ministry of Internal Affair gave respond to a parliamentary question (1.12.94) as There is no Fethullah Gülen s disciples organization in our records. On 4.9.1994, Ministry of Internal Affairs made an public announcement to press with stating that related to an investigation and nol-pros decision years ago, with displaying this investigation happened recently, public opinion was misdirected about police department which needed more public support in these days. In 1997, the same claims were made as if a current issue by some press organs, Ankara State Security Court s Prosecutor Office initiated investigation and gave nol-pross decision on 3.20.1998 (1997/18 pr., 1998/24 D) with stating: by this time, based on all investigations about violating law no. 3713 s 1 st Article related to existence of an organization called Fethullah Gülen Hocca s disciple aiming to establish shari a system and defendants established such an organization, and became member of this alleged organization, nol-pros decision was given based on CMUK s (Code of Criminal Procedure) 164 th Article because no evidence has been found to prove these claims. All these mentioned decisions were presented at the attachment of our petition on 1.29.2001. 14. Cevdet Saral Cevdet Saral is the former Police Chief of Ankara. Because of illegal phone-taping scandal, he was removed from duty with Osman Ak and his other friends. At the hearing of 9.17.2001, in his testimony he stated that (briefly) Based on news at Aydinlik newspaper titled Fethullahists conquered police forces on 1.10.1999 we went on action, then we investigated all his books and his other writings written in 1970s, 1980s, and 1990 which are sold freely at the market, we felt that these books contain model of an organization, but activities in this model were performed openly, and his statements were highly accepted by public, but we felt that they have hidden agenda that they have different aims, these activities are not hidden as Marxist-

44 Leninist organizations, they publicly organize, I made some evaluations on certain paragraphs about previously investigated and marked books, but I don t have knowledge in details about investigations of these sources When it is asked to the witness, he responded that I cannot say exactly that Fehullah Gülen s group became organized in police department, what we did was security intelligence work The reports prepared with this witness s signature to cover illegal phone-taping scandal with in enmity and rancor was explained in details at the below section titled report dated 4.21.1999 prepared by Ankara Police Headquarter related to Fethullah Gülen and his organization. At the National Intelligence Organization s report and at the book The Last Judgment Court written by Tuncay Ozkan, the same witnesses covering previous scandal known by public as Banker Bako with preparing report about false religious organization in Police Deparment was explained. Copies of related pages in this book were attached to our petition to the court on 12.25.2001. Even though, at the hearing, Cevdet Saral stated that I have never been investigated in all my whole career until I prepared report about Fethullah Gülen and he claimed that investigation was opened against me because of the report about Fethullah Gülen, but he was investigated in 1987 when he was department chief in Istanbul and be fined with the decision of EGM Central Disciple Council (1989/261). Also Ankara Council of State s 2 nd Bureau gave decision of trial for the violation of TPC s 240 th Article (1999/2490 E) and also Ankara Council of State s 2 nd Bureau gave decision of trial for the violation of TPC s 240 th Article (1999/2985 E and 1999/2110 D). This determined decision of investigation and trials show that witness had been undergone many investigations before incident related to Fethullah Gülen, and his statements are false. Prosecutor Keles in his opinion showed witnessing of Cevdat Saral and his statements as evidence to prove claims against our client with ignoring all these progresses, prosecutor Keles stated that in the testimony of Cevdat Saral he said we determined some of aims of Fethullah Gülen and his organization model. But in the testimony of the Cevdet Saral, there is no such a statement. This statement was added by Prosecutor Keles. On the contrary to this, Cevdet Saral had said I cannot say exactly that Fehullah Gülen s group became organized in police department, what we did was security intelligence work. It is very clear that 35 years experienced high level Police Chief Cevdet Saral s witnessing and report which was prepared without using any investigation method such as chase, surveillance report, deploying helper intelligence staff and with just reading some of the paragraphs of the books and inferring with saying I felt that, cannot be accepted as evidence against our client. 15. Osman Ak

45 Osman Ak is ex-deputy Chief of Ankara Police department. He is one of the staff removed from duty due to illegal phone-taping scandal. Osman Ak has close connections with the people who schemed fabrication against our client. From the beginning of the lawsuit, we have stated that some of the witnesses have kept in close touch with some groups, especially Contemporary Education Foundation, and directed and instructed by these people. With the broadcasting at Isik TV on 5.4.2002, our statements were proved. Osman Ak s relation with these group was suspected by public opinion when Osman Ak received a award from Contemporary Education Foundation after his testimony at the court. At the ceremony, Osman Ak said that I want to receive this award after Fethullah Gülen s roots were exterminated. This saying also shows that he received this award due to his witnessing against Fethuulah Gülen. (this information was taken from Cumhuriyet Newspaper dated 11.27.2001 and presented with our petition on 12.25.2001). Witnessing of Osman Ak against our client carries great importance. Because, this person was involved in illegal activities to accuse our client with misusing his public authority (mandate). For example, arrested specialized sergeant Cengiz Ersever due to organizing armed gang and armed attack against Akin Birdal, in his testimony was administered to give statements against our client by Osman Ak. Later on these statements were falsified and presented as a report to the prime minister and same report was also leaked to the press. How this incident started and its progress according to the press is as following: Cengiz Ersever, due to the request to him during his query, with his hand writing wrote 7 pages statement with the title of Turkish Mafia. Statements related to our client are: Now Fethullah Gülen has the most financial power, man power, political power, the press and TV power. After dissolution of Welfare Party and Rightway Party coalition, Fethullah Gülen started relation with Sedat Peker, Fethulah Gülen said at the beginning of 1998 that send 10 million dollar to Sedat Peker who was in Bulgaria. At the his testimony on 5.27.1998, Cengiz Ersever stated that Sedat Peker got huge unearned income, he built a big house in Romania and Bulgaria and he live in there, he has many people around him, he has relations with Fethullah Gülen, Fethullah Gülen transferred 10 million dollars to him But in the first statement there is a date mentioned but at the second no date was mentioned. At the first statement Fethullah Gülen said to people to send money, but at the second there is a certain statement that Fethullah Gülen transferred 10 million dollars. These statements were collected as an information note and presented to the Prime Minister. In that report these claims are written as: In Istanbul, most powerful person financially is Sedat Peker, he currently stays at Romania, he is in drug business in there, he has relations with Fethullah Gülen, Fethullah Gülen is money laundering with the help of this person, in 1998, 10 million dollar was transferred to give Fethullah Gülen. The statements of Cuneyt Ersever that Fethullah Gülen transferred 10 million dollar to Sedat Peker changed in information note as Sedat Peker transferred 10 million dollars to Fethullah Gülen. At the statements of Cuneyt Ersever no certain date was given but in the information note the date is January 1998.

46 But other important distortion is the claim that, in the information note there is also Fethullah Gülen is money laundering with the help of Sedar Peker statement. This information note which was prepared with distortions of statements of Cuneyt Ersever presented to the Prime Minister and same day it was leaked to the press also. This information note was broadcasted at the main bulletins at Interstar TV on 5.28.1998 and 5.29.1998 and published at Aksam and Milliyet newspapers on 5.28.1998. Cuneyt Ersever before arrested, in the testimony obtained at prosecutor office on 5.29.1998 stated that my testimony in the Police department was taken under compulsion, and he stated his sentences about this subject: During my query, inquiry personnel asked me question about mafia, questions about people I know was asked. I answered with giving names to these questions with the knowledge from here and there and from press. When they asked me with saying specific name, I answered what I heard or what I know from press and this was written to my testimony in this way. I thought the names I stated which were known as mafia leaders at public opinion, Sedat Peker, Sedat Sahin, Kursat Yilmaz, Ali Yasak, Alaattin Cakici, Nejdec Ulucan who are close to Islamic opinion, can be an instrument for Islamic activities, therefore I gave information and my thoughts about them. As it is seen at the testimony at prosecutor office, the name of Fethullah Gülen was not mentioned. After this incident published in press, the tekzip (correction) letter prepared by our client is as following: At the main bulletin and the night news of Star TV on 5.27.1998, and at Milliyet and Aksam Newspaper on 5.28.1998, it is stated that based on the statement during the query of Cengiz Erseven who is the suspect of assassination of Akin Birdal, and who is saying that we planned to organize armed gang for mass murder, it was claimed that Fethullah Gülen has relation with Sedat Peker and he is money laundering. Our client Fethullah Gülen has no connection with the name mentioned in this news in any way. It is not in the question that our client sent money to this person or any other person. In this news, with claims based on an assassination suspect s statements, effort to implicate the name of Fethullah Gülen in illegal formations like mafia is a scene which was prepared by the people in this slandering campaign. In front of Turkish public opinion, we are inviting these people slandering Fethullah Gülen to prove their claims on an assassination suspect s statements in justice and we want them to answer these questions. Why did Deputy Chief of Ankara Police Department Osman Ak request a report about Mafia in Turkey from an assassination suspect Cengiz Erseven who planned to organize armed gang for mass murder?

47 After requesting a report from crime suspect who personally saying that he established a crime organization, with changing the report which was written with suspect s hand writing, with adding Fethullah Gülen is money laundering, why was this report presented to Prime Minister? Was this mentioned Deputy Police chief requested this mafia report of crime suspect to solve assassination attempt to Akin Birdal? Or is there any other reason behind this? Is this request with his own initiative or was he received any directive about this subject? Was Fethullah Gülen s name added to this report as a result of a bargaining or a promise? If the reports about preliminary investigation and the name of people alleged to a crime must be secret, who and for what purpose did this report leak to the press? Turkish public opinion closely knows how many murders have happened in Turkey after statements of murder suspects leaked to the press. Therefore, we regretted that big press organs which were known with their seriousness, without any serious investigation and research, to publish manipulated statements of crime suspect. We are inviting public opinion to be watchful, against people who want to create chaos in our country in such unlawful ways of slandering plot against Fethullah Gülen and using murder suspect for their slandering. After all these progresses, Osman Ak have still continued to prepare forged reports accusing our client with misusing his authority. In the report dated 4.21.1999 in this file, we can see clearly that how Osman Ak misuses his authority with the statements of police officers Selat Ozturk, Ayhan Ozturk, Aydin Batu, Zeki Guven at the hearing. Osman Ak in his testimony at the hearing on 11.12.2001 stated that (briefly): At the investigation about Fethullah Gülen, investigation initiated based on news at Aydinlik Newspaper, as a preliminary investigation intelligence bulletin, a book about cult, and Fethullah Gülen s books were examined, Intelligence Bureau introduced Fethullah Gülen harmless with modest Islamic opinions, but in our preliminary investigation we reached to opposite conclusion, our investigation is based on open resources and at the characteristics of preliminary investigation. Osman Ak s statement from beginning to end is false, many fabrications were prepared to accuse our client. At the example below, we will show that he don t hesitate to lie even at the concrete incidences. Osman Ak says that I prepared my report on 4.21.1999 and gave to SSC prosecutor office, 3 days after this report, defendant went to USA for the excuse of treatment. But our client to reach his appointment (file 13, line 1106, appointment letter) which was given by Mayo Clinic in USA for 3.22.1999 left Turkey on 3.21.1999 (file 13, line 1086, copy of the passport), this date is one month earlier than the date claimed by Osman Ak.

48 Osman Ak in his statement claimed that date for general amnesty initially though as April 18, because of our report presented to the prosecutor office on April 21, general amnesty date was changed to April 23 to let Fethullah Gülen benefit from amnesty. It is clear that this scenario was created to support his claims that Fethullah Gülen s influence on politicians. However, even a simple citizen having no interest on law knows that intelligence police report does not have any influence on determining the date of general amnesty. Witness in his testimony stated that In the Gülen s book Fasildan Fasila vol 1. pages 113-114, there is explanation about intelligence works and how to resist intelligence work. But when the mentioned pages of the book were read, it is about importance of permanency and survival of State and examples from history about this were given. There is nothing in mentioned pages and in whole book about the claims. Osman Ak in other part of his testimony stated at the book Fethullah Gülen Incident written by Mehmet Ali Soydan page 107 and 108 with a title which intelligence report is valid, when there is a conversation about the defendant and report by Intelligence General Headquarter, it is said that our preliminary report would not be valid, in these conversation the politics should be conducted against us informed to the related parties. But when the related pages of the book was read, Osman Ak s claims that the politics should be conducted against us informed to the related parties is false, on the other hand when the related pages are read, it is seen that our client says that I am leaving the decision to public conscious, to real law understanding and to real intelligence understanding. This statement has no relation with Osman Ak s claim of the politics should be conducted against us informed to the related parties. Osman Ak states that I have personally witnessed that people participated fundraising program of the cemaat paid considerable amount. But when we demanded to be asked, he responded that I have never been at the fundraising program of the cemaat. This witness in his statement resembles this alleged structure to organization called Hassan Sabbah s Hashasi. As the reason for this, Osman Ak explains that since Hasan Sabbah enchained his disciples with drug. At the other part of statement, he resembles this structure to the structure of Turkish Communist Party, in other place to Osama bin Ladin s organization. Osman Ak to accuse our client, made up scenarios paranoidly, he made up connection with our client with all the organization he knew. Again Osman Ak I think this organization armed, organizing at police forces, organization uses armed force at police, therefore this organization is armed saying is just demagogy. Osman Ak also stated that police collapsed an insurance company in one night, but later I learned that this operation was made by Fethullahists because of competition in this market, this shows the power of the organization and how deep organization infiltrated in State. But to our questions that who did manage that overnight organization?, whether an order came from SSC prosecutor office for this operation or not?.

49 He responded that I managed personally this operation with the order of Ankara SSC prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel, but later I understood that I was used. Witness s statement about this topic is also false as his other statements, even we accept this is true, it will concluded that prosecutor of Gülen s lawsuit Nuh Mete Yüksel used Osman Ak for benefit of alleged Fethullah Gülen organization. Cevdal Saral and Osman Ak stated that they initiated preparation of report based on Aydinlik newspaper s article on 1.10.1999 titled Fethullahists conquered police department. The same newspaper on 12.21.1998, showed Cevdal Saral and Osman Ak at the police wing of a junta supported by America which will overthrow the government with coup on 12.21.1998. Again Aydinlik newspapes on 11.18.2001 page 8 Fethullahist plot to gendarmerie, a list of 500 officers in charge working at the department of Anti-Smuggling and Anti-Organized Crimes Gendarmerie was prepared as Fethullahist, this list was prepared by ex-ankara Police Chief Cevdet Saral and ex-deputy Chief Osman Ak, previously police chiefs working for anti-embezzlement were accused also as Fethullahist by Cevdet Saral and Osman Ak, the same plot was performed for Gendarmerie. (copy of the mentioned newspaper was presented with our petition on 12.25.2001). Cevdal Saral and Osman Ak had stated that they initiated preparation of the report based on article at Aydinlik Newspaper. The same Aydinlik Newspaper had also made news about above accusations about Cevdal Saral and Osman Ak. We are leaving this situation up to the discretion of the court. All these conditions were ignored at the opinion of Prosecutor Hamza Keles, statement of Osman Ak was used as evidence against our client. However, Osman Ak stated that we prepared this report based on his feelings. Police Headquarter s High Disciple Council decided (2000/99) that witnesses prepared this report in enmity and in grudge. This determination was also proved with Osman Ak s hostile behaviors and attitudes during the hearing. WITNESSING OF CHIEF POLICE COMMISSIONERS AND POLICE COMMISSIONERS TOOK CHARGE IN PREPERATION OF THE REPORT AT ANKARA POLICE DEPARTMENT. At the evidence list P, The report (File 5 line 154-155) dated 4.21.1999 prepared by Ankara Police Department about FETHULLAH GÜLEN and his organization was shown as evidence to the accusations. Our demand that all police officers played role in this report should be heard was accepted and Selat Ozturk, Ayhan Ozturk, Aydin Batu, Zeki Guven, Ersan Dalman, Zafer Akkus, Lutfullah Ugur Pekca, S. Tamer Yerlikaya, and Cavit Cevik were heard as witness. The testimonies of these officers were presented below. 16- Selat Ozturk

50 Sedat Ozturk in his testimony stated that (briefly) at the date of the incidence I was in charge at the table tracking Left oriented organizations. On 4.5.1999, with the oral order of Cevdet Saral, Osman Ak and Ersan Dalman I was assigned to C table which tracks religious and nationalist organizations with a group of friends. One day we had meeting at the room of department chair Zafer Aktas. With saying all police personnel will be investigated based on the news at Aydinlik Newspaper titled Fethullah Gülen conquered police department, we started in action with oral order, no written order was received, it is told us that with bringing school yearbooks, write the names of your friends you thought that they are observing their prayer, fasting, sectary, connected to cemaat (community), connected to Nur movement, Fethullahist, we told them that this method will not work because some of people are seen as observing their prayer to look good to the religious administrators, but it was told us that don t comment just obey the order, 2 days after starting to the investigation new names brought by Cevdet Saral, Osman Ak and Zafer Akbas on papers with their hand writings, these names which were published by Aydinlik newspaper were ordered to be placed to the list at the computer, at the hand of Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan we told to Cevdet Saral, Osman Ak and Zafer Akbas that these people may be connected with different cults or societies or may not connected to any society therefore their condition should be investigated with intelligence techniques and methods, but they told us that we must just follow the orders, otherwise they threatened us opening investigation against us for supporting Fethullah Gülen s group, we received 3 days reprobation fine, after this point we conducted at the direction of orders, we only entered the names brought us to the computer, no investigation was made to find out these people s connections with cults or religious societies, I kept hand writings of the chiefs, I am presenting these to the court now, as an answer to the question he said that I don t have any knowledge about the report dated 4.21.1999, we suppose to do research about personnel in Ankara, but I entered the names of all high-ranked officers to the computer without corresponding related cities, these investigations started after wire-tapping scandal revealed in the press, I don t know any of my friends who is Fethullahist, but I know people who pray or fast. Witness Selat Ozturk s statements shows that Ankara Police Department s report was prepared in hurry without any intelligence method and procedure to cover illegal wire-tapping scandal with the order of some chiefs and deputy chiefs, they are not based on any investigation or evidence, and content of the report is also not true. 17. Ayhan Ozturk At the testimony of Ayhan Ozturk, he stated that (briefly) I was in charge at the table A-3 tracking Left oriented organizations. On 4.5.1999 I was called to the room of deputy chief Zafer Aktas. There were some of my friends in the room. It was told us that an investigation was started related to the Fethullahist list published in Aydiklik Newspaper, it was told me that as a support we were assigned to the C table which

51 tracks religious and nationalist organizations. Later on when we gathered at the room of table C s bureau chair Aydin Batu, we learned that personals at table C do not know about this investigation, it is requested that everybody will bring their yearbook and say the people who are Fethullahist. People there objected this order with saying this will not be a healthy investigation, it was told us that everyone will work here by order otherwise legal action will be taken against them, they gave us very short time, in this condition we typed the names in Aydinlik Newspaper to the computer, at the same time we received written warnings about working slow, our works were not paid attention, only lists were typed, one day chief police commissioner Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan told us that our duty was finished, after this date we did not work on this subject, I don t know who, when how this report in the file was prepared, I did not prepare any report, after the news at Press I wrote a petition to Police Department Headquarter on 6.16.1999 everything in details about this work, I presented the same petition to this court also and gave 4 pages petition explaining what I mentioned in details to the court. Witness Ayhan Ozturk s statements shows that Ankara Police Department s report was prepared in hurry without using any intelligence method and procedure with the order of some chiefs and deputy chiefs, they are not based on any investigation or evidence, and content of the report is also not true. 18. Aydin Batu At the testimony of Aydin Batu, he stated that in 1999 I was bureau chair at C bureau, department chair Ersan Dalman called me and requested me to prepare a report related to Fethullah Gülen, therefore I went to archive and prepared a report and take to the Zafer Aktas, Zafer Aktas read the report and said that you are propagating Fethullah Gülen therefore I brought the resources of these report, after this Zafer Aktas wanted me to bring Fethullah Gülen s book in the market, I took these books with buying from the market to the Zafer Aktas, Zafer Aktas told me that you will see how a report can be prepared, in later days I was called to the Zafer Aktas s room, there were other personals from other bureaus also in the room, it was told us that an investigation about Fethullah Gülen s structuring in police forces was started, then the list published in Aydinlik Newspaper were given to us, I told that as a chair of C bureau, I didn t understand why higher ranked people and groups from other bureaus were assigned here, after starting the work names were saved to the computer, then it was told us that computer was crashed, therefore the work was ended, but Zafer Aktas told us that the list was found at the back up storage disk, he told us that they finished the work and submitted, this work consisted of a name list, when a new department chair Umit came, he gave us totally different file, in this file there was detailed work which was different then previous one, he told us this file may be prepared by high level personals. From the statement of the witness, how the report prepared without using any intelligence method and procedure can be clearly understood.

52 19. Zeki Guven Zeki Gülen after finishing his testimony gave also 8 pages of written testimony to the court. In his testimonies he stated that I was working at the A-2 table, on 4.5.1999 I was called to Zafer Aktas s room. Intelligence department chair Ersan Dalman, Commissioner Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan, C table chair Aydin Batu, Tamer Samet Yerlikaya, from table A Ayhan Ozturk and Selat Ozturk were at the room. Ersan Dalman told us that at the Aydinlik newspaper a list named Fethullahists was published, an investigation was started about this subject, you are assigned to support Table C, later on we had meeting at the room of Aydin Batu, chair of table C, since previously we were dealing with the left organizations we needed more information about religious groups, but they told us that just make a list form the people their names published at newspapers, add new names with looking at yearbooks of their school years, therefore many people in the room objected, they said that this should be investigated with intelligence techniques and methods, people in the list should be investigated with legally wire-tapping, surveillance, tracing, close watching techniques and we need vehicles, devices, personals, equipments etc., similar objections continued, but they told us everyone will prepare the list with following orders, otherwise administrative action against you will be taken due to helping and involving in Fethullahist group. This time I also learned that staff in table C are not aware of this investigation, I was surprised, next day Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan went to Ersan Dalman s office to convey the objections again, but when he returned he said that Ersan Dalman became so angry and ordered us to finish the list, 2-3 days later he gave us written notice to psychologically pressure us. They deactived Sadettin Izkan Deputy department chair and Zafer Aktas actively worked in this investigation, but Zafer Aktas did not have written assignment order for this investigation. Zeki Guven in his testimony explained many very striking incidences. For example One day, I went to Osman Ak s room to take a signature, I was waiting at his personal secretary s room, Osmak Ak s door was open, Osman Ak was shouting with saying You will see, I will plot against the people who caused all the trouble to us, I will name them Fethullahist and make them assigned to traffic duty at TEM highway. At that time this saying did not make any sense to me, but I got it when illegal wire-tapping scandal revealed, I began to worry about it, because I think that the list prepared as Fethullahist list were the list of the people revealed this scandal and he was doing this for revenge. Zeki Guven continues as the though that we were used started to dominated, I went to chair of Intellligence Sabri Uzun and explained all in details, Sabri Uzun told me that I will request an inspector, you can go and continue to this work, but just don t tell anybody that you came here. After I talked to Sabri Uzun, I went back to work, C table bureau was assigned to close watch the people who their address were determined in the list, personnel in table C informed that these people in the list do not have any connection with Fethullahists, some of them are supporter of Motherland party, some of

53 them are Republican People s Party, some of them were even socialist. Related to this subject they prepared a report and gave to Zafer Aktas, but Zafer Aktas took no notice of this report and tear it up... they were showing that this investigation is a committee work but they were conducting individually, at the 6 or 7 th day of the investigation they told us that the computer was infected, at the 15 th day I took a copy from the computer of Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan, he talked me that from now on the work will continue at the Zafer Aktas s room, I did not understand this, our duty ended with this, I don t know how the investigation continued after this point, I did not prepare any report about this work, the report prepared was not the work of a committee, it consisted on one or two people s thoughts and evaluations, after wire-tapping scandal revealed at the press, I wrote a petition to Police Headquarter and stated all my knowledge about this incident, I am presenting a copy of this petition to the court now. Statements of witness Zeki Guven shows that the report of Ankara police headquarter was prepared by some chief and deputy chiefs with an arbitrary attitude, with plotting some people to cover wire-tapping scandal, out of intelligence methods and techniques, it is not based on any evidence and content of it is not true. From the witnessing of Selat Ozturk, Ayhan Ozturk, Aydin Batu, Zeki Guven it was understood that some people claiming some imputations against our client plotted this and prepared untrue report. 20-Ersan Dalman Ersan Dalman, in his testimony taken by Bolu High Criminal Court (precept file no: 2002/2) and his testimony at the hearing stated that (briefly) When Fethullah Gülen was working in Edirne Uc Serfeli Camii (mosque), he lived 2.5 years at the balcony of the minaret. He is against to marriage. In 1999, during the sacrificing animal festival, I read around 20 of Fethullah Gülen s books and I summarized some topics in these books. As a result I found out that Fethullah Gülen has personal problems. Some strange progresses happened when I was working on him, Ankara police headquarters computers were infected with Melissa Virus, because of this virus some information at these computers was lost Ersan Dalman in his statements made unreal claims and he did not even hesitate to distort some concrete incidences. For example; When he was stating to the court his evaluations of quotes from the book Kucuk Dunyam (my little world) which was compiled with valuation of interviews with our client, he stated that our client lived 2.5 years at the balcony of the minaret, but in this book our client said lived at the section in front of window. As it is known that the balconies of minaret were used to call for prayer in old times and it is not possible to live in there. But in some mosques especially in old mosques, sections in front of windows are places

54 suitable to live in. In old times students were using this section to live in, witness with his purposeful distortion wants to defame our client. Again the witness in his statement says that In 1999, during the sacrificing animal festival, I read around 20 of Fethullah Gülen s books, each book is around 300 pages, total it is around 6000 pages, sacrificing animal festival is 4 days, it is not possible to finish and summarize these many books in such a short time. This also proves his lies at his testimonies. The witness with selecting some phrases in our client book attributed his meanings to these phrases and with distorting this meaning stated that our client is enemy of the Republic and Ataturk. But these attributing meanings are not based on any concrete or logical reason. Our client in his books mentions about 200-300 years unfortunate period. Witness attributed this unfortunate period as Republic period. But when the age of Republic was considered, this unfortunate period cannot be Republic period. It is last 200-300 years of Ottoman Empire period. His claimed that the word deggial (anti-christ) means Ataturk, this claim is also groundless. Our client strongly have rejected this claim via press and in his deposition. On the contrary to witness s claims, our client does not have any statement against marriage. The witness s all other claims with attributing meanings to our clients statements are totally nonsense. With this method, it can be even derived criminal elements from law text. Despite all, witness let some facts slip out that we could not solve this organization to result some legal effect. This also proves nonexistence of this organization. 21. Zafer Aktas In this testimony he stated that the computer containing all the information about Fethullah Gülen infected with Melissa Virus and the information about this investigation was erased. In such style he wanted our client be under suspicion. At the attachment of our petition we presented on 5.3.2002, a report taken from Gazi University Technical Education Faculty s Computer System was presented. In this report, it is written that: Melissa virus does not delete files or format computers. The function of this virus is sending word files in one computer to third parties without knowledge of the owner. This report proves that this virus do not delete files on the contrary of witness s statement. Zafer Aktas also judged at the Ankara 20. Criminal Court of General Jurisdiction for deleting computer records, he defended himself with blaming Melissa Virus, but the witness polices in this lawsuit stated that no, Melissa Virus did not delete the files, with the order of our chief we deleted. Court sentenced Zafer Aktas with 5 months imprisonment for ordering to delete files not to reveal the list of the

phone numbers illegal wire-tapped. The news at Hurriyet Newspaper about this attached to our petition on 5.3.2002. 55 22. Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan At the testimony of Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan which was taken at Malatya 2. State Security Court (2002/2 precept file) he stated that (in summary) Osman Ak, Ersan Dalman, Zafer Aktas were removed from their position and assigned to different positions because of illegal wire-tapping, new chief stopped this investigation, since the investigation was in short time, we could not reach any conclusion about claims at Aydinlik Newspaper, we only collected data but we could not evaluate and conclude the data, in the investigation everyone investigated their own peers, we added some names to the list based on people s personal life and thoughts, we could not concluded 100% that these names are connected with Fethullah Gülen movement, other personals in this investigation objected that we should collect more information about these people to reach to a conclusion, I told them, you are right and I went to department chair room about these objections, but he said you just give the names which you have suspicion, we can do investigation later, but no such investigation was done later, the work stayed as a scheme of suspect list. Testimony of the witness shows that Ankara Police Headquarters report was prepared arbitrary without using any intelligence techniques or methods. 23. Tamer S. Yerlikaya At the testimony of Tamer S. Yerlikaya which was taken at Mus High Criminal Court (2002/17 precept file) he stated that (in summary) At the investigation related to Fethullah Gülen, we did secretariat duty with Selat Ozturk. I just typed a list from the given names to us. I don t have any knowledge about how information and documents were collected. I don t have any private or personal information about Fethullah Gülen s activities. The testimonies of people involved preparing Ankara Police Headquarters report and their responses to our questions show clearly that our client did not commit the crimes claimed. But prosecutor Hamza Keles just took one sentence having no meaning from the testimonies of witnesses Selat Ozturk, Ayhan Ozturk, Lutfullah Ugur Pekcan, and Aydin batu, testimony of Zeki Guven did not take any place in his opinion. 24. Cavit Cevik

56 Cavit Cevik was the Ankara Police Headquarters TEM branch chief when report was prepared. Therefore he was heard as witness: He stated that: I don t have enough information about the investigation started about Fethullah Gülen at the Police General Headquarter and Ankara Police Headquarter at the beginnings of 1999. I was the Ankara Police Headquarters TEM branch chief during that time. That report was prepared by the signature of Intelligence department Chief Ersan Dalman, but at the same day this report sent to Ankara Police Headquarters TEM branch; I was removed from this position. Later on I learned that this file was waited 40 days at Ankara Police Headquarters TEM branch and sent to Ankara State Security Court Prosecutor office, I don t have enough knowledge about this report He gave this response to a question we demanded to be asked: When I was Ankara Police Headquarters TEM branch chief, I was not acquaint with any terrorist activity of Fethullah Gülen s group. No information came to our branch about this At the witnessing of Cavit Cevik it is clear that no terrorist activity or knowledge related to Fethullah Gülen s group was brought to this branch. If this happen, this department should know first. Therefore statements of Cavit Cevik also prove our defense that There is no terrorist organization named Fethullah Gülen terrorist organization. Our client doesn t have any connection with any terrorist organization. But prosecutor Hamza Keles ignored the testimony of such an important person who was Ankara Police Headquarters TEM branch chief when the report was prepared. WITNESSES ABOUT MALTEPE MILITARY HIGH SCHOOL Our client at the 15 th page of the indictment was accused with working to capture Turkish armed forces. A file at the evidence list Sh named investigation file about works to infiltrate Maltepe Military High School was presented as an evidence for this claim. On 10.16.2000 with No. 3 interim decision, with the request of Prosecutor, it was decided to be heard these people, Mustafa Soysal, Murat Yanik, Hasan Yakup Kemertas, Yemen Acikgoz, whose names were written in this investigation. We will evaluate below the testimonies of these witnesses taken at Istanbul no. 6 State Security Court with precept 2000/78 on 12.8.2000. 25. Murat Yanik Witness Murat Yanik in his testimony stated that When I was student at Maltepe Military School, we were studying physics with my friends, Mustafa Soysal and Alpay Akyol at the home of one of Alpay Akyol s relatives, bell ringed, people in front of the door told us that they are police and military officers and

57 will carry out search at house. Then they searched house and took the statement down. When we went to school, since two books of Fethullah Gülen were found at the house s bookshelves, our captains forced us to give statements they wanted, if we don t give such a testimony they threatened us dropping out from school. If we give such a testimony they promised us good future in our career, after psychological pressures of nofood for one week and no sleep, we accepted their requests. As an answer to our question, he said that I don t know Fethullah Gülen and any of his relatives or close people. 26. Mustafa Soysal Witness Mustafa Soysal in his testimony stated that I entered military high school exam with my free choice, I don t know Fethullah Gülen, when I was studying with my friend Murat and Alpay, police and military officers carried out search at the house, two books of Fethullah Gülen were found at the house. They applied psychological pressures on us, due to this psychological pressures we gave statements they wanted 27. Hasan Yakup Kemertas Witness Hasan Yakup Kemertas in his testimony stated that at the house searched, previously I had studied with Murat Yanik, Mustafa Soysal and Alpay, but I was not there during that day, but these people added my name also to their statement since I am their friend. I don t know whether Murat and my other friends have any connection with Fethullah Gülen, these people do not propagate Fethullah Gülen to us, I don t know Fethullah Gülen, due to physical and psychological pressures, I gave untrue statements that my commanders wanted. 28. Yemen Acikgoz Witness Yemen Acikgoz in his testimony stated that I am student at Kuleli Military High School. Since my name was mentioned at the statement of my homeboy Murat Yanik, my commander called me, Murat Yanik s testimony was given to me and I was forced to give the same testimony, during this incident I was 16 years old, I could not stand this oppression, I don t accept my testimony which was taken under oppression, I don t know Fethullah Gülen and he does not have any influence on me. NOL-PROS DECISION OF IZMIR REPUBLIC CHIEF PROSECUTOR OFFICE File (File 5 line 30-78 and repeating at File 6, line 206-207) related to Maltepe Military High School was added to court file incomplete. Two investigations were conducted at Maltepe Military High School and these investigations were sent to Izmir Republic Chief Prosecutor Office, since no crime was seen in

58 these investigations, nol-pros decisions were given for these investigations. But these nol-pros decisions somehow were not put to the court files. But with our request these nol-pros decisions were requested to the file with the interim decision on 7.1.2002. At the 73 rd page of the indictment, it is written that the statements of Murat Yanik, Hasan Kemertas, Yemen Acikgoz, Nidayi Coskun, Salih Cavdar confirmed the testimony of Murat Soysal. On the contrary, it is clearly seen that the statements of Nidayi Coskun and Salih Cavdar refute Mustafa Soysal. This is misquoted to the indictment. About Maltepe Military High School students Salih Cavdar and Muhammet Ozdemir, nol-pros decision was given (1999/16444 pre, 1999/4009 decision). When the testimonies of these people given at prosecutor office were read, no statement against our client was seen. About Maltepe Military High School students, Mustafa Soysal, Murat Yanik, and Hasan Kemertas, nol-pros decision was given (1999/16443 pre, 1999/4717 decision). At the testimonies of these people given at prosecutor office and in his other free statements, no statement against our client was seen. With the witnessing of these people, it is clearly proved that the claim that our client became organized at Maltepe Military Hich School is false. But Prosecutor Hamza Keles ignored all the testimonies of Murat Yanik, Hasan Kemertas, Yemen Acikgoz taken at the hearing at State Security Court, at the Izmir Republic Chief Prosecutor Office, and also nol-pros decision of Izmir Republic Chief Prosecutor Office and presented their testimonies taken when they were 15 years old, not taken with legal authority, with the questioning methods violating Code of Criminal Procedure s 135 article and similar articles, under oppression and written testimonies which were also illegally taken, without inviting defense council, as evidences. This attitude of the prosecutor is not easy to be explained, he prepared his opinion without examining all files. 29. Witness of meeting with Pope: Monsignor George Marovitch Our client s meeting with Pope John Paul II became an object of accusation at the indictment. Our client was accused at the 13 th page of the indictment with aims of administering Muslims not only in Turkey, but also all over the World, were unveiled after his meeting with the Pope, at the 14 th page with preparing ground for the formation, called World Union of Religions, by taking advantage of his own means, and through the dialog, undertaken by him with the representatives of celestial religion, and also has opened the first page of a strategy, carried out in the international arena and based on the mutual interests, in line with this formation and in direction towards being the only representative of the Islamic Religion, at the 17 th page with Fethullah GÜLEN have met the Pope in Vatican on 9 th Februray 1998, after having been invited by the Pope 2 nd Jean Paul and consulted with the Government... Fethullah GÜLEN has been

59 demonstrated, in the international arena, as the leader of Islamic population of Turkey, and at the 19 th page with Fethullah GÜLEN has intended to have good contacts with all religions and nations, thus preventing contra-initiatives from their side, and even gaining their support. Prosecutor Hamza Keles with ignoring statements of Vatican Istanbul Representative Monsignor George Marovitch at the hearing, accused our client with claiming that our client did this meeting aiming his personal targets and as a representative of Islamic world and introduced himself as a representative of Islamic people in Turkey. We demanded Vatican Istanbul Representative Monsignor George Marovitch who arranged the meeting with Pope to be heard as a witness related to claims to ask the aim and content of the meeting, whether our client was preparing ground for the formation, called World Union of Religions, whether he was shown as the representative of Islamic people in Turkey, whether forming and directing towards being the only representative of the Islamic Religion. Our demand was accepted with an interim decision on 3.28.2001. At the testimony of Monsignor George Marovitch, which was taken at Istanbul No.1 State Security Court he stated that (in summary); I know Fethullah Gülen, I did not see any aim to organize a gang to establish a State based on religion, I know him as a person open to all religions, Christian society was influenced from his sayings, due to his sayings, as a Catholic I started to love Muslims, Fethullah Gülen also met with Rome Patriarch and Chief Rabbi, have good relations, therefore I wanted him to meet with Pope, Gülen went to Rome due to our invitation, he did not go as a representative of Islam, he made a short meeting with the Pope about religious subjects, I don t have any information about Gülen trying to form a foundation about establishing Islamic State, Gülen was welcomed by Altan Guven, ambassador of Turkey in Rome. 30- Serpil Genc Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel requested Serpil Genc be heard from his statement at the file 2000/507 Pre., on 8.22.2001, the court decided her to be heard as a witness. Serpil Genc who resides in Istanbul came to Istanbul No.6 State Security Court (precept no. 2001/64) on 11.1.2001 at 10 am and waited until 3pm, when her turn came, he stated that I will not give my testimony here and will not answer questions of defendant s representatives and I will give my testimony in Ankara. As we explained before, since no concrete evidence against our client was found about the accusations, some people were be in an endeavor of fabricating aspersive evidences. Witnessing of Serpil Genc is also this kind. Although she resides in Isnabul, she called to give her testimony at Istanbul No.6 State Security Court, he waited there 5 hours, she insisted on not giving her testimony there. For the reason of not

60 giving her testimony in Istanbul she claimed that she will give very extensive information. But there was no reason why she did not give very extensive information to Istanbul DGM. This attitude of Serpil Genc was due to influence public opinion and the court which was paid attention highly by press. In his testimony at prosecutor office, she claimed to be a student and we are wondering about who did compensate his traveling and accommodation costs. In her statement, she said she does not know our client; her mentioned incidences do not have any connection with our client also. It is also observed by the court that statements of Serpil Genc are fabricated statements based on her psychological condition. 31. Ergun Poyraz Ergun Poyraz stated that I don t know Fethullah Gülen personally, I know him based on my researches. When his testimonies given with a petition dated 3.10.1999 during the investigation of Prosecutor office, and his testimony taken by Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel on 3.7.2002 were examined, it is seen that his claims about our client are based on intangible (abstract) claims. There is no witnessing based on observation or facts. Despite all, Ergun Poyraz with saying himself as researcher writer read his personal evaluations 1.5 hours as if he is an expert in front of the court with cutting pieces from our client s works and then he also indited his statement to court clerk, he claimed he reached to these evaluations with reading our client s books, watching his video cassettes and listening his audio cassettes. But these excerpt pieces are his personal evaluations with ignoring beginning and ending of the same sentences. We would like to express also that to read the notes on your hand to the court and to indite them to the court clerk is against to Criminal Procedure Law. Statements of Ergun Poyraz consist on false, distorted statements. The reason behind these statements was revealed with the broadcasting of Isik TV. At the video cassette broadcasted at Isik TV, Gulseven Yaser tells to her friend that Who is supporting Ergun Poyraz? I am sending money to him constantly? As it was understood from this conversation, Ergun Poyraz perjured with the direction of some people organizing fabrications of evidences. But Prosecutor Hamza Keles in his opinion did not refer to our below documents and petitions about witnessing and statements of Ergun Poyraz and accepted Eygun Poyraz s statements as evidence for existence of illegal organization and being threat and pressure between people. (the opinion page 7 and page 23) Some examples of lies and distortion in Ergun Poyraz s statements: At the statements of Ergun Poyraz it was stated that essential researches of Nur society and Fethullah Gülen s group were conducted at the houses of light. In these houses, Fethullah Gülen and similar prominent leaders speak frequently to people that were gathered there. In these speaks, they tell that democracy will end some time later, in other worlds it will put to side, real democracy which was lived 1400

61 years ago as Islamic life will conquer everybody s life and people will be governed with Islamic rules. All these statements are false, based on assumptions, and are not based on any information or visual observation. Ergun Poyraz in his statements saying that Sizinti magazine explained from the Fethullah Gülen s speech made at the meeting titled entering 13 th year Islamic State which was died away after WWI, is getting ready to a new historical birth at the womb. What a great birth this is claims that one of the most important elements of this birth is Sizinti Magazine. The article of Sizinti Magazine titled Entering 13 th Year was attached to our petition on 7.1.2002, in this article, there is no claimed statement, and there is not even an implication about claimed statements. Ergun Poyraz clearly lied in his statements. Ergun Poyraz says that Nihat Dagli quoted from Fethullah Gülen s some conversations at the 5 th and 13 th page of his book Iz Dusumler, in these quotes Fethullah Gülen says that one day democracy will be put on the self. From a 9 pages article, Ergun Poyraz took one sentence with distorting from real meaning used it to accuse our client. With this method crimes can be attributed to even law texts. At his testimony Ergun Poyraz stated that our client said our people will enter to a new structuring in aid of our cause (not someone else s benefit), they will abolish their oppressing, pressing thoughts which they were implementing on us, they will present their thoughts, with new revival compatible with the spirit of Quran will revolt against whole world. All systems after Qur an order will be old, they will be abolished but white path, source of white path will not change. Ergun Poyraz used all ways to distort our client s statements. In such a way that, first part of above statements were taken from page 12, italic statements were taken from 5 pages of the book under different title. To deceive the court Ergun Poyraz brought the sentence 7 pages later and added to a sentence at page 12 and stated in his distorted version. Ergun Poyraz in his statements claimed that our client took other terrorist organizations as examples. His statement is When Fethullah Gülen became organized; he took other terrorist organizations as examples. He praised some of terrorist organizations, one of them is Hezbollah. At his sermon at Pendik mosque, Gülen says Hezbollah as God s party against all political fights and parties Hezbollah, God s society, in other word God s party, Prophet Muhammad Mustafa s soldiers who always avoid from sin, holy people who lost themselves with piety. Our client gave a sermon at Pendik mosque as his public duty. Of course a person officially appointed to teach Islamic faith will talk about verses of Islam s Holy Book Qur an to people in mosque. The word Hezbollah is a religious term written in the Quran and it has been used for 1400 years. This term does not have any connection with a terrorist organization which was revealed last two years with his horrifying murders in Turkey. In mentioned sermon, our client told mosque congregation the term Hezbollah which is written in some parts of the Qur an, with interpreting the term Hezbollah in the framework of Islamic love, tolerance and Unity of God. Ergun Poyraz with ignoring Hezbollah is an Islamic term, claimed that our client praised and identified Hezbollah terror organization. The aim of this accusation is to establish our

62 client with a connection with Hezbollah terror organization. But this accusation is not more than a slandering campaign. It is clearly identified in the Islamic Encyclopedia prepared by Department of Religious Affairs, the term Hezbollah does not have any connection with terrorist organization: The term Hezbollah in the Islamic Encyclopedia prepared by Department of Religious Affairs was defined as a Qur anic term meaning believers united around praising the religion and observing the faith. At the explained section of this Encyclopedia, it is written that in Qur an Hezbollah term was used in three places, and it is explained as God s army, God s friends, God s supporters, and God s helpers. M. Nuri Yilmaz, President of Department of Religious Affairs explained Hezbullah term to public opinion as in the Quran Hezbollah term used with the meaning of people who become saved, who find truth. It is wrong to use this beautiful Qur anic term with associating gang of murders. It is very normal to use this Islamic term in the sermons. At the Commentary of Qur an which was written by Elmali Hamdi Yazir with the order of founder of the Republic Ataturk, the term Hezbollah was defined as Hezb; means owner, society, congregation, fragment. Plural version of Hesb is Ahsab. Meaning of Hezbollah is people who are faithful to God s religion and protected by Him (Commentary of Qur an, vol.2. page 787) At the Commentary of Qur an which was written by Prof. Dr. Elmali Hamdi and delivered to the public by Milliyet newspaper, Hezbollah was explained as God s parties (supporters) (pages 2648-2649). Our client at his sermon in 1992, he used this tern in the framework of above mentioned resources. For ten years, there is only one more person than Ergun Poyraz claimed about the term Hezbollah as Fethullah Gülen praised Hezbollah terror organization. That person is Necip Hablemitoglu. Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel presented his article named Fethullahists and Hezbollahists to the file at the hearing on 3.28.2001. Ergun Poyraz did not do something new, he just read the indictment and attached files, and repeated the same claims as a witness. Since these claims were clear distortion, Necip Hablemitoglu article Fethullahists and Hezbollahists was sentenced to compensation by Istanbul 7. Civil Court (2001/245 E, 2002/391 D, 5.29.2002) (the documents about this section was presented with our petition on 7.1.2002) Ergun Poyraz claims false accusation related to jihad to our client. Ergun Poyraz s statement at trial records about jihad is at the Gülen s book İ la-yı Kelimetullah veya Cihad (Exalting the Word of God or Proclaiming the True Religion to Unbelievers), the virtues of decapitation was mentioned and killing was praised. It is stated at the 45 th page of this book Jihad appears to be the most pleasant and the highest idea, for which a believer can sacrifice his or her life. Because, a believer can reach such a rank as being suffocated in his or her sweat or performing ablution with his or her blood, only through jihad and at the 68 th page Whoever is not able personally to participate actively in a struggle, but is supporting those struggling

63 in this war and embracing these worriers through his or her institutions and is protecting them, will be respected in the category of those struggling in this war. Our client s book İ la-yı Kelimetullah veya Cihad is in the file. Nowhere in this book, there is statement about the virtues of decapitation or killing. Ergun Poyraz s claims are false and groundless. These claims as other ones are only slanders of Ergun Poyraz. At the statement of Ergun Poyraz, he stated that at the Nihat Dagli s book whose this fight, their target to destroy Republic which was found in 1923 was clearly said as, they openly declared their longings of Caliphate and Shari a. Prosecutor Keles also took Ergun Poyraz s this statement in his opinion page 23 to accuse our client. But when the book in the file was read, it will be clearly seen that nowhere in the book there is statement about targeting to destroy Republic and declaring longing of Caliphate and Shari. Ergun Poyraz states that Again when it was looked at these people s sayings, their most complaint subject is alphabet reform. Fethullah Gülen in his many speaks and writings have emphasized that alphabet reform took the country back. But our client newer said alphabet reform took the country back. Our client at his book Fasildan Fasila-3 stated that having an attitude against learning Arabic language was a mistake of intellectuals and government officers of that time. Our client in his book does not criticize abolishing Arabic Education (using Arabic and Arabic letters as education language), he talks about having an attitude against learning Arabic (to have classes of Arabic Education like English and French Languages). The reason why Arabic language should be thought in schools was clearly explained by our client as to continue dialogs with the countries we have historically connected and to learn our religion from original sources. In this condition, to accuse our client with criticizing abolishment of education in Arabic is false and groundless. Besides, the start of teaching Arabic language and literature in our country confirms our client s views. Clear distortion of Ergun Poyraz was seen in this section also. Ergun Poyraz in his testimony states that Fethullah Gülen during his duty at Department of Religious Affairs, with one month paid vacation went to teach ideals of Shari at European National Vision organizations. Our client has never been at European National Vision organizations and never thought ideals of Shari. Ergun Poyraz could not show any evidence to his claims, he was slandering our client. Before his witnessing, Ergun Poyraz had participated the program Walnut Shell at ATV. In this program, due to his unserious claims, program producer Hulki Cevizoglu told him that what you are saying here is paranoia. Ergun Poyraz s claims Fethullah Gülen group cannot be even called an organization, its foundation goes to very old times, it goes to Kurdish Said, president Suleyman Demirel and his brother Ali Demirel are also disciples of this organization can only be called paranoia.

64 Ergun Poyraz in his testimony states that At the Fethullah Gülen s book Fasildan Fasila-1 vol.1, page 209; faith, life, and shari a will be steps of resurrection at the end of the world. He advises to work very secretly in this cause; he wants his friend being very cautious and says that the groups working in the resurrection attempt and to expand it to every segments of the life need to move secretly and in mystery. In this way they will not face with any obstacle. Our client s book Fasildan Fasila-1 exists in the file. When the claimed page was looked at, our client answering a question explains faith and life against atheism, he does not mention about sheri a. In addition to this there is no such sentences He advises to work very secretly in this cause; he wants his friend being very cautious and says that the groups working in the resurrection attempt and to expand it to every segments of the life need to move secretly and in mystery. In this way they will not face with any obstacle. Ergun Poyraz fabricated these sentences in his testimony. Ergun Poyraz says for the book Kirik Tayflar written by Latif Erdogan: At the book published by cemaat, resurrection, establishment, life, and shari a will be determined one more time, and then we will be a state. Not only third person s statements bind legally him, but also when we examine the book we see that there is no such a statement in that book. The place of this then we will be a state could not be shown by Ergun Poyraz. This is clear slander. Ergun Poyraz in his testimony states that a person I don t know met with me saying I have some explanation about Gülen group, as I said in my signed proceedings this person showed me a bag full of dollars and wanted me to quit witnessing and being intervener. This person persuaded other witnesses with this method. He offered me 500.000 dollars to quit witnessing and being intervener. This incidence happened in last weekends. I don t remember exact day. What a piety that Ergun Poyraz remembers events happened years ago but does not remember the day happened in last weekends. This person wanted Ergun Poyraz to quit witnessing and being intervener. Ergun Poyraz at the hearing on 5.6.2002 claimed that he was harmed from this crime and he requested to be an intervener, this also shows his enmity against our client. Ergun Poyraz is not an objective and impartial witness. Therefore his witnessing cannot be accepted. Ergun Poyraz also presented his written testimony to the court; he presented also copies of many books at the attachment. Later on these books were also added to the file. Prosecutor Keles also in his opinion took his quotes which were prepared with cutting beginning and ending of the sentences, loosing meaning and integrity of the subjects. About the thoughts related to the books which were not written by our client, responsibilities belong to the author not to our client. But also when we examined the content of the books there is nothing to prove the claim to establish an illegal organization and organize activities to change the structure of secular State and to replace it with the one based on religious rules. Contrarily, these books contain historical, sociological, religious, and literary evaluations.

The information in detail about Ergun Poyraz s false witnessing was presented with our petition to the court on 7.1.2002. 65 OUR CLIENT WAS SUBJECTED TO A PLOT OF FABRICATING CRIMES AND EVIDENCES BY AN ORGANIZATION From the beginning of this lawsuit, we stated that at the background of the accusation of establishing terrorist organization, there is a slandering organization to plot by some people due to their ideological reasons. This organization have fabricated false evidences against our client with illegal methods and presented to the file. They prepared montage cassette, published some writings at magazines and newspapers, with connecting some state officers they prepared false reports, on the other side with supplying financial benefits to some people illegally or with threatening some people they have created witnesses to use against our client. These fabricated cassettes, reports, false witnesses, and fabricated writings were added to the file. Despite all these provocations and contents of these evidences, they could not present existence of the crime defined by Law. No 3713 s 1 st and 7 th article existence of terrorist organization using the methods of oppression, violence, forceful and threat. On 5.4.2002, a video cassette was broadcasted at Isik TV. This video cassette clearly revealed all these plots and fabrications of false evidences at the file against our client. Montage cassettes, reports, magazine and newspaper excerpts, testimonies of witnesses plotted by this organization cannot be accepted as evidence at the court based on norms defined at our constitution and Code of Criminal Procedures. This video cassette also reveals connection between this plotting organization and PKK terrorist organization. In this broadcasting, after giving examples of violent murders done by Abdullah Ocalan, adventure of his capturing was explained and images of him when we imprisoned at Imrali were showed. In the news, during the trials of Abdullah Ocalan to stop his death penalty, international forces and internal forces behind these terrorist organizations trying to influence this lawsuit were presented. It was determined that these forces were organized under Sivil Toplum Kuruluslari Birligi (STKB, Civilian Society Establishment Union). In the broadcasting, efforts of extensions of these internal and external organizations to remove the lawsuit of Abdullah Ocalan from the agenda and parliamentary question by Minister of Internal Affairs about Sivil Toplum Kuruluslari Birligi (STKB, Civilian Society Establishment Union) were presented. Minister of Internal Affairs stated that; in 1996 Civilian Society Establishment Union was established as an illegal formation with incorporating many foundations and organizations. The aims of this illegal STKB are; to protect principles of

66 secular, democratic, social, and law of State, to protect and develop statues of Republican reforms. On the contrary some of the leaders of STKB were taken legal action about involving in activities violating principles of Ataturk, insulting government s legal person, committing felonies against State s national person, being member of PKK terrorist organization, aid and abet to this terrorist organization, establishing secret organization and being member of this organization to destroy constitutional system by weapon and replacing it with the one based on Marxist-Leninist and Maoist principles, and many similar crimes. This totally contradicts with its aims especially related to protecting Republic reforms and laws. After this explanation, transcript of a talk with Abdullah Ocalan and his lawyer published at Mustafa Kemal Magazine was broadcasted. Isik TV announced this transcript with the title Cassettes are PKK s plot. According to this transcript; press Abdullah Ocalan asks to his lawyer what is the essence of this Fethullah Gülen incident in the Lawyer answered as this was made out by our friends Abdullah Ocalan asks again did our friends make out?, Lawyer answered as yes, friends who are close to us. Isik TV stated that to remove the death penalty of Abdullah Ocalan from the agenda, these cassettes were plotted by PKK and this incident was made a current issue. Isik TV broadcasted President of Contemporary Education Foundation Gulseven Yaser s video images from her voice. Her talks uncovered also Abdullah Ocalan s talk with his lawyer. In her talks; - Bargaining about Fethullah Gülen incident - Decision of works and money offers to the students which were used as witness against Fethullah Gülen - Giving scholarship to PKK member and later on to stop these scholarships. - How Fethullah Gülen s cassettes were assembled. - Preparation of anonymous CDs by Contemporary Education Foundation These were broadcasted to public opinion with the image and voice of Gulseven Yaser. This broadcast band and its transcript (speak text) were attached to our petition to the court on 5.6.2002. This organization s plot against our client was clarified with the broadcast by Isik TV on 5.4.2002. After this broadcast, Istanbul SSC Republic Prosecutor Office initiated investigation with the application of families of martyrs. Then with the indictment of the prosecutor office, Istanbul no. 3 State Security Court

67 opened public lawsuit against President of Contemporary Education Foundation Gulseven Yaser and its board members (2002/246 E). This mentioned lawsuit s files were examined by us. File 2 line 206-216 in this lawsuit s files confirms this slandering campaign against our client. Mentioned evidence is a CD in which phone talk between Gulseven Yaser and Police Commissioner Bayram Ozbek was recorded. This CD was recorded by Gulseven Yaser and also presented by her as attachment of complaint petition to the Police Headquarter. Transcript of this CD was made by Police Department s Anti-Terror branch. Since Gulseven Yaser recorded this CD, she talked very carefully; in this talk, she accepts existence of the broadcasted band by Isik TV but discuss about who recorded this CD. In the content of the CD, it is clarified that although they were not a side at Gülen s lawsuit and their intervener demand was rejected, both speakers were interfering with the lawsuit externally and involved in fabrication of evidences. These sentences in the texts of these speak clearly revealed this condition: - Bayan (Gulseven Yaser): We trust in police and government, we trusted in you, we said, such a state, what we do, all together we want to be rescued from this trouble which has been pestered Turkey, we want to save our children. - Bay (Bayram Ozbek): I put my carrier at risk, I met with you, dig a pit for people against you, what we did, all benefits you - Bayan (Gulseven Yaser): Listen me, to get the same result again, we will give this and we will put up a fight against these people - Bay (Bayram Ozbek): But you saw the direction of the lawsuit. Ergun s intervener demand was rejected, witnessing, everything is militating in favor of them... - Bayan (Gulseven Yaser): it will blow out in other places, new children will come - Bay (Bayram Ozbek):.I can help you in any subject - Bayan (Gulseven Yaser): you can call Mr. Huseyin, our lawyer - Bayan (Gulseven Yaser): I got it. Have you talked to Ergun in America yet? - Bay (Bayram Ozbek): Yes - Bay (Bayram Ozbek): Zubeyir had come here and asked me from my chief, Zubeyir Kindira. - Bay (Bayram Ozbek): look, these CDs you gave are still here, I have them now, Best of Fethullah, I don t know what type of trouble is he, if I am harmed they are with me, these are violation of art and thought works, there is six month imprisonment for this - Bayan (Gulseven Yaser): they will not have any connection with us

- Bayan (Gulseven Yaser): anyway, let s do like this, these things are not something to talk at the phone 68 Despite their all attentions and efforts, the sentences which were rapped out clarify how they influence the lawsuit externally. PROGRESS İN THE LAWSUİT AT THE FRAMEWORK OF ISİK TV S BROADCAST - STKP group which was founded by Contemporary Education Foundation President Gulseven Yaser, 68s Foundation President Hasmet Atahan and some other people is an illegal formation - This formation have prepared and delivered handout against our client. - Collage text were prepared from montage cassettes which contain our client s image, with cut and paste methods - These collaged texts were served to many different sectors to sentence our client - To establish a public opinion against our client, arranged some students to speak in TV channels and prepared and published a book Hocanin okullari with these false statements. - The students used were put under physiological pressure and financially supported. - At the end of this progress, they used these people as witness or intervener at the court against our client. This illegal formation which got in touch with some witnesses supplied them financial benefits, oppressed some of them to give false statements. This was also clarified with the statements of Serhat Ozkan Since I understood that we were deceived by some people, I am quitting from being intervener and witness at this lawsuit. Other interveners Eyup Kayar and Arife Kayar also quitted their complaints and being interveners with the same reason. Mentioned formation due to their ideological reasons has nurtured enmity against our client. Their main aim was to wear him out in public opinion and open a criminal persecution against him with fabricating crime and evidences. As we will mention below, the most striking characteristics of this plot, these evidence fabrication activities are not individually produced, they are planned, organized activities and even some public officers had participated these activities. To understand mentioned plot more clearly, it is required to examine the cassette broadcasted by Isik TV. With the talk between Gulseven Yaser and her friend which was the reason for the broadcast, the plot against our client was understood clearly.

69 With the order of Istanbul SSC prosecutor office s order, the search at Contemporary Education Foundation by Istanbul Police headquarter Anti-Terror branch on 6.3.2002, Gulseven Yaser s email conversations with his friend at the cassette were also revealed. These email texts also clarified the plot against our client. At the email numbered as 7/34 by prosecutor office, Gulseven Yaser states that: We have to meet very urgently. I could not go out after the TV broadcast. I don t know what to do. We had meeting with Necip, Huseyin, Ergun and Zubeyir Kindira and assessed the situation. Common opinion is that you and I should go to prosecutor Yüksel and say that this visual and audio recording is montage, no such a talk happened. Otherwise it will be so bad. Mesut, don t spare this sacrifice from me. If you do this sacrifice, I am ready to give you my summer house at Bodrum right away. We are presenting this email text which was taken from the file (2002/423 E) at Ankara 31. Civil Court at the attachment (attachment 32). At the email numbered as 7/35 by prosecutor office, Gulseven Yaser states in briefly that: Dear Mesut, we need to find new witnesses in opposition related to Fethullah Gülen lawsuit. Our lawyer Mr. Huseyin told me that the lawsuit have been turning against us There is a friend of Serhat, his name is Cihat, I am planning to give some money and take him to the court for witnessing against Fethullah.I continue to give scholarship to that PKK member child named Ramazan Yidirim but I do not put into official records. We need to meet with him again. If we can persuade, we can make up a new scenario and we have to use him against Fethullah, otherwise we are busted. After this broadcast, we applied to Isik TV and we requested a copy of the cassette. Isik TV gave us that cassette at the attachment of letter dated 5.6.2002. We presented this cassette and its transcript to the court with our petition on 7.1.2002. Below, at the framework of Isik TV broadcast, examples of fake evidences fabricated with illegal methods will be presented. These evidences should be taken as essence for decision. As it is understood that Gulseven Yaser and his friends above talks; this organization plotted against our client and organized below activities; MONTAGE CDs AND CASSETTES AGAINST OUR CLEINT WERE ASSEMBLED AND WERE GIVEN TO THE COURT. Before the lawsuit against our client started, some cassettes attributed to our client were broadcasted by some TV channels. These collaged cassettes which were prepared by the methods of montage and distortion were used as foundation of the lawsuit and they were quoted frequently at the indictment. In here, the most important question should be asked is who did serve this distorted, montage cassettes to the court and to the press. From the talks between Gulseven Yaser and his friends, it was understood that these

70 cassettes were given to the court and to the press by these people: Sections about mentioned talks are as following: GULSEVEN YASER: I will give the cassette to them but cassette need to be converted VHS we were very busy from the beginning, I will give now, I will let children stand over HER FRIEND: Let s do one thing, just in case, take one more copy GULSEVEN YASER: We can hold one of them, they cannot watch this cassette, we have to convert it to VHS HER FRIEND: of course that is small cassette GULSEVEN YASER: I should take it. Now I brought you 15 cassettes. HER FRIEND: do all of them belong to Fethullah? GULSEVEN YASER: Fethullah s. what do you say how many more we have! (laughter) GULSEVEN YASER: We have already watched them, but you will watch with different look, very different, there can be some other places that we did not do things. HER FRIEND: yes, you are right GULSEVEN YASER: I will say you something like that look at these cassettes, they are first time, we watched them, there are quotes for these, but you will look over all of them, all together 4 lastly came cassettes, they are very different, you will find them very exiting here you go, job for you not one or two many HER FRIEND: these are then, let me finish them I will do related places; I will copy important places of them. (at this time, Gulseven Yaser confirms with his head and makes cut sign with her hand) GULSEVEN YASER: Start to copy HER FRIEND: hey hey GULSEVEN YASER: after that for them, there was a CD that CD went to very important places, lets make 2 CDs and we can do 3CDs. HER FRIEND: do you have that CD, I did not do thing to it. GULSEVEN YASER: Are you serious. HER FRIEND: I did not see it. You have never given to me. It was that isn t it, best of Fethullah.

71 GULSEVEN YASER: O best of Fethullah, how I did not give to you, on Monday bring this one to me, I will be at foundation on Monday, I will bring you that CD on Monday to the park, if you want I can give you more copies, HER FRIEND: two, three I will do something to Mr. Aziz. GULSEVEN YASER: I kept 10, I will give to you. We produced 50 copies. You give it one time; you will give to very important places HER FRIEND: Okay, I will do thing, I will give to related places, I should not give to everybody, they should not get one. GULSEVEN YASER: What happens if they have one, what can they do? HER FRIEND: What happens? GULSEVEN YASER: Because they got it, we gave them to the court saying these things were prepared it is at the market HER FRIEND: Did we give CD to the court? GULSEVEN YASER: Yes we gave it ( ) GULSEVEN YASER: It is not known who did it. HER FRIEND: is it not known? GULSEVEN YASER: No, nobody knows. HER FRIEND: it will not be known if there is no name on it. GULSEVEN YASER: there is not, it cannot, before we wrote CEV HER FRIEND: Himmm GULSEVEN YASER: they told us, don t do this HER FRIEND: Right Right Right because when this went to the court, they will certainly file a criminal complaint to prosecutor office. Mentioned CD in this conversation was presented to the court by Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel on 12.4.2000. At the CD, it was written that this CD was prepared by Contemporary Education Foundation (CEV). Its president is Gulseven Yaser. THIS ORGANIZATION CONTACTED WITH THE WITNESS OSMAN AK

72 At the broadcasting at Isik TV, sections related to Osman Ak is as following: GULSEVEN YASER: Tuesday Huseyin will come here. Do you want to talk again? HER FRIEND: It can be. Tuesday we can meet with him there. You will prepare that thing with Osman Ak to them, won t you? GULSEVEN YASER: ya ya ya HER FRIEND: What do you think about them? How can we trust them? GULSEVEN YASER: Osman Ak s department chiefs were scared of give them some courage, they will devolve there, they say why do you scare of, we have such and such friends. We need to do something like that. We need to say to the police forces, there is military behind this work; we will finish this and give impression to everybody that soldiers are behind this. HER FRIEND: yes, people are scared of him, everyone is feeling himself alone in this cause. GULSEVEN YASER: we need to give that HER FRIEND: we need to do something to give that. GULSEVEN YASER: We don t have any other chance but Osman Ak. You are saying Nationalist Party is behind Osman Ak, but Nationalist Party is not behind them ( ) GULSEVEN YASER: Once you give this image, signal, you say that; there are soldiers behind this, a signal should go to the chiefs, related chiefs, they said, we will not cause to leave this. They would have gone to the end. I will talk to them now. We need to tell this to the Minister of Internal Affairs. HER FRIEND: hey hey ( ) HER FRIEND: There are you, I, and Hasmet in Istanbul. In Ankara you gather with him and his chiefs. GULSEVEN YASER: Chiefs are very important; if their statements HER FRIEND: How will we bring the chiefs, did you do anything for this. Is Osman Ak saying something. Did he call them, did he get their word? GULSEVEN YASER: I will talk them all. I know that we will talk to them. I am not talking anything at the phone, but I will talk to them now. Nobody knows this number. I will call you from this number from now on.

73 HER FRIEND: Okay I will change that now. GULSEVEN YASER: You change that for sure, we don t do thing. HER FRIEND: We need to give them assurance that they can talk comfortably, otherwise if they don t say statements supporting Osman Ak s statements, things will go against us. ( ) HER FRIEND: Because at the last hearing, that happened. It became in opposition to us. Statements of Osman Ak made us happy. Then his statement GULSEVEN YASER: Actually he said they will talk in our favor at the future. They promised to Osman Ak. As it was understood in these talks, President of Contemporary Education Foundation Gulseven Yaser s talked to Osman Ak and made him to give statements against our client. Then Gulseven Yaser wanted from Osman Ak to influence other witnessing public officers, with giving the image army is supporting us, they threatened them and took promise to give statements against our client. In addition to this, just after Osman Ak heard by the court, he took an award form Contemporary Education Foundation. In his speak at the award ceremony I wish to receive this award after I exterminated the plague of Fethullah Gülen (it is in the file, Cumhuriyet Newspaper on 11.27.2001) EYUP KAYA AND SERHAT OZKAN GAVE FALSE WITNESSING DUE TO FINANCIAL PROMISES OF THIS ORGANIZATION At the Isik TV video broadcast, these talks were conducted at the section about Eyup Kayar and Serhat Ozkan: GULSEVEN YASER: Serhat Ozkan was weeping. He had a second baby, women infected during surgery; he said I should send him money. I told that don t want from me anymore. You sent from here. I don t know how Eyup s current situation now. Let me see how is he? HER FRIEND: Now I will give you a name. He will do thing. GULSEVEN YASER: His money has been sent, hasn t it? HER FRIEND: yes, yes, It was supposed to be deposited with the name of Hasan Kasap. (Gulseven Yaser calls and talks something) GULSEVEN YASER: Hi I wonder what happened to our boy s staff...it did not go Tuesday, did it?...what did they say, what did they say, I will do him but at phone then Eyup should call them

74 again come now, it is bad, it is bad, of course it is right, okay now, I will talk to him later. Look, I talked to Ankara, I am getting confirmation again about the writing, I follow it. I told him, we are dealing with it, they will send one more writing. We will follow it then. Tell him that we are doing other thing then. I will be in search of something again. Yes Yes Where I will go again, I will come again, I am very busy now, I wonder at now. I will talk to again, will it be again? See you later. HER FRIEND: What happened? GULSEVEN YASER: it's not nice. Mr. Kemal had talked to TEMA. I sent to someone, General Manager told him that it is to carry boxes. Monthly 105 million. He will go with 3 buses. HER FRIEND: is 105 million? GULSEVEN YASER: Yes It cannot be. He is university graduate. HER FRIEND: 105 million in this century. Can it be something like this?. ( ) GULSEVEN YASER: Now you don t forget to send money to Serhat. HER FRIEND: Okay, don t worry. I will call in a minute, it had been sent by Hasan Kasap. GULSEVEN YASER: This is very important. Our guys suppose to send some also. Two times See we could not find a job for Eyup. HER FRIEND: Let me search it myself it is not happening with someone else... GULSEVEN YASER: It cannot be, it cannot be, look this is very important subject, Eyup s mother says that they said us this and this but they are no good. We gave them such a support. HER FRIEND: is he married or single? GULSEVEN YASER: Single, single HER FRIEND: may be he will marry. There may be a thought GULSEVEN YASER: There is, it came to this point, we should not support this. HER FRIEND: Yes, you are right ( ) GULSEVEN YASER: said. They may be using this too. He said if you could not clean this in Turkey. I will put both to the prison for false witnessing. HER FRIEND: I got it.

75 GULSEVEN YASER: If they give different testimony, both of them will be charged from false statement. Because they gave the testimony to me, they gave testimony in front of court. It is not a joke. HER FRIEND: Do these children talk against us? Namely, can they do something against us like saying We did not say these, they fabricated their own scenario? GULSEVEN YASER: Sneak named Ismail did Ismail s this documents Ismail did it, does Serhat do. Serhat s statements are all old statements. HER FRIEND: Yes, Serhat turned once, he said very opposing things, then again,...he again? GULSEVEN YASER: Huseyin said that we have to control them, we should get our hand on them. HER FRIEND: Mr. Kemal may find them job we have Cihat and Ramazan in our hand, Ramazan is a member of PKK. GULSEVEN YASER: Nobody concerned about them. We are loosing them. We came to this point with sensitive balance. HER FRIEND: There is also this difficulty in this. These children may be as same as Eyup and Serhat? We can arrange them now. Let s say we arranged them and they talked against him. We can evaluate this with Ramadan, let s talk to these things also and take their opinions. ( ) GULSEVEN YASER: This is the point. How should we capture that child? You know these tactics better. What should we do? HER FRIEND: First we will search his weakness. Whatever he wants. Some want money, some want job like Eyup. We will give him money, job, whatever he wants. As it is clearly seen at above talks, Eyup Kayar and Serhat Ozkan did false witnessing due to financial benefits supplied and promised by Contemporary Education Foundation s President Gulseven Yaser and his friends. In addition to this, we presented the documents proving financial benefits supplied to Serhat Okan with our petition to the court on 3.28.2001. WITNESS ERGUN POYRAZ GAVE FALSE WITNESSING DUE TO FINANCIAL BENEFITS SUPPLIED BY CEV s PRESIDENT GULSEVEN YASER. At the Isik TV video broadcast, these talks were conducted at the section about Ergun Poyraz:

76 GULSEVEN YASER: Who is supporting Ergun Poyraz, I am frequently sending money to him. HER FRIEND: Yes. As it is clearly seen at above talks, Ergun Poyraz did false witnessing due to financial benefits supplied by Contemporary Education Foundation s President Gulseven Yaser. This foundation has followed the lawsuit in each step. Last example of this is Ergun Poyraz. As follows; Ergun Poyraz, during the initial investigation gave his complaint petition on 3.10.1999, but he came back again 3 years later. Three days after Serhat Ozkan, Eyup Kayar, and Arife Kayar quitted being intervener in the lawsuit, Ergun Poyraz reappeared suddenly and demanded to be intervener at the lawsuit. This also shows how this foundation followed the lawsuit very closely and their effort to influence the lawsuit. WITNESS METIN SARIASLAN GAVE FALSE WITNESSING AFTER HE WAS SENT TO CEV s PRESIDENT GULSEVEN YASER. Witness Metin Sariaslan was listened at the hearing on 3.28.2001. We demanded to be asked this question Every person heard at the court as a witness, first met with Contemporary Education Foundation s President Gulseven Yaser and then came to the court. We demanded to be asked to this witness whether he met with Gulseven Yaser or not. Witness responded as I could not take my rights exactly, when a lawsuit became known by public opinion, I called Ankara SSC Republic Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel. I mentioned about my situation. I explained what happened at the school and I said that I could not receive my money. At the time when I was coming to Ankara to give my testimony I needed money. My friends advised me to apply Contemporary Education Foundation, in this way I met with Gulseven Yaser It is understood from this that this person was sent to Contemporary Education Foundation to receive money and after he met with the president of the foundation he gave false witnessing. At our petition on 5.15.2001, we explained how Metin Sariaslan was directed and by whom in details with the evidences. RAFET YILMAZ GAVE HIS TESTIMONY AT PROSECUTOR OFFICE UNDER OPPRESSION At the Isik TV video broadcast, these talks were conducted at the section about Rafet Yilmaz: GULSEVEN YASER: you know they will talk at the future in our favor said. They promised to Osman Ak. If they were not sold. Even Rafet Yilmaz did this.

77 HER FRIEND: Yes he gave testimony and talked with very negative way. ( ) GULSEVEN YASER: Once you give this image, signal, you say that; there are soldiers behind this, a signal should go to the chiefs, related chiefs, they said, we will not cause to leave this. They would have gone to the end. I will talk to them now. We need to tell this to the Minister of Internal Affairs. Zubeyir Kindira wrote a book Fethullah s Bludgeons. He claimed that I wrote this book based on statements of Rafet Yilmaz, ex-police officer. This book was presented to the file and prosecutor demanded from the court that Zubeyir Kindira and Rafet Yilmaz need to be heard as witness. But witnessing of Zubeyir Kindira was rejected by the court and Rafet Yilmaz was accepted to be heard as a witness. Rafet Yilmaz gave his testimony at Tunceli High Criminal Court (2001/102 precept). In this mentioned statements he stated that the journalist named Zubeyir Kindira reached me using chief constables, Zubeyir wanted me to confirm his book Fethullah s Bludgeons, he threatened me that I have to do this, later Zubeyir took me to meet with Minister of Internal Affairs, Minister told me that this is very important, you must work with Zubeyir Kindira, He told me that I will take you from Tunceli to Ankara, then we went to Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel, and I gave my testimony with the directions of Zubeyir Kindira, they were not my statements. But my testimony at the hearing is my real statements. When these both statements Rafet Yilmaz s statement that after I met with some police chiefs and the Minister of Internal Affairs, I gave my testimony at prosecutor office and Gulseven Yaser s saying that a signal should go to the chiefs, related chiefs, we should tell him to the Minister of Internal Affairs were evaluated together, it is seen that Gulseven Yaser with illegal methods fabricated false evidences against our client and made an effort to influence public workers to give false witnessing. ILLEGAL FAKE EVIDENCES CANNOT BE USED FOR THE ESSENCE OF JUDGMENT. At the criminal judgment to investigate and prosecute are held by official authorities. Private person does not have authority to do this. To investigate and prosecute crimes has characteristics of public work. Therefore, this cannot be defended that things could not be done by public claims, can be done with individual claims. We explained with examples above, in this lawsuit, all evidences presented to the file, cassettes, CDs, books and documents, statements of the some witnesses, were fabricated illegally by Gulseven Yaser

78 and his friends. At the case that illegally obtained fake evidences by private individuals presented to the authorized organs or to the hearings cannot be used as essence for decision. Despite all these plots, even the contents of these evidences could not be presented to prove the existence of the crime defined by Law. No 3713 s 1 st and 7 th article existence of terrorist organization using the methods of oppression, violence, forceful and threat.