THE REALITY IN THE PRISONS
In the last issue we had published documents about the ULUCANLAR MASSACRE. Ulucanlar was not the first, nor will it be the last.
Those in political power are continually putting the cell-type prisons on the agenda with the particular aim of killing the political
prisoners and taking away their revolutionary identity. It was said that the construction of cells, which is in full swing, would be
completed in May. New circulars are being published, protocols have been signed between ministries, and the military has also
participated. Public opinion has been told that all this is being done for the sake of the health of inmates. But the reality is something very
different. The medical treatment of captives is still being prevented on the days when it was previously announced it would be available.
The "silent destruction" continues. In our bulletin, a great number of examples are given and documents cited as to the health situation of
captives in various prisons, as are the ways in which treatment has been prevented. How will the Justice Ministry, which says it is
concerned about the health of the prisoners, explain itself for any of these things that are to be described. The truth is not in the slightest
how the politicians present it.
In this issue we have particularly concentrated on these attacks whose severity has particularly been marked in recent years, as well as the
results of them, the wounded prisoners and those who have lost their lives, and on their accounts of these attacks. We have also told of the
resistance of revolutionary prisoners to attacks, as recounted by themselves.
In Turkey there really is a "prisons problem". But this problem is not the one stated by the authorities and their media. The reality can be
found in our bulletin in the form of documents and statements by witnesses.
In these days of heightened attacks in relation to the cells, we have tried to tell the whole of public opinion about the reality in the
prisons, about the "prisons problem".
We hope to meet in issue No 4.
In today's world, our country has a special place in the list of those with the largest number of prisons and prisoners. According to official
figures, there are more than 500 prisons and about 70,000 prisoners.
Certainly even these figures suffice to show that there is a "prisons problem" in our country. Yet such a statement is inadequate and
therefore wrong. There is no "prisons problem" in the traditional sense. What is actually there is repression, massacres and attacks directed
against revolutionary captives, and their resistance. It is a "problem" for the state: the revolutionary prisoners who have protected their
beliefs and resisted for years will not let their resistance be destroyed. This is why for years the words which have come to the relevant
state authorities' lips are that the prisons are a "bleeding wound". But what a coincidence it is that, as in the Ulucanlar massacre, those who
bleed are the revolutionary prisoners and we who are their friends and relatives who are wounded or slaughtered.
For this reason it is necessary to pose the problem properly. The problem is justice ... The problem is democracy... The problem is a
problem of rights and freedoms... In sum, fascism is the problem. Not heeding this reality means not understanding the prisons of our
country. This is the crux of the problem.
For this reason, it is particularly advantageous to properly examine the prisons in our country...
THE REALITY OF THE PRISONS IN OUR COUNTRY
Since classes came into being, from slave society to today, prisons, prisoners and the policies of bringing about surrender have always been
a part of the class struggle. In the prisons too, the oppressors attack the representatives of the oppressed in the prisons, and continue their
war against those of the oppressed who take sides with them. In every period, no matter what the tactics and policies of the ruling class
are, for them one aim never changes: TO SILENCE AND COMPEL THE SURRENDER OF THOSE WHO STRUGGLE AGAINST THE
SYSTEM OF EXPLOITATION.
The torture and murder in the prisons, the attempts to bring about surrender, to destroy personalities, is aimed at removing the danger for
themselves. >From this viewpoint, the prisons are nothing more than a change of locale in the ongoing struggle between oppressors and
oppressed. Those who on the outside waged a struggle against oppression and for freedom and independence and then have been taken
prisoner have also continued the struggle in the prisons. It is not necessary here to tell the continuing story of this, which dates from the
time of slave society. It would both take a long time and also be unnecessary. Unnecessary, because in every epoch, while there are
peculiarities, the essentials do not change. With this aspect in mind, we will satisfy ourselves with various chapters in which we will
examine the policies of the ruling class in the prisons in the period beginning with the September 12 (1980) military coup.
We will concentrate on the laws, circulars and actions which cam into being as well as the results and effects that were produced. At the
end of what we say, it will be clear that in these processes nothing is isolated or unconnected. They complete each other or replace each
other. And again it will be seen that none of the policies applied in the prisons of our country over the past 20 years is unique to our
country. Wherever in the world a struggle is waged against imperialism and exploitation, in the prisons the ruling class in every country
practices the same policies with only differences in nuance. This also shows that the policies in the prisons are centralised at a point where,
on a world scale, the lessons arising in the light of experiments conducted are reproduced, developed and once again used in exported form
against the peoples of neo-colonial countries. The centre of all this is imperialism. Militarily and politically, the contra-guerrilla centre
consists of structures created and founded by imperialism. In countries like Panama, NATO, CIA, European Union and US imperialism
have opened training academies for inculcating torture and murder techniques. Today when the prison policies and their consequences are
discussed, the role and influence of the USA must be taken into account. Only then can we attain real, correct and scientific results. Only
thus are we able to find the answer to how to give our support from the outside to prisoners engaging in a just struggle in the prisons, and
who are dying, being tortured and are paying the price.
This congress can only fulfil its true function if it succeeds in this. Certainly it will not be sufficient by itself to deduce consequences and
find ways to achieve a solution. Then we can achieve as many realistic and correct results as possible;
if these are not brought to life then nothing has been achieved in practice; if they are restricted to words; and if what is correct is not
brought to life, then what the correctness of what has been said has no special significance. For years in our country, everybody said things
in the prisons and in practice displayed behaviour according to a particular line. But with every day that passes, saying things and not doing
them and failing to persist with steps that have been embarked upon merely prepares the way for new and intensified policies of
implementing massacres. During the Death Fast actions, the Yasar Kemals (note: Yasar Kemal is a famous writer in Turkey whose politics
are of a reformist nature) and those behind them in the Prison Observation Committee formed afterwards give the most striking example
of this.
Within the society we live in there is a war between the ruling classes and our oppressed people. If this struggle goes in what looks like a
physical sense, nevertheless it is essentially an ongoing war between two ideologies. In every battle into which they enter, two ideologies
seek to win victory for themselves. For the ruling classes themselves, the prisons are nothing other than a place where the armed/unarmed
opposition which is seen as dangerous spends a period of time. But here the issue in regard to a captive is not a matter of whether the
prisoner has been captured or physically destroyed, but whether or not the will of the bourgeoisie is accepted or rejected. This is where
victory and defeat lie. For this reason, in the prisons, the condition of winning victory in the war between two ideologies is to not
surrender, of being able to say "to the bitter end", even if it means death... Those who, to their last breath, refuse to accept the will of the
bourgeoisie, those who in the face of the executioner cry out their adherence to their beliefs and cause will not be defeated. You know that
from Socrates to Giordano Bruno, history is full of such examples, and if today what are called human rights are given general recognition,
it is because those who resisted refused to give up their rights. Those who generate history, are those who do not surrender and who resist
for the sake of their rights and freedoms.
Sometimes resistance in the darkness of night in prison dormitories is a lofty folk song or a revolutionary march. Sometimes it is calmly
walking along the corridors, people saying "merhaba" (hello) to each other and not letting truncheons prevent this happening. Sometimes
it is being able to say, "To live, you have to be able to die". Or, in acts of resistance by those who knew that death could not be escaped,
shouting the slogan "Bize olum yok" ("for us there is no death" ) in response to attackers using tear-gas canisters, iron bars and wooden
beams. The most honourable pages were written in the history of the prisons of our country in such a way. And these latest pages of its
history were written in Ankara, very near to here. And the congress gathered now will be the herald of these new pages which have been
written, for all the prisons in our country contain resistance within them.
The American Ecevit government which has issued new declarations which have nothing new in them, is sending the signal that it is
preparing new attacks on the revolutionary prisoners. "We will come up with a solution to the prisons problem," says Ecevit. Did not such
attacks on the prisons begin decades ago in the same way? "The prisons should be reconstructed," "The state must show its authority"...
Lots of things similar to these have been said. Years pass, governments change but the words do not. "The prisoners will be integrated into
society"... "For this, whatever is necessary will be done.."
All this was contained in the prisons of the junta, with their torture, massacres and exile. In the military prisons of the junta, on the door
of every ward was hung what was called "13/1" from the military regulations book.
"Every other day the beard area will be shaved, every 15 days a haircut to a length of three millimetres will be given. During counts,
prisoners will stand at attention against their walls. Only by number will prisoners be allowed to see visitors and lawyers. At night they
will go to bed at 10. The wards will not be established in a communal manner. All requests will be made on specially printed forms and in
military fashion, be addressed `To the commandant's office'. In the exercise area prisoners from other dormitories will not be spoken to,
nor will items be purchased from them. All grades of soldier will be addressed as `my commander', including privates, and they will
stand at attention in front of him with shirts buttoned up to the collar. In the dormitories, folk songs and marches will not be sung."
In this regulations book, cigarettes could not be smoked in the dormitories, private soldiers could not be spoken to and there were many
similar paragraphs. According to the junta, prisoners are "soldiers" and must be "soldiers". The conception is to make your life, your brain,
say "give an order, my commander". Giving No 3 haircuts and suchlike sanctions may not appear too important at first glance. The issue is
not one of special haircuts but one of getting prisoners to surrender by turning them into soldiers. It is aimed at creating human beings who
are cut off from the people, destroying their personalities and breaking their wills. To do this, prisoners were beaten right from the start
in the military prisons. In subsequent days they were beaten when they went to court or to hospital. What was the pretext? Any pretext
was possible. Anything in conformity with a paragraph from "13/1" sufficed. Torture and beatings were everyday events in the prisons.
The military prisons had the position that prisoners could be taken back to police stations, but in most cases not even that was necessary,
for repeated interrogations could be carried out in the prisons themselves, with the participation of the prison administration. In the
prisons in the first junta period, the junta put captives in the prisons through interrogations by torture under prolonged and severe
conditions in an effort to frighten them into abandoning their political convictions and the struggle. We want to lay particular stress on
this. Whatever method might be used, following arrest the prisons are the second stop on the road after arrest and are a way of
supplementing the practices in the torture centre: indeed, they complement each other. Secondly, the one is part of the other. The prisons'
interrogations through torture have the aim of making the prisoners surrender. In the first days of the junta this policy gave rise to heavy,
open and uncontrolled violence. They wanted the torture to result in hopelessness and immorality. When these policies were repelled the
junta, without abandoning repression and violence, continued to use new and more subtle methods. This policy, in the form of prison
buildings, has continued up to the present.
The "E-Type Special Prisons" came onto the agenda in 1982 in the form of a statute. these prisons were designed as dormitories. But in all
of them there were areas designed for isolation and observation and policy caused these to be used. As soon as prisoners came into the
isolation areas, they were subjected to beatings and torture and kept in these places for up to a month. Observations was only designed for
people who came from the cells. The prisoners were brought here from isolation and would be kept there until their good behaviour and
adherence to the rules had been proved. In cases of resistance, the punishment of being sent to a closed prison would be inflicted. This is
what the statutes said. The intention was to divide the prisoners and split them up. In the dormitories, the junta's statutes state that those
given heavy punishment were to be separated from those given lighter ones. We especially draw your attention that was said yesterday is
the same as what is said today.
In every place fascism has applied a common method. First do something, and then a convenient law emerges. Fascism praises repression
and torture to the skies in prepare a "legitimate" environment for it. In 1982 and 1983 comprehensive changes were made to the Turkish
Penal Code in relation to prisons. In those days the prison administration continued, with activities like the regulations book, to
legitimise repression and bans. What didn't they organise in this way? There was everything. They had everything in hand to institute bans
and enforce conformity to the regulations. All the prison governors had the same aim. To bring about surrender. To create a robot, a living
mummy, someone fallen and wretched, a slave without a tongue in his or her mouth. This is what they wanted to tell the people... those
talk to you of revolution and go in the vanguard are people who were subjected to dozens of pains, torture and looked death in the face.
Will these make revolution? Are these your hopes, your future? This was the mentality behind the policies in the prisons.
It was not an easy matter for the state to institute unbending discipline, irrational rules and regulations damaging to human honour and
personality. It is still not easy in today's prisons. This is the work of uninterrupted resistance. Because to resist is the fight of the just
against the unjust, the legitimate against the arbitrary, human honour against the inhuman practices. A sacred right has been practised. This
how the prisoners describe it: "Resisting in the dungeons has been able to bring political identity to life. Defending our human honour and
our personality cannot be oppressed or besmirched. The class war continues, the quest for freedom will not be interrupted. ... Resistance is
its own creator and finds its own forms. This has arisen both in theory and practice. The class struggle produces very different
characteristics in some areas compared to resistance elsewhere. Morale plays a very important role in this resistance... Resistance takes its
strength here from displaying moral and psychological superiority. The forms of resistance in prisons appear very simple and are often are
not to be understood dialectically. In many places, receiving visits or walking up and down in the prison exercise area has been a source of
moral strength, but the denial over periods of months or even years of the right to receive visits or walk in the yard and see the sun has been
echoed in the form of demonstrating moral and psychological superiority.(...). Here is only resistance in words; the forms of resistance are
connected to each other, resistance is created which like links in a chain. Psychology is displayed in moral superiority (...) It is continually
rising to one's feet. We rose to our feet by completely protecting our psychology of moral superiority..." (Foreword, "Resistance, Death,
Life," book on the 1984 Death Fast)
Traditions of resistance thus grew, extending their roots towards the future. With these in the prisons, traditional methods were turned
inside out, (...). The darkness of the prisons was sprinkled with light. The handcuffs on wrists, the fetters on ankles had no effect on the
contents of minds. Resistance was expressed in slogans at the foot of stairs or posted in corridors in defence of honour (...) "Performing
Torture Is Dishonourable" "The Torturers Will Not Go Unpunished", "Human Honour Will Defeat Torture". Prisoners were not allowed
to go to court, requests and letters could not be written. There were bans and sanctions imposed preventing visits by lawyers and families.
When the day came when the beards and facial hair were cut and people were shaved by force, growing a moustache became an act of
resistance. (...). Resistance while handcuffed to being forcibly dressed in the Prison Uniforms (...). Rather than be warm in the Prison
Uniforms, they wore underwear in the cold, in the rain, in the snow for hours on end.
The hunger strikes, especially where, like the prisons, the means of struggle were limited, became an increasingly important weapon in the
struggle. The hunger strikes became a political weapon to be used against the junta, over and above exceptional situations. In this period
the prisons were a centre of the people's opposition. Hunger strike resistance in various periods, which were only in the prisons and making
limited demands, also exposed the junta. Courage and moral superiority is an important struggle in a prison struggle in torture, bans and
sanctions sought to hem them in. From this aspect, the hunger strikes are of even greater importance and originality. In actions, whether or
not resistance was physical, the action was characterised by willpower and moral superiority. In this way, from the first days of hunger
strikes under the junta to today, they have used as an effective weapon. The ruling classes have had to take a step back in the face of hunger
strikes, and rights were won, but at the first opportunity they would be taken away. In a sense this is a natural occurrence. Firstly, those in
power are in conflict with one another. This is over whether to accept something or not to accept it, to surrender or not to surrender.
Implementing rights or taking them away is only one aspect of this war. If the weapon of the ruling classes is confiscating rights, the
weapon of the prisoners is resistance. This situation in the junta and the subsequent period will go on. With this resistance it was possible
to extend the implementation of rights.
The form of every struggle is gained as a result of "experiment". This principle was valid under the junta. And the junta carried out various
psychological and physical attacks in an attempt to undermine the prisoners' moral superiority and implement their own policies. For
example, the decision issued by the administration of Metris Prison on October 23, 1983 on tactics to defeat the resistance was only one of
these. "1. The files are to be found of those prisoners involved in actions. 2. In future in the case of executive reports, advantage is to be
taken of these files. 3. In the executive reports, prisoners taking part in actions like hunger strikes will have their punishment determined,
they will not benefit from laws on releasing prisoners (...). 4. In future prisoners and convicts like this will not benefit from amnesty
laws. They are hereby notified."
Prison Uniforms
The operation to collect civilian clothing began in E Block's "Siberia" on Saturday, January 14. By force, the prison authorities removed
civilian clothing, leaving only underwear. On January 16, 1984 the torturing prison administration began to forcibly dress in the Prison
Uniforms captives who were on the way to court or hospital. In this way, up to February 2, 1984 Metris went through a period of the
most extreme torture. Pyjamas were confiscated in this operations. For hours, the prisoners were left to wait in the exercise area in the
freezing cold. The torturers want to achieve a result with lightning speed. In other prisons these practices had been instituted earlier. The
particular aim of the Prison Uniforms was to make them accept their status as captives, to take away their own initiative with regard to
clothing, and create in them the psychology of being "criminal" by means of their clothing etc. etc... They were not able to accept it and did
not accept it. Prisoners who were not dressed in uniforms for years were punished in various ways. They were not allowed out into the
exercise area or for visits. They were not given other clothing or personal belongings. Food was not issued to them until it was spoiled.
They were not allowed use of the canteen. In winter they were left to freeze for hours in snow, rain and cold winds. They were not
allowed shoes or thick cloth material. They were not allowed books. Cultural activities were prevented. Paper and writing materials were
banned. Radio and TV were not allowed. Under the pretext of carrying out searches, their belongings were plundered, even their defence
documents were taken. Hot water for bathing, washing clothes or washing dishes was not allowed. There were sanctions on seeing
families or lawyers, and on court appearances and they were thrown out of court buildings. These were the prices of not surrendering. The
junta's real aim was not to make prisoners dress in Prison Uniforms, this was simply a method. As a matter of fact the true aim was shown
by the fact that in 1985 the state was not content with those political prisoners who did accept Prison Uniforms. Immediately after
accepting Prison Uniforms. Certainly sanctions forcing prisoners to wear guilt as a label did not stop there, the administration only
wanted to use the manner of dress that time. That is, those who resisted for years and did not accept sanctions also put pressure on those
who did wear Prison Uniforms.
The resistance to Prison Uniforms in the prisons of the junta from the point of view of quality and prestige, was of historic importance.
The resistance to Prison Uniforms became a symbol from then on. The prison administration located prisoners according to whether they
were accepting or rejecting Prison Uniforms. In the press, every kind of reactionary sanction and attempt to make prisoners surrender was
covered up in the official media. In this way the same techniques aimed at making prisoners surrender were used against the social
opposition, the signals of fear and intimidation were strengthened. In the prisons from this aspect, the effects and results were never
limited to between four walls. Both surrender and resistance were a touchstone in the people's struggle for rights and freedoms. There
have been many examples in the world how, if the revolutionary vanguard of the people in the prisons surrendered, the people's opposition
also retreated, and fascism moved forward. If the resistance grew, from behind four walls this wave transmitted itself to the people and
acted as a bridge to the people's struggle for rights and freedom. Despite everything, a tradition once again appeared of resisting and
extending the war with fascism.
The tens of thousands of captives in the jails had to turn into a furnace of resistance and opposition. The prisoners were confronted with
this duty. A period of rapid and decisive steps was necessary. There was no middle way. Either a programme of resisting to the death, or the
September 2 junta would get its way. Captives from the Devrimci Sol (Revolutionary Left) and TIKB (Union of Revolutionary
Communists of Turkey) Trials decided to go on hunger strike and Death Fast to repel the attacks on their own political identity in the
country as a whole which had begun with the attempt to introduce Prison Uniforms, to strengthen the centres of resistance further and
generalise them, to take in hand the economic and political rights, and to raise yet higher the banner of political opposition. From
henceforth death would be the target. The state encountered public opinion which during the junta years had never given such a rapid
response to previous hunger strikes. So much so that it tried to respond with demagogy that the prisoners were making amnesty demands
and seeking a stop to executions...
The real demands of the resistance were:
"An end to torture and repression in the prisons,
An end to implementation of Prison Uniforms,
The return of social and living rights,
To organise the executive system in favour of prisoners,
To abolish `Military Prisoner' status and recognise the rights of political prisoners"
The state continued to employ demagogy and lies in response to the prisoners' demands, according to which the prisoners' action was
"because the organisation put pressure on them to join the action", "they are eating food in secret", "those who are dying are convicts subject
to the death penalty anyway". There was no change in what was said in the Death Fast of 1996 compared to 12 years before. In a short period
the resistance did not immediately find support in all prisons of the country. In many prisons support hunger strikes began. Resistance
rises in the dungeons, prisoners' families rapidly become politicised and organised, and on May 19 in Taksim Square, Istanbul, they laid
wreaths and conducted petitions in an effort to raise their voice. The first martyr of the resistance shook the state. When the resistance gave
three martyrs the state authorities made a last attempt to break the resistance with an attack. But all attacks like this were fruitless when
carried out against those determined to look death in the face.
Four revolutionary prisoners, Abdullah Meral, Fatih Oktulmus, Haydar Basbag and Hasan Telci, were martyred. It was a torch of
resistance which will never be extinguished. It was a tradition. It carried a message that oppressed people would resist junta terror and
proved that even in these conditions the junta could be resisted and forced back. Victory was won with the martyrs. Friend and enemy were
shown that a revolutionary, a captive could maintain his beliefs and cause while, if necessary, heading towards death...
The revolutionary prisoners in the resistance expressed it like this:
"Our resistance won partial rights and temporarily ended physical torture, very clearly showing friend and enemy in the prisons,
revolutionary and progressive prisoners on remand and convicts, our labouring people and world democratic public opinion why we are
waging our struggle and that we know it can lead to death. With our resistance, we protected our human values and raised high the torch of
our struggle as political prisoners without fascism being to get to us and destroy us... Our action to protect our political identity was an
important step in our struggle to protect our political identity, and to strike a blow at the demagogy of the September 12 fascist junta
about " Turkey's transition to democracy". Our resistance pushed back the Prison Uniforms measure which the civilian junta was using to
try and give legitimacy to itself and clarified before public opinion that the measure was illegitimate and damaging to human honour and
the personality. ... The Death Fast was a key point in frustrating the prison plans of fascism aimed at "rehabilitation" (remoulding people),
which it still continues up to the present.
Depersonalisation Is Now To Be A Matter Of The Laws
After September 12, the prisons policy of the junta can be recognised as one of the "carrot and stick". Within this period, the necessary
policies were applied, force if need be, and the junta found repression, violence and torture to be valid in any period. From the start, if any
method was found to be insufficient by itself, others would be put on the agenda in its support. Especially since 1983, to achieve their aims
a more obvious programme has brought onto the agenda, one more detailed and careful. The laws on operations, the use of doctors of
psychology, announcements aimed at blackening revolutionary leaders, using the press as a demagogic tool for carrying out campaigns of
ideological attacks, every method, every tool was brought onto the agenda to break the ties between the masses and their leaders, to make
the masses look down on revolutionaries and make them think the authorities' own measures are just.
While trying to implement these policies rather systematically, the necessary laws were introduced. On the one hand, those prisoners who
resisted and defended their political viewpoints under all conditions were subjected to the most severe torture, while those who show
themselves weak in the face of pressure and torture are induced to return to the system and presented with every possibility so they can be
used against the revolutionaries. Torture and attractive possibilities were put on offer at the same time. In particular, those seeking
individual liberation were set free under the most alluring conditions. Those who sold their personality and their honour were set free.
With the adoption of the "law on repentance" No 3216 of June 19, 1985, collaboration, turning informer and actions connected to them
were continually encouraged. In short, work was done to make weak people leave their organizations - they were told "Repent" ,
"Collaborate", "Take the state's side", "Escape". In this way the policy of pressure and torture would meet its successful culmination. Such
successes would actually strike a socio-political blow at the liberation struggle by organisations, these fickle people were used to make
revolutionary organizations look bad, to blacken them and harm people's confidence in the revolutionaries. The demagogy of theories
about "repentance", "going down a mistaken route", "deception", "historic duty", "debt to humanity" and so on were used to legitimise this.
However they were afflicted with the spectre of fatigue. Out of thousands 100 or 200 benefited from the law, exposing what they were
before the eyes of the people. The law only remained as a kind of legislative monster, a means the state had used to defend itself.
Immediate Instructions Implemented Late
The August 1 Directive On Prisons Not Implemented Because Of The October/November Resistance
In July 1988 the Justice Minister Mehmet Topac published a directive, to come into force from the August 1 date of signing.
With the directive:
The Prison Uniforms were once again brought on the agenda,
Visits and consultation with lawyers to be restricted.
Hours in the prison exercise areas to be reduced.
Limitations on correspondence
Bans on receiving food from outside, and on the use of tubes, hearths and heaters inside the prisons.
Bans on growing hair, beards and moustaches.
Radios, tape cassettes, typewriters, music and pictures banned.
Restrictions on receiving property during visits.
Major restrictions placed on receiving magazines and books.
All these were to be worked into the system in a way to make captives accept their guilt and impose a new penal discipline. Not to wear the
Prison Uniforms, to engage in hunger strikes, to shout slogans, sing marches, engage in silent resistance... everything would be subject to
disciplinary punishment. The aim was an open one. The oligarchy was not going to abandon its programme of making the prisoners
surrender. This programme has been conducted at various periods with different methods, but the aim of making resistance retreat has
never been abandoned. From the junta to its civilian extension the ANAP (Motherland Party) government, and now the democracy game,
it has been necessary to create an environment of legitimacy for attacks. And the August 1 Directive was a legal cover.
The authorities in Gaziantep and Eskisehir started off this directive with attacks, which proceeded to become generalised. The same day
prisoners started hunger strikes. Attacks and resistance became widespread. In 12 prisons about 2,000 captives began to wage the struggle
against the August 1 Directive with their own bodies through hunger. For the first time the relatives of captives joined them in resistance.
From the start the youth, various DKO (Revolutionary Mass Organisations) and unions also took their places in this struggle. The
resistance to the August 1 Directive grew to the same scale as the original one in the 1984 Death Fast. The Death Fast was an appeal for
struggle. This appeal made to the people for resistance and struggle had been made since 1986. With their deaths in 1984, the captives
proved their courage and proved that they would not surrender. Now the courage of the resistance, both inside and outside as shown in the
form of mass actions, continued to draw a line of resistance. The acts of resistance of October and November 1988 which immediately
spread to all prisons and secured broad support from the people, once again made the enemy take a step back. The directive was officially
cancelled and the actions connected with it were not implemented. The October/November 1988 acts of resistance show us, even today,
what it is necessary to do in the face of steadily increasing fascist attacks.
After every setback the authorities prepared new attacks, but the attacks aimed at implementing the directive did not stop, along with the
resistance to it, from this period onward. The circular provided all kinds of attacks with a pretext. The authorities lacked the ability to
mount an attack on all prisons, only individual attacks took shape. Pretexts to apply pressure connected with the circular sometimes were
to do with a tunnel, sometimes another reason was given...There was a great deal of searching for excuses connected with attacks. And
sometime they were about taking rights away...
"Postponement" Or "Law On Conditional Release"
A Screen For The Anti-Terror Law
Eleven years after the September 12 junta, thousands of revolutionaries were still paying the price of the laws established by September 12
in the prisons. During this period, many campaigns were organised to alert domestic and foreign public opinion to the legislation of
fascism and practices in the prisons. The oligarchy's policies in the prisons were shown to be bankrupt, and the prisons were the place
where the system's statements about democratisation were shown to be lies. They were forced to do some things. The ANAP government
which came into power in 1991 brought three basic themes onto the agenda in order to isolate the prisoners and wash its hands of repression
in the prisons; it abolished paragraphs 141-142 and 163, partly legalised the Kurdish language and reduced the penalties of political
prisoners. The abolition of 141-142 and the postponement of the Anti-Terror Law caused the reaction from the people to decline. The
bogus democratisation package was put forward in the framework of discussions before public opinion, and because no opposition arose to
the Anti-Terror Law, it came into force together with the package.
Simultaneously with the Anti-Terror Law, various things began to be implemented with regard to the prisoners. On the one hand this
comprised legal decisions. As opposed to the normal 2/5 executive system, sentence passed under the anti-terror law, that is, against
revolutionaries, came under the ¾ executive system. This comprised using the Anti-Terror Law in a different way in the prisons.
According to this, the achievements of struggles conducted over years were to be openly taken away but the real aim was also to create a
legal basis for filling the "individual cell-type prisons" with revolutionaries. This is what Paragraph 16 of the Anti-Terror Law said: "In
the case of those found guilty of crimes comprising this subject, the building of individual cells or a three-person room system is to be put
into effect."
The Ruling Classes' Prison Policies Are Derived From Imperialism
"We must hurry up the policy in the prisons of isolating relations and carrying out rehabilitation. Either changing their beliefs, or
death..." This was the decision taken in 1988 by the NATO Anti-Terror Committee. The concept behind the decision was the following:
cell-type prisons, that is, coffins and death cells... At a period in the people's opposition was growing and revolutionary actions were
spreading, various policies were created to undermine this resistance. Disappearances, massacres, repression, emptying villages, all these
would come to mind. This policy in the prisons was the "cell-type prisons". Moreover the oligarchy saw it as an effective weapon during
the period of the "democracy game" when it was trying to make the revolutionary prisoners surrender as well as the people.
To do this experts from the USA prepared projects. With the help of information derived from experiments throughout the world, the
cell-type prisons, called "Turkish-type" prisons, were put on the agenda. E-Type, L-Type, O-Type, Special Type, these were the names
given to the prisons which were the arena in which great efforts would be made to make prisoners surrender. From security units to hours
in the exercise area, visits, meetings with lawyers, everything was worked out in detail in accordance with this. Since 1983 the Special
Type prisons had been on the agenda. As a result of the findings of experiments, these prisons were built in remote areas far from city
centres. Those captives seen as "badly behaved" or who came up against severe punishment could be sent there. Those staying here in the
E-type prisons and playing an active role in resistance could be traced. >From this period onward the authorities have put heavy
psychological attacks on the agenda in the prisons. They wanted to hem in the lives of the prisoners by means of punishing them in isolation
cells, bans on letters and visits, taking away rights, banning access to exercise areas, restricting access to newspapers and magazines and
other such bans. The psychology of sanctions and attacks was worked out and developed, whether it was Prison Uniforms, the August 1
Circular or a succession of threats and bans.
Victory Always Resulted From Revolutionary Will And Resistance Which Did Not Accept Any Status Quo Or Sanctions
In October 1990 the cell-type prison at Eskisehir, which was presented to public opinion as being of European standard, was opened, but
resistance forced its closure. Reckoning that the law on postponement would make it easier to induce a reduced number of prisoners to
surrender, and on the alert for opportunities to attack, the authorities used two Devrimci Sol prisoners in Ankara Central Closed Prison as
a pretext to re-open Eskisehir. The first transports of captives from Ankara Central Closed Prison were carried out. By the start of
November 1991 the number of prisoners sent to the Eskisehir cells had reached 206. Hunger strikes on account of the transports and attacks
began to proliferate. The resistance did not remain restricted to the prisons but also spread to receive support on all sides from the people.
And again, in the face of these attacks, the resistance and the resisters won. On November 24 Eskisehir was again closed and the transports
were withdrawn. The ruling class could not get a grip on the resistance. It keeps having to take a step back against powerful resistance. But
this is not a decisive setback and could not be. The class war in the country could not be periodically interrupted. At the first opportunity
the rulers have resumed attacks.
The Prison Programme Of The Oligarchy "To Proceed From A To B" Is Again Rendered Bankrupt
On July 27 1993 a circular was published. The circular provided for sending captives to prisons in the provinces because "Sagmalcilar
Prison is more than filled to capacity with prisoners". This time the oligarchy also tried to bring policies of isolation and exile onto the
agenda. The circular also needed the creation of a legal basis. Between August 9 and August 24 circulars were issued for this purpose.
However, because this was not able to break through the resistance another circular was issued on September 9 and on September 17 the
Resolution on a Legal Code was issued. The resolution contained new arrangements open to every kind of interpretation and hence opened
the door to repression and bans in the prisons. This resolution was again the first step in the state's objectives in the prisons. It was the
first indicator that attacks were on the agenda... The attacks also did not break through. The captives started a General Resistance. In every
prison targeted in the attacks they lay down and submitted their bodies to hunger. The state was forced to take a step back in the face of the
strong resistance and hunger strikes scored their first great victory. The September 9 Circular was abrogated. However the resistance in all
prisons also continued to be dissipated through local problems.
In January 1995, the first item on the National Security Council meeting's agenda was: "STEPS ARE TO BE TAKEN WITH REGARD TO
THE PRISON SITUATION"
After the meeting resolutions were taken which were summarised as saying "We will stop the prisons being a training camp for prisoners".
This resolution openly expressed the conception of making resisting prisoners surrender. "If you do not surrender I will kill you." This
was to say that the ruling classes, in a deep crisis and gripped by instability, would carry out more repression, terror, massacres and fascist
attacks for the sake of their own peace of mind and stability. The prisoners made the monopolies uneasy because of prisoners bore a
dynamism of resistance and victory derived from the people's moral values. This was an important reason for the contra-guerrilla attacks
on the prisoners, the revolutionary struggle in the prisons was seen as being a "bad example" to the people. The authorities again wanted to
teach a lesson in the prisons and brought in methods aimed at physically and psychologically eroding prisoners over the short, medium and
long term as part of their plans to make them surrender and through attacks to do the same to the people and the revolutionary struggle. To
do this the plans to attack were personally prepared by the National Security Council and the contra-guerrillas began to carry them out.
From 1995 policies gave clues that attacks would be spreading out gradually. At the end of it was seen that there was an almost continuous
escalation in the attacks. The policies of defeating the prisoners, rendering them ineffective and turning them into collaborators were
expressed by physically attacking dozens of prisoners, arresting their relatives in front of the prisons and subjecting them to torture, thus
seeking to isolate the prisoners, and the bourgeois media was used as tool for carrying out a campaign of wide-ranging psychological
warfare.
With The Attacks The Resistance Of The Prisoners Also Increases In Various Ways. The Resistance Develops And Takes On New Forms.
The state was not able to find able to find a solution to the people's problems and deepening crisis, so it directed the application of yet
more terror and massacres against the growing opposition and the revolutionaries. The reality of this country is war. And the prisons are
not separate from this reality. In the prisons of today the revolutionary prisoners are the key question and the state's are directed against
the political identity and honour of the prisoners. With the aim of making them surrender to these attacks, the price they have to pay is to
be savagely killed or left maimed... The political powers that be do not even try to hide their aims on this point, these are openly spelt out
in pamphlets...
The Ministry of Justice prepared a "Handbook on Management of Prisons", which said, "The terrorists must not communicate with one
another. Because when the prisoner does not communicate he or she will die like a fish out of water. When the sources which nurture the
terrorist spirit and idea are cut off and dried up, his or her revolutionary side, that is, the destructive side, will be eradicated. What is
needed for this is that communication with the terrorist environments, the world, the illegal organisations
on a world scale must be taken away and curtailed... In connection with convicts and detainees, prison officials must find methods of
encountering them one at a time and in such a situation, away from the effects of mass psychology, must try to take advantage of the
situation to make the criminals recognise their own cowardice, timidity, powerlessness and weakness, must learn their problems and later
use methods of persuasion and suggestion to make the criminals zealous in purifying themselves of guilt..."
In the years of the September 12 junta, the leaven was the identity of the revolutionary captives, their resistance, the revolutionary mode
of life, the unbroken transmission of the revolutionary struggle from then to the present, and this revolutionary inheritance has also
grown. The ruling classes' policy of implementing the surrender of the prisoners and wishing to turn them into a tool for use against the
people was frustrated by the prisoners themselves. The fight created, the tradition of not surrendering, the consciousness in the prisons of
their own power also found an echo on the outside, and the prisons showed the way to struggle. Every victory won raised the people's
confidence in the prisoners, the revolutionaries, that bit higher. For that reason, it was also the prisoners who were the target of the
massacre policy. That is how it was.
On September 21, 1995, tension which arose in Buca Prison following the escape of four DHKP-C captives turned into a massacre.
Various actions had been carried out since September 12 on account of rights that had been taken away, and the prisoners' refusal to let
themselves be counted by the guards gave rise to a murderous assault. The Buca massacre, was an attack on revolutionary prisoners for not
surrendering despite all massacres, intimidation and treachery. The captives set up a barricade behind the doors of their ward and began to
defend their beliefs and put up resistance. Against the barricades the state forces openly prepared to carry out a massacre. The prisoners
were dragged out of the ward and the savagery continued in the exercise area. Even when they were soaked in blood they did not surrender.
The captives Ugur Sariaslan, Turan Kilic and Yusuf Bag were martyred but the resistance continued. So that an attack whose pretext was a
refusal to accept counting led to an action which went on until all prisoners' demands were accepted.
As soon as the Buca resistance was announced, in all prisons there were refusals to be counted, barricades were set up and various forms of
resistance were carried out. And the process evolved the General Resistance which started with a UHS (Unlimited Hunger Strike)
beginning on September 25, which called for "a reckoning for Buca, an end to attacks on political identity and the closing of the coffin
prisons". The General Resistance ended after 44 days with the winning of a complete political victory and the winning of special rights in
the prisons. The Buca massacre had shown the scope of the struggle in our country and how the prisons had found an echo. The massacre was
not a momentary event. Fascism had slaughtered captives in the dungeons before. But mass murder had not been directed. The developing
epic of resistance to the Buca massacre was the best example of the futility of the ruling classes' massacre project. Buca was a turning point
at which the revolutionary prisoners set out a line of resistance.
Not much time passed following the victory of the General Resistance before attacks started again. These attacks were made ongoing in
order to suffocate, drive back and defeat the captives. Fascism's war of wills with the captives went on in all prisons but was actually
focused on Umraniye. And Umraniye, at a price of four martyrs and dozens of wounded, was the scene of another victory. Abdulmecit
Seckin, Orhan Ozen, Riza Boybas, Gultekin Beyhan... Dozens of others were seriously wounded. Fascism's policy of using the coffin
prisons out of a desire to make the revolutionary prisoners surrender, and turning Umraniye into a base for attacks on all revolutionary
prisoners, made them into places of resistance at the cost of giving martyrs. Within a short time after the start of the resistance to the
Umraniye massacre, it had spread to all prisons. Once again there was a robust response to the massacre of prisoners. The resistance which
set up barricades, carried out occupations and took hostages, spread to all prisons and the prisons thus rose up.
Following the Umraniye massacre, one of the most important achievements of the resistance which spread through the country both inside
and outside the prisons was that united organisations were established both inside and outside the prisons. DETUDAK and CMK (Central
Coordination of Prisons) were founded as products of resistance and were to prepare even greater acts of resistance. Resistance became
more powerful and more lasting. The ruling classes' policies, carried out over years, of seeking divide and rule were thus frustrated. The
prisoners' resistance, continuing to struggle even when surrounded and fighting to the death created this unity.
Today in our country, the central organisation for all revolutionary prisoners is still the CMK, and its organised resistance still makes the
Susurluk authorities take a step back. Attracting attention first from both to friend and enemy since its foundation, the CMK is seen as the
legitimate and central organisation of prisoners. While making this positive evaluation of the CMK, unfortunately we cannot say the same
thing about resistance organisations founded outside of the prisons. Founded after the 1995 General Resistance, DETUDAP, despite all
sorts of negative phenomena, has been the central organisation for struggle outside prison by friends and relatives of prisoners. These
experiences have had valuable lessons for those who want to learn. A new process was beginning in the prisons. Taking hostages, setting up
barricades, rebelling were a new stage in the prison struggle. Moreover, enclosed within the people's resistance, too, a broad potential was
available to the movement. Fascism received a response to the Umraniye massacre from both the captives and our people as well. It was a
victory of the revolutionary prisoners. A victory of our people.
The 1996 Death Fast Victory
Fascism persisted in its policy of bringing about surrender. Its perennial fear of revolution developing caused the National Security
Council to put some paragraphs on the agenda. In accordance with a National Security Council directive, a meeting of the Council of
Ministers passed two resolutions as its main business in connection with May Day. The attacks on the prisons and the Anti-Terror Law
were to be made more severe... This meant a total and systematic attack on the people. The first sign of the attack was the founding of the
fascist ANAYOL government (coalition of the Anavatan or Motherland Party and the Dogru Yol or True Path Party) and the
appointment of the torturing, murdering contra-guerrilla chief Mehmet Agar as Justice Minister. As soon as Mehmet Agar had settled in
his chair his first statement was "First of all I will solve the prisons problem," "I will put a stop to the prisons acting as training camps."
Fascism was persisting in its policy of attempting to enforce surrender. And it was openly stated that future attacks would take place
without resort to a series of pretexts. On March 26, 1996, the captives said the following:
"The new programme of the authorities and their political preferences mean that policies of even worse terror and massacres against our
people and the revolutionaries are on the way. One of the important pillars of this policy of attacks is definitely the prisons... For this, the
authorities will take pains to prepare attacks on the revolutionary prisoners in advance, seeking to create an advantageous situation from
every point of view for them..."
The fascist Mehmet Agar took as a first step the policy of forming his own staff for the prisons. Fascist pressure came in the form of
regulations hindering visits by families and lawyers, the receiving of books, magazines and foodstuffs, court appearances and medical
treatment, as well as arresting prisoners' families and subjecting them to torture with the aim of prevent visits altogether.
The media continued aiding the attacks with the aim of aiding the fascist policies. The bourgeois media became a part of the attacks on the
prisoners to a degree we had not previously seen. "The prisons are the houses of (illegal) organisations", "terrorism is directed from the
prisons", were the kinds of demagogy and lies spread as an attempt to isolate the prisoners from the people. The unbridled attacks against
the people on May 1, 1996 were the beginning. The families of the disappeared, actions to obtain justice, were without exception the target
of attacks. With the May 6, 1996 circular the Eskisehir coffin prison was opened and the captives entered a period in which attempts were
made to make them collaborate, to surrender and deprive them of independence.
With the circular not only was Eskisehir Prison opened but at the same time the emptying and elimination of Sagmalcilar Prison above all,
as well as Buca, Umraniye and Diyarbakir was contemplated. The intention was to isolate captives and turn them into collaborators.
Sending them to distant places would make also make visits by families and lawyers difficult and cut the bonds with them. The ANAYOL
government and Mehmet Agar knew that these practices would not be accepted by the revolutionary prisoners and they were openly
preparing the way for an operation and massacres. This wave of attacks was the most serious and comprehensive of all the attacks directed
at the prisons in recent years. Mehmet Agar personally made this clear. To make the prisoners into collaborators, to make the surrender, to
take away their revolutionary identity and force them to be at the service of the system. "Discipline" and "control" would be established in
the prisons, the most varied rights would be taken away, and most important of all, the prisoners' organisations would be broken up and
scattered. Thus in the face of these serious and comprehensive attacks it was necessary to come out with a programme of resistance that was
well thought out and calculated. As the attack was not simply an attack directed against the rights of the prisoners, the resistance to be
developed to this attack would also not only be a struggle limited to rights in the prisons.
The first step in the oligarchy's campaign to defeat the people and have its own ideology accepted was the prisons. Against this a line of
struggle would be traced, the fight of the people's forces against fascism, revolution against counter-revolution, and revolution and the
people's forces would be in a situation which would be favourable to them gaining strength. This would be a battle of wills. It was also
clear that it would not be so easy to repel fascism. Certainly the revolutionaries would win the battle of wills at a price. Fascism today,
like yesterday, would try to bring revolutionary willpower to heel. The revolutionary captives had proved on numerous occasions that
would give dozens of martyrs. A tradition had been created in Death Fasts, encirclements, torture and barricades. Again fascism's attacks
on the people would be defeated by using their own bodies, forming barricades, using willpower, bravery and devotion. To win, it was
necessary beforehand to expose the content and quality of these attacks as being motivated by the desire to make the people surrender, and
in the face of fascism's policies of openly attacking, to create a reaction among all sections against fascism. This meant a long struggle. It
was an assault at the same time. With every passing day the revolutionary willpower and strength would have to be shown, with every
step fascism would have to be exposed. The Susurluk authorities wanted to wear down the captives inside and the people's opposition
outside the prisons. The attackers did not shrink from assaulting old people with clubs, dragging those arrested along the ground and
taking them to torture centres. The captives laid their own bodies down for the Death Fast. The resistance gave 12 martyrs. On the 63rd day
the TKP(ML) (Communist Party of Turkey (Marxist-Leninist)) captive Aygun Ugur, on the 65th day the DHKP-C captive Altan
Berdan Kerimgiller, on the 66th day the DHKP-C captive Ilginc Ozkeskin, on the 67th day the MLKP (Marxist-Leninist Communist
Party) captive Huseyin Demircioglu, the TKP(ML) captive Ali Ayata and the DHKP-C captive Mujdat Yanat, on the 68th day the
DHKP-C captive Ayce Idil Erkmen and the TIKB (Union of Revolutionary Communists of Turkey) captive Tahsin Yilmaz, on the 69th
day the DHKP-C captive Yemliha Kaya and the TIKB captives Hicabi Kucuk and Osman Akgun, and the TKP(ML) captive Hayati Can,
after the victory while on the way to hospital... Once again the policies of fascism were overcome at the cost of martyrs. They were a
barricade in front of the people. The world was raised to its feet.
Massacre In Diyarbakir Prison
September 24, 1996 was visiting day in Diyarbakir Prison. A group of captives came out of the dormitories for the visits. On the morning
visit a group of collaborators brought from the collaborators' dormitory, by picking a fight with the PKK captives, began to prepare the
ground for a provocation. This provocation came some hours later when 30 captives were brought out to be transported to Gaziantep
Prison. The prisoners were attacked by state forces consisting of the Special Team, political police and gendarmes when they raised
objections to being transported and refused to go. Murderers equipped with iron bars and clubs massacred 10 PKK captives.
It would appear that in every direction the developments in the massacre had been planned in advance. The oligarchy showed with the attack
that it was continuing to put its policies into effect. The Diyarbakir massacre showed a truth that should not be missed. To be exposed to
murderous attacks means the only option is resistance, not reaching an agreement. Or in other words, it will become clearer that the way to
put a stop to state massacres is not to search for an agreement. The Diyarbakir massacre is an important development showing the reality of
fascism to those sections who during the 1996 Death Fast had said "Don't die" , "Reach an agreement", "You should be looking for a
solution". Those with a line of not resisting in the prisons were brought to such a point that those who for whom any development not
appearing in a statute was described as a provocation were also not able to save themselves from the violence of fascism. Fascism is the
enemy of everything apart from itself. Whatever agreements are reached, the administration will work to bring about submission and will
continue massacres and torture until surrender is achieved. Against fascism the only path was resistance, even at the cost of one's life. In
that case it would be possible to continue a life in accordance with honour. This is the only path that is capable of forcefully opposing
fascism.
Through Circulars They Want To Run The Prisons In Accordance With Their Own Caprices
On January 10, 1997, Justice Minister Sevket Kazan sent the circular No 15.103 B03.O-C.TED.00.000 dated December 23, 1996 to the
prisons to introduce new regulations. In the circular, it was stated that "in a section of the prisons, those who were not released are
holding illegal demonstrations under the name of ceremonies for prisoners who are being released, and so it has been decided to detained
released prisoners for a period and keep them under observation." In this situation those being released were not able to bring belongings
from dormitories where they had stayed for long periods, and the authorities wanted to prevent the most natural human desire, to say
farewell to those with whom the same environment had been shared.
Once Again, The Authorities Talk Loudly About Bringing In Cell-Type Prisons
Previously the revolutionary prisoners had frustrated the oligarchy's enterprise by having the cells closed down, but from then on it
started using more subtle methods. While on the one hand the construction of cells was accelerated, on the other steps were taken to head
off a reaction from public opinion by saying how necessary they were and spreading propaganda that the cells were in the prisoners' own
interests. The health issue was their most favoured approach. Moreover, they tried to neutralise any reaction against cells by sending
prison staff directives banning the word "cell" , replacing it with euphemisms like "room type" and so on .Justice Minister Oltan
Sungurlu's work to make cells seem harmless by calling them "room type" was in vain. It was obvious that they were talking about cells
as if they were hotel rooms. In August 1997 the following were designated as pilots for cell-type prisons: Nigde, Nevsehir, Burdur,
Afyon, Amasya, Usak and Cankiri. The Justice Ministry spent an additional 3 billion lira each on creating cell-types in 32 E-type and 14
Special Type prisons. Cell-type construction was completed in these prisons:
Usak Prison: Construction of 47 cells was completed in this prison. The cells were built to hold four captives each.
Cankiri Prison: In Cankiri, 80 cells were built, 24 for one person each, the others to contain four people each. In the cells that Oltan
Sungurlu wanted to present as luxury hotel rooms: the cells are four metres long, two metres wide and 2.2 metres high. At the cell
entrance there is a rafter at a height of 1.5 metres. This rafter hangs down 50 cm from the ceiling. A person of normal height will hit his or
her head on it, so anyone walking around will have to stoop. At the entrance door there are two embrasures. One of these is 15 by 10
centimetres and is designed to look into the cells. The other is 18 by 18 centimetres, is very close to the floor and is for delivering food.
The cells were completed in order to show no respect to human honour, as is shown by the way food is to given. Again, 1.5 metres from the
entrance on the left-hand side is a wash basin, right next to it is a Western-style toilet. On the right-hand side of the entrance is a table
and chair, and next to it there is also a bed. The beds are 80 by 80 centimetres and are at a height 50 centimetres from the cell floor, being 85
by 1.60 metres. Again there is an embrasure 15 by 10 centimetres in the door. Water will accumulate inside the cell. Nowhere in the cell is
there a window that can be looked through. That is, there is no way sunlight can penetrate into the cell. Moreover, the accessories inside
the cell (washbasin, bed and so on) cannot be moved to make it easier to move around. Should you want to take a shower, it will create
dampness inside. Two cells will go out to the same exercise area at different times. The exercise area is six metres by five. The wall is
eight metres high. So leaving your cell will still give you no access to sunlight, and sporting activities are not possible. The cells are in any
case a damp environment. Moreover it is always possible to see rats. At the same time there are twelve cells. All these cells have the same
characteristics. The lighting system is outside these cells and centred in the same place. It is impossible for the people in these cells to see
one another.
The Circular From The Prosecutor Of Cankiri Prison Was A Threat
We TIYAD families and a prison delegation went to see the prosecutor of Cankiri Prison, Ibrahim Ethem, to express the prisoners' and
our own concerns about the cell-type system. But the prison prosecutor did not allay our fears. Ibrahim Ethem, stating that the cells
would be completed within a month, claimed that the politicals and many ordinary prisoners would be lodged there. Ethem, saying that
the July 14 circular would be implemented in other prisons like in Cankiri, also said, "This is a definite directive. Your children can resist.
As in the past, more blood may be spilled. But under all conditions this circular will be put into practice." On the subject of the cell-type
system, the prosecutor said in reply to the prisoners' representatives that the transfer of 80 prisoners to them would be completed in the
next few days, 24 would go to individual cells and the rest to four-person cells. The representatives said, "We are ready to resist." After
the meeting we held a press conference in front of the prison and we made an appeal to prison staff not to implement the July 14 circular.
However, the construction of cells went on without a pause. As a result of reactions by quite a few sections of public opinion against the
cells, the Justice Ministry issued an unserious circular with the aim of softening up public opinion and creating a calm environment for
putting the programme into effect. In the circular, it was stated that "homosexuals, AIDS sufferers, those with infectious diseases,
prisoners unable to get along with others, and those wishing to be transferred to the cells" would be sent there. However, in general the
construction of the cells as places to put political prisoners continued. So from today it was being more openly stated for what and for
whom the cells were being built.
Medical Treatment Of Captives Prevented
On the one hand, the politicians claimed to be spending trillions of lira on building cells because of solicitude for the health of the
prisoners, while at the same time they were abandoning quite a few prisoners to their deaths. This was the most telling indicator of the
hypocrisy and deceit of the politicians, for the pretexts for abandoning captives to death were pressure from the gendarmes, the absence of
doctors, the lack of medical equipment and a lack of money. On February 24, 1997, this reality was expressed by the chair of the TTB
Central Council, Fusun Sayek, stressing that prisoners who were healthy when they went into prison were sick when they came out
because there were not enough doctors.
Captives who were brought to hospital for treatment also had their medical examination hampered by the gendarmes. Gendarmes would
go into the doctor's surgery during the examination and put pressure on the doctor. Even though in 1989, the Justice Ministry had said in a
circular that it was not necessary for gendarmes to stay in the doctor's surgery during an examination.
A list of captives in the prisons not receiving treatment and their illnesses in 1997 alone will be sufficient to show this. After the Death
Fast in Sagmalcilar, those suffering from memory loss and having serious problems standing up on their own, and as a result of not having
medical treatment are disabled, are: Ali Ekber Akkaya (released), Ali Yalcin, Mehmet Ali Celebi, Delil Ildan (released), and Cafer
Gurbuz (released). In Ankara Central Closed Prison, Zeynep Gungormez (In Nigde Prison since the Ulucanlar massacre), in Cankiri
Prison Haydar Yildirim (at the moment in Bayrampasa Special Type Prison), Erol Ozbolat, Yozgat Prison, from which he was exiled to
Amasya on the pretext that a tunnel had been discovered, Selmani Ozcan, (at the moment in Cankiri Prison), in Bartin Prison Abdulaziz
Nakci, in Buca Prison Bernar Satar (at the moment in Antakya Prison), Murat Ozdemir (at the moment in Bursa Prison), Ali Teke (at the
moment in Aydin Prison), in Bursa Prison Mesut Uzun, Kenan Dincer (at the moment in Canakkale Prison), Ibrahim Dogan (released),
Ergun Butuner, in Sakarya Prison Serife Dogan (released) and Gulumser Tosun (at the moment in Canakkale Prison) have all not received
treatment. In Malatya Prison Veysi Celikten in on the verge of death. In Ankara Central Closed Prison Resit Kayran is ill with cancer, in