In Bolu Type F Prison, the release of 32 prisoners was recently postponed by the Administrative and Observation Board on the grounds that they were “not of good conduct.” Similar postponements had taken place before in Bolu Prison, and the situation remains unchanged.
Thirty-one of the 32 prisoners have been behind bars for over thirty years. The board has postponed the release of Nedim Yılmaz eight times, and that of Deniz Öztürk, Halil Dağ, Şahap Elbasan, and Abdullah Çelik seven times each.
Meanwhile, manipulative news reports circulated in the media, suggesting that prisoner releases were taking place, especially following the annulment by the Constitutional Court of Turkey of the article concerning “committing crimes on behalf of an organization without being a member.”
Lawyer Şükrü Alpsoy, a member of the Association of Lawyers for Freedom (ÖHD), stated that such reports do not reflect the reality inside prisons. He emphasized that the article in question has already been annulled and shared details with ANF regarding the situation in Bolu and other prisons.
The offense was annulled, but the situation was distorted
Lawyer Şükrü Alpsoy stated that following the annulment of the article on “committing crimes on behalf of an organization without being a member,” the media began distorting the situation. He drew attention to debates around individuals who had already served 30 years and were released:
“The situation in prisons is being misrepresented by certain circles who oppose the current peace and democratic society process, which has reached a significant phase. Reports like ‘Dozens released in 72 hours in Diyarbakır (Amed)’ were circulated. But behind these headlines lies an article that the Constitutional Court of Turkey annulled twice. Despite the annulment, people were not actually released.
When the Constitutional Court issues an annulment, it often sets a delayed effective date. This is to prevent a legal vacuum and to give the parliament time to pass a new law. However, even at that stage, the enforcement of sentences should be suspended, because individual liberty and security take precedence. If the legislature enacts a new law later, sentences can resume accordingly. But if no new legislation is introduced, then people will have been imprisoned for nothing.
In fact, even before the annulment took effect, enforcement decisions should have been issued in accordance with the ruling. But this did not happen for everyone. For some, the courts issued decisions; for others, they did not. Eventually, the Constitutional Court’s decision took effect on 9 July 2025.
Once it came into effect, Article 314/3 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK), which criminalized acting on behalf of an organization without being a member, was legally annulled. This means that the offense in question no longer exists. When there is no longer a crime, people cannot legally be held in prison. Therefore, the releases at this stage are the natural result of the Constitution and the Penal Code, they are not a form of privilege.
Ironically, even among those who complain about the failure to implement Constitutional Court rulings, there has been backlash against these releases. While some individuals were released in accordance with the court’s decision, the same circles continue to protest the non-enforcement of other decisions. This contradiction reflects their perspective on the Kurdish issue and Kurdish freedom.
For instance, the release of Veysi Aktaş was also portrayed in this manner, but Aktaş had completed 30 years in prison. Similarly, the release of Çetin Arkaş after completing 30 years was framed politically by these circles. These individuals had already fulfilled the requirements for conditional release, were considered to be of good conduct, had no disciplinary sanctions, and were legally eligible for release.”
The same situation exists not only in Bolu, but in many prisons
Lawyer Şükrü Alpsoy stated that the powers of the Administrative and Observation Boards were expanded in violation of the Constitution of Turkey, identifying this as the source of the current problems: “Some individuals have been released, but there are still dozens, hundreds, who have not. Serious problems persist. One of the most pressing is the continued imprisonment of those who have completed 30 years in prison. But it’s not only these 30-year prisoners, there are also many who have completed their sentences and still are not being released. This is our most urgent issue.
In particular, for political prisoners who received life sentences in the 1990s and have now completed 30 years, the powers of the Administrative and Observation Boards were expanded in 2020. These powers were granted in a way that violates the Constitution of Turkey.
Previously, a prisoner who had reached the point of conditional release and had no active disciplinary penalties, or whose penalties had been lifted, would be considered ‘of good conduct’ and would be released. But driven by political and ideological motives, especially with the release dates of 30-year prisoners approaching, the authority of these boards was expanded in 2020. They were given the power to prolong imprisonment based on vague, abstract, and highly subjective criteria. As a result, many prisoners in numerous facilities are now facing this issue.
Take Bolu, for instance. It’s one of the most typical examples. Right now, the release of 32 people is being blocked in this way. Although they have completed the 30-year requirement for conditional release, they are deemed ‘not of good conduct’ and denied release. Thirty-one of these 32 prisoners have already completed 30 years.
Many of them are ill, some of them seriously ill. And this is not limited to Bolu. In Bakırköy, there are seven or eight people in the same situation. In Maltepe, at least seven prisoners face similar conditions. The same goes for Silivri, and if we speak more broadly of Marmara region prisons, the same problems exist. We also know that these issues extend beyond Marmara, to Tekirdağ and Çorlu, where similar situations are being reported.”
Pressure to express remorse and abstract justifications…
Lawyer Şükrü Alpsoy emphasized that the Administrative and Observation Boards are exercising judicial authority without legal legitimacy, and that their decisions are arbitrary and lack concrete evidence: “These release blockages stem directly from the decisions of the Administrative and Observation Boards. There are several fundamental problems here. The first is that these boards are exercising judicial authority. They intervene in one of the most basic rights, personal liberty and security, by prolonging sentences and obstructing releases.
The board is not a court, and apart from the prosecutor who serves as its chair, there are no legal professionals on it. Their reasons for extending imprisonment are non-existent, highly arbitrary, subjective, speculative, and vague assessments.
Without providing any concrete justification, they simply claim, ‘We believe this person would maintain contact with the organization if released.’ According to Turkish penal law, once a person is captured, their legal connection to an organization is severed. Unless there is new and tangible evidence showing a renewed connection, you cannot claim someone remains a member of an organization. This is a direct violation of the presumption of innocence.
These individuals have already finalized their convictions, and their sentences have been served. There is no other conviction, no pending investigation or prosecution. Yet it is being alleged that they remain affiliated with the organization. That alone contradicts the principle of presumption of innocence.
It also contradicts the very authority of the state. To claim that a person held in a state prison remains organizationally active, without any investigation or prosecution, amounts to denying the state’s sovereign authority over its own institutions. In essence, the state is contradicting itself.
In addition to all this, there is pressure to express remorse. For instance, some of the prisoners have been held for 32 years and believe they were imprisoned unlawfully and denied the right to a fair trial. In many of these cases, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has issued violation rulings. Most of those rulings have never been implemented or were only superficially acknowledged.
These prisoners do not believe they committed a crime; therefore, they do not express remorse. And that is perfectly natural. For someone to express remorse, they must first believe they committed a crime. If they do not, how can they be expected to declare otherwise?
Moreover, this forced remorse contradicts Article 38 of the Constitution of Turkey, which prohibits compelling anyone to testify against themselves or their relatives. These pressures amount to degrading treatment.
Beyond that, the main justification used by the boards often includes absurd and fabricated claims, violating both logic and constitutional rights, such as ‘not reading enough books,’ ‘drinking too much water,’ or ‘consuming excessive electricity.’ Based on such absurdities, release decisions are unlawfully and arbitrarily denied.
Objections to these decisions are routinely dismissed. Without proper review, the Execution Judges copy and paste the reasoning of the board. The High Criminal Court then issues a one-sentence ruling: ‘The decision is lawful and in accordance with procedure.’ This is the process we are dealing with.
In this context, there are still 32 individuals in Bolu alone. In the Marmara region prisons, this number may be closer to 100. And when we look at prisons in Turkey, the number is likely much higher. Even the release of a single prisoner who has served 30 years is portrayed as a provocation. This reality reveals a deeper truth: what is considered a right for some is still denied to Kurds.”
Source: ANF News
