In Turkish prisons, where rights violations grow more severe each day, the systematic practice of suspending releases by the Administrative and Observation Boards continues to be one of the biggest obstacles to the freedom of political prisoners. The latest example comes from Bakırköy Women’s Closed Prison.
Dilek Öz, a ill prisoner who has been behind bars for 30 years, along with many other political detainees, has had her right to conditional release arbitrarily postponed on the grounds of “lack of good conduct.”
Avukat Melek Nur Ramazanoğlu
Melek Nur Ramazanoğlu, a lawyer from the Istanbul branch of the Association of Lawyers for Freedom (ÖHD), who visited Dilek Öz, spoke to ANF about the case. She explained that Öz, sentenced to life imprisonment in the 1990s and imprisoned ever since, has had her conditional release postponed for a year on the grounds of a “cell punishment.”
Ramazanoğlu noted that Öz’s first conditional release date was originally January 2025, but this was extended by one year with the justification of a “disciplinary punishment.” She emphasized that the term, which was supposed to end on August 19, has now been postponed again by the Administrative and Observation Board until November 28, this time on the pretext of “lack of good conduct.”
A personal note used to punish an entire ward
Melek Nur Ramazanoğlu pointed out that Dilek Öz’s right to conditional release had been unlawfully and arbitrarily denied twice in succession. She said, “Dilek Öz’s first conditional release date in January 2025 was postponed on the grounds of a cell punishment. When we investigated the reason for this punishment, we saw that it was given in a completely arbitrary way. The cell punishment was based on a note found during a search of the ward. Although one of the prisoners stated that the note belonged to them, the prison administration ignored this and, citing the fact that the note was found in a common area, imposed an 11-day cell punishment on the entire ward, including Dilek Öz. It is impossible to find good faith here. The prison administration is well aware that such cell punishments can be used as grounds to delay the release of prisoners whose sentences have already been served. Indeed, because of this maliciously imposed disciplinary punishment, Dilek Öz has not been released for eight months, from January until August.”
Second postponement justified by claim of not being in a ‘neutral ward’
Melek Nur Ramazanoğlu stated that Dilek Öz’s release, scheduled for August 19, was also blocked by the Administrative and Observation Board on the grounds of “lack of good conduct.” She explained: “As the basis for this so-called ‘lack of good conduct,’ they cited the excuse that Dilek Öz was not in a neutral ward but in a political ward. On this basis, they argued that no conviction could be formed that she felt remorse for the alleged offense. This is exactly the same fixed, copy-and-paste decision text that we see repeatedly in the cases of other prisoners as well.”
The board in Bakırköy Prison runs a process unrelated to the law
Melek Nur Ramazanoğlu drew attention to the fact that the Administrative and Observation Board in Bakırköy Women’s Prison operates through a process entirely unrelated to what is defined by law in terms of its nature, structure, and decision-making. She noted that although the law requires the board to be chaired by a public prosecutor, the prisoners there have never even seen a prosecutor.
Ramazanoğlu described how the board functions in Bakırköy Prison and said: “Dilek Öz and other prisoners are first taken to a psychologist and an education unit. Afterwards, they meet with the chief warden, the officer referred to as the supervisor of the guards, and the deputy director. Then, following the deputy director, a three-person team from the prison administration sees the prisoners once again. Of course, this entire procedure is purely symbolic. Does the psychologist ask a reasonable question regarding good conduct? No. Does the psychologist base the evaluation on a principle of psychology or compare the answers with any scientific data? No. The psychologist merely sends a superficial evaluation report to the team consisting of the chief warden and the deputy director. And at the end of the day, Dilek Öz, who has already spent thirty years in prison, once again has her release blocked by a decision that lacks any valid legal basis or justification.”
Despite the process, release rights are blocked by unqualified boards
Ramazanoğlu said, “This board is composed of prison staff who have no knowledge of rights. Let alone a qualified jurist, there is not a single lawyer in the board. This is a very serious problem. Although a prosecutor exists on paper, prisoners never see them; the prosecutor only signs the decision as a formality. Dilek Öz, who was already victimized in the 1990s by the State Security Courts (DGM), which were neither impartial nor independent, is today being punished once again by the Administrative and Observation Board, which sets itself up as if it were a High Criminal Court. Moreover, Dilek Öz is a sick prisoner. She suffers from heart disease, kidney problems, and chronic asthma. Despite years of applications by her family and civil society organizations for her release on the grounds of her medical condition, she has not been freed. Taking into account both her illnesses and the fact that she has already completed her sentence, she should have been released, yet once again she is faced with the same unlawful decision.”
He also said, “Just before the holiday, a new enforcement regulation was passed. This was also a period when, in connection with the Peace and Democratic Society process, steps were expected from the state. At the very least, we expected a regulation regarding sick prisoners. Such a measure would have been a sign of sincerity. But unfortunately, even with the 10th Judicial Package, no sufficient regulation was made on this issue. A process is being conducted, but the most crucial matter is the prisons. While people have already lost thirty years of their lives on baseless grounds, their release continues to be blocked by unqualified boards despite this process.”
Release postponed for a university graduate for not attending a literacy course
Melek Nur Ramazanoğlu stressed that the unlawful practice of suspending releases is not limited to Dilek Öz but has become a form of punishment applied to nearly all political prisoners. Ramazanoğlu said, “Before Dilek Öz, the release of Delal Tekdemir was also unlawfully postponed. She too is in Bakırköy Prison. Her release was delayed on the grounds that she had not attended a literacy course. Yet Delal Tekdemir entered prison as a university graduate. How can we place any trust in the decisions of the Administrative and Observation Board when it delays the release of a university graduate on the grounds of not attending a literacy course?
As I said, this is a board with no legal qualification whatsoever. They did not even look into who Delal Tekdemir is. The law lists not attending a literacy course as an indicator of ‘lack of good conduct,’ but they did not even consider whether this applied to her. Another prisoner’s release was suspended on the grounds that they had not borrowed a book from a public library.”
Ramazanoğlu said, “Yet the political wards are already made up of people who are active readers and highly engaged on an intellectual level. The prison administration and guards know this very well. But the same guards, the same chief warden, the same board, conclude that these prisoners lack good conduct simply because they have not borrowed a book from a public library outside the prison. The board knows full well there is no legal basis to suspend releases, yet they deliberately invent excuses and, through entirely unlawful decisions, prevent prisoners from exercising their right to freedom.”
Three more political prisoners’ releases suspended in Bakırköy
Melek Nur Ramazanoğlu noted that during her visit to Dilek Öz on August 15, she learned that the sentences of political prisoners Süreyya Bulut, Eylem Özer, and Silva Raşit from Rojava had also been suspended on similarly unlawful grounds. She added that previously, the conditional release rights of prisoners Delal Tekdemir, Türkan Karadaşlı, Mekke Sönük, and Dilan Kutlu had likewise been arbitrarily blocked by the Administrative and Observation Board.
Decisions of the Administrative and Observation Boards violate the ECHR
Melek Nur Ramazanoğlu stated that they will file objections on behalf of Dilek Öz and other political prisoners and that they will closely follow the process to put an end to this illegality. She emphasized that the decisions of the Administrative and Observation Boards also violate the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Ramazanoğlu said, “The Administrative and Observation Board evaluates whether a prisoner feels remorse for their crime. In fact, the very reason these boards were established, the purpose of this regulation, is precisely this. But the European Court of Human Rights says that no one can ever have absolute certainty as to whether a person feels remorse or whether they will commit another crime after being released from prison. It says, regardless of which board you set up or which expert you appoint, you cannot form such a definitive judgment. Because of this ruling, the very existence of the Administrative and Observation Boards can be questioned. Most likely, within five years, a decision will be made to abolish these boards entirely. And we will continue to fight for this.”
Source: ANF News
