Court hits ex-top soldiers hard

A Turkish court comes down hard on several high-ranking generals, sentencing them to decades in prison on charges of attempting to overthrow the government

A court in Istanbul has sentenced three retired generals were sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment in the “Balyoz” (Sledgehammer) case on Sept 21, before the sentences were reduced to 20 years.

 Air Force Cmdr. retired Gen. İbrahim Fırtına, retired 1st Army Cmdr. Gen. Çetin Doğan and retired Navy Cmdr. Adm. Özden Örnek were convicted to life on charges of “attempting to overthrow the government by force,” but the terms were later reduced to 20 years because of the “incomplete attempt at staging a coup,” the court said.

A total of 331 of the 365 suspects were sentenced to prison terms, while 34 suspects were acquitted.

Engin Alan, a retired general and a deputy from the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), was sentenced to 18 years in prison, as was retired Gen. Bilgin Balanlı, the former commander of the War Academies. Retired Col. Dursun Çiçek was sentenced to 16 years in prison while a total of 175 suspects were each sentenced to 13 years in prison.

The court decide not to release any of the 250 suspects under arrest, while also issuing arrest warrants to 69 suspects who were on trial without arrest.

‘Turkey is proud of you’

The 108th hearing in the trial, which has been underway for about 18 months, was held at Istanbul’s Silivri Prison beginning Sept. 20. During the hearing, those suspects who are currently under arrest were applauded by those in attendance in the courtroom. The attendees chanted slogans such as “Turkey is proud of you” and “We are the soldiers of Mustafa Kemal.” Those suspects who are not currently held under arrest and who had not previously made their defenses also did so, pleading innocence.

Meanwhile, arrested suspect Navy Col. Hakan Mehmet Köktürk suffered a heart attack and was transferred to GATA Haydarpaşa Hospital for treatment. Most of suspects’ lawyers did not attend the hearing, in protest of the prosecutor’s decision to present his considerations before listening to some witnesses and evaluating the evidence on file. Only nine lawyers attended the trial.

“Balyoz” is the name of an alleged Turkish secularist military coup plan, against which a case was initiated on Dec. 16, 2010, with the first court hearing held in the courthouse at Silivri Prison. According to allegations, the military planned drastic measures to foment unrest in the country in order to remove the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) from power. These measures included bombing two major mosques in Istanbul, attacking a military museum disguised as religious extremists and raising tensions with Greece by attacking a Turkish plane and blaming the incident on the country’s Aegean neighbor.

____________________________________________________________ 

Background of first coup-plot Balyoz case

The Balyoz coup plot case went on for two years and eight months and involved 365 suspects, 250 of whom were under arrest, including the former Air Force Commander retired Gen. Halil İbrahim Fırtına, former Naval Force Commander retired Admiral Özden Örnek, and former 1st Army Commander retired generals Çetin Doğan and Ergin Saygun.

The case was brought to the agenda after documents titled “Balyoz Operation Plan,” dating back to 2003, were revealed by a daily newspaper two years ago. According to the claims, the coup plot was planned by the junta leaded by 1st Army Commander of that period, Çetin Doğan. The plot was alleged to consist of action plans under the code names of Çarşaf (Sheet), Sakal (Beard), Suga and Oraj. 5000-page documents were claimed to include plans such as forcing the government to proclaim martial law by bombing the Fatih and Beyazıt mosques in Istanbul and provoking the people by downing a Turkish jet over Greece’s airspace and arresting journalists after the planned coup.

The Balyoz coup plot was represented as part of a Plan Seminar which was held between March 5 and 7, 2003. General Çetin Doğan, who organized and lead the Plan Seminar, was accused of organizing the coup plan and rehearsing it with this seminar.

On July 19, 2010; the Istanbul 10th Court for Serious Crimes accepted the indictment and filed a lawsuit against 196 soldiers. The 968-page indictment charged the defendants with “attempting to hinder the operations of executive body of the Republic of Turkey by force.” However, they demanded reducing the charges due to the “incomplete attempt” according to Article no. 61/1 of the former Turkish Penal Code, and demanded a 15 to 20 years prison sentence for each defendant.

Inconsistencies

However, the case included a number of apparent inconsistencies. For instance, it is claimed that SAT commander Capt. Ali Türkşen saved a certain document in his computer on a certain date, but it was revealed that the captain attended a T.V. program about diving at the same time. In addition, some videos that were detected were recorded at the same time he is know to have been diving. “How can I save a document while I am under the sea?” Türkşen asked. He has been under arrest for 1.5 years. It is also alleged that an appointment was made on the TCG Alanya ship in 2003. However, the ship in question was not constructed until 2005.In addition, a number of street names that are stated in the gendarmerie plans were different in 2003 and only had their names changed after that date.

Top suspect Doğan sentenced to 20 years

Çetin Doğan was the former 1st Army Commander who became general in 1999. He was appointed as the Commander of Aegean Army Command and was retired in 2004. Within the Balyoz coup plot he was mentioned as martial law commander. During his defense, Doğan said the plans regarding war colleges were possible, but he rejected the scenarios of bombing mosques and downing a Turkish jet in Greek airspace. He was alleged to have organized a plan seminary which was claimed to be a rehearsal of the planned coup.

Admiral Özden Örnek sentenced to 20 years

On March 29, 2007, the magazine Nokta published the alleged diaries of retired Admiral Özden Örnek. The diaries admitted that some generals had prepared a coup plan in 2004 but were impeded by the chief of general staff of the time, General Hilmi Özkök.

The diaries were considered among the most solid evidence related to the Ergenekon case, an investigation into a suspected gang that allegedly sought to topple the government. Örnek was was arrested in 2011 as part of the Balyoz case.

Air Force Gen. Fırtına sentenced to 20 years

Halil İbrahim Fırtına was a retired Turkish Air Force General and Commander of the Turkish Air Force. He was arrested in May 2011 along with General Çetin Doğan, the former commander of the 1st Army, and Özden Örnek, the former top commanders of the Navy. Fırtına compared himself to Italian scientist Galileo during his defense at the 102nd hearing in the case. Galileo was imprisoned in the 17th century for insisting that the earth was round, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest at his farm.

Taiwan probes punishment over navy drill near Japan

A Japanese Coast Guard ship (R) approaches a Taiwan Coast Guard ship as it escorts a Taiwanese fishing boat near the disputed East China Sea islets called Senkaku in Japan, Diaoyutai in China and Tiaoyutai in Taiwan, in this handout picture taken July 4, 2012.

Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou Wednesday ordered an investigation into the navy's decision to punish a senior officer for sailing too close to a Japanese-held island in a recent drill.

Rear Admiral Chang Feng-chiang received a demerit, was transferred and will face a court martial in the case, which has caused critics to attack the top brass for seeking to please Japan.

"The defence ministry must conduct a thorough investigation into the case and fully inform the public," Ma said, according to his spokesman Fan Chiang Tai-chi.

In the drill on July 26, Rear Admiral Chang led a force of three vessels to within 21.2 kilometres (13.2 miles) of Japan's Yonaguni, an islet some 110 kilometres east of Taiwan.

Chang claimed that he was testing a scenario linked to a hypothetical war in the Taiwan Straits, but the navy insisted he had violated the rules.

Lawmakers and local media blasted the navy's decision, saying it "made a fuss over the event" in order to make Japan happy, an allegation rejected by Taiwan's defence ministry.

The three vessels' manoeuvres prompted the Japanese military to send a surveillance plane but did not draw a protest from Tokyo, according to Taiwan's defence ministry.

Defence Minister Kao Hua-chu agreed to review the event and the punishment given to the rear admiral.

The event occurred amid mounting tension over a disputed island chain in the East China Sea, known as Senkaku in Japan, Diaoyu in China and Diaoyutai in Taiwan.

Last month, coastguard vessels from Taiwan and Japan "bumped into" each other in waters near the disputed island chain, as the Taiwanese vessel was escorting activists to the area.

Tensions between Beijing and Tokyo rose at the same time after Chinese vessels twice entered waters near the resource-rich islands.

Japan lodged two formal complaints with Beijing and summoned the Chinese ambassador in protest, and Japanese Defence Minister Satoshi Morimoto warned Tokyo could send troops to the disputed island.

Colonel’s sentence in bigamy case draws outrage

Soldiers of all ranks have expressed outrage at the light sentence imposed on the former commander of 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team, Col. James H. Johnson III.

Johnson, 48, pleaded guilty to 15 counts including bigamy, fraud and adultery and was convicted June 13 on two more counts.

The fraud counts stem from unauthorized expenditures of government funds, spent to “frolic” with his Iraqi mistress between 2008 and 2011.

A panel of five colonels in Kaiserslautern, Germany, sentenced Johnson to a reprimand and a fine of $300,000 — or five years in jail if he doesn’t pay the fine.

“Military justice is a joke,” retired Staff Sgt. John Mackes wrote to Army Times. “Different standards for enlisted and officers. If this was an enlisted soldier, you know he would have been hit with serious jail time. One standard for enlisted and another for officers. It makes me sick.”

Capt. Joseph R. Vigueras added, “In one swift decision, the board made a mockery of justice and allowed a bigamist and a thief to retire with honor.”

The Army charged that Johnson racked up more than $100,000 in authorized charges including unauthorized travel, cellphone bills and hotel and meals charges for him and his mistress while off duty.

The bigamy count was the result of Johnson’s November 2011 marriage to his Iraqi mistress — while he was still married to Kristina Johnson, whom he married soon after he graduated from West Point in 1986.

Johnson re-married by proxy after producing a phony divorce certificate for his 1987 marriage. That first marriage is still working its way through the divorce courts.

Even Johnson’s former colleagues disapproved of the sentence imposed by the colonels.

“As a member of Col. James H. Johnson’s staff during his command of the 173rd BCT, I am appalled at the light sentenced he received,” wrote Special Forces Lt. Col. Bo Stuart. “He was convicted of 15 counts, yet received no confinement and is still an active-duty colonel. His fine did not even cover the money he defrauded from the government and the cost of the investigation and trial. This is yet another egregious example of senior officers protecting their own. If Col. Johnson were an E-6 instead of an O-6, he would be in Leavenworth. This is an embarrassment to the officer corps.”

Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, commanding general of U.S. Army Europe, issued a statement about Johnson’s sentence, acknowledging that “many soldiers and senior leaders I’ve discussed the results of this case with are surprised with the sentence, especially given the guilty plea provided by Col. Johnson on the majority of the counts.”

“But none of us know what went on in the courtroom,” Hertling wrote. “And none of us know of the discussion that went on between the panel members.

“We should know, however, that our military justice system takes all factors of evidence, proof and mitigation into account, and we must keep faith in that system doing what’s right.”

Many who have looked at the sentence — including Kristina Johnson, the victim of the adultery and bigamy — say the sentencing panel must have weighed the impact of a harsher sentence on her and the two children.

Had Johnson been reduced in rank, or stripped of his rank and dishonorably discharged, he would have lost some or all of the benefits he and his family earned during 26 years of service. That would have left the family with no retirement, no health benefits and would have cut off Johnson’s daughter’s GI Bill college support.

“It seems like the jury cared more about the Johnson family than Colonel Johnson did,” Kristina Johnson told Army Times.

While she is glad that she will not lose the benefits, she said she believes the sentence “reinforces the notion that if you’re a colonel or a general, or your father is a general, or if you went to West Point, you can do whatever you want.”

Johnson’s father, retired Lt. Gen. James H. Johnson Jr., commanded the 82nd Airborne Division during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The elder Johnson and Col. Johnson’s family were in the courtroom for the duration of the trial.

But, according to two people who were at the trial, the impact of a conviction on Johnson’s retirement was never raised in open court — by the prosecution or the defense. The prosecution asked the panel to sentence Johnson to dismissal and confinement for a period of “years, not months,” according to Stars and Stripes.

Johnson’s problems began in January 2011, when Kristina Johnson contacted Army authorities after she was denied health care — because the Army said she was divorced.

Johnson was relieved of command in March 2011. An Army investigation found he had misused Army funds to travel to see the mistress and had given her an Army cellphone — and that she racked up $40,000 in charges.

Johnson was also accused of attempting to steer an Army contract to his mistress’ father and of hiring her father, an Iraqi who spoke no Afghan languages — to be his cultural adviser when his unit was in Afghanistan.

Col. Johnson is not guaranteed his retirement as an O-6. When he applies for retirement, Army regulations require that Human Resources Command review his personnel file “to see if there is any adverse information generated since the officer’s last promotion.” If there is — and Johnson’s record will almost certainly reflect his court-martial conviction — Army Regulation AR 15-80 requires HRC to refer the officer’s case to the Army Grade Determination Review Board, which is in the Office of the Secretary of the Army.

The AGDRB will review the record and recommend that the officer be considered for “the highest grade in which the officer has served satisfactorily.”

For Johnson, who was a colonel when his crimes were committed, that could mean he could be referred for reduction to O-5.

The final decision rests with the assistant secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs.

Johnson was promoted to colonel Nov. 1, 2007, and the actions for which he was convicted date to September 2008.

“There will be some who say the sentence was unfair, or that there is a different system between officers and enlisted,” Hertling said. “But those who say that were likely not there, and those who say that probably have little knowledge of what went on in the court. What we know is this: Col. Johnson was relieved and charged with crimes by his commanders; he pled guilty to some charges, and was found guilty of others, in our military court system; and he was sentenced by that court. Soldiers can debate or be discouraged by the sentence, but we must maintain trust in the fairness of our military judicial system.”