Trial Judge: It is alleged that you were a member of the PKK organisation, that you took part in the establishment, dispatchment and administration of the organisation, that you carry out the press and broadcasting activities of the organisation, and that you abducted Ali Dursun, a member of the organisation, from Diyarbakır Numune Hospital in August 1978 and used a false identity in the name of İbrahim Şenel.
MAZLUM DOĞAN: I would like an indictment. If you give me an indictment so that I can explain it clearly, it would be better if I speak according to this.
Trial Judge: Sure. (The indictment was given to the accused.)
MAZLUM DOĞAN: I would like to give my statement in two parts. First, I am really a party member as alleged. Therefore, the charges against the party and also other members of the party…
Trial Judge: – now look. After explaining that you was a party member for the first time, when you entered the party, why you entered, let us know the place for the first time. Answer accordingly.
MAZLUM DOĞAN: In order for my deposition and my personal deposition to be well understood, I will first have to give some information about the establishment of the party, its objectives and so on. In line with this information, my statement can make sense.
Now I will not focus on some things in the indictment. If I had testified before, I could feel the need to focus on the Diyarbakır group. However, I do not see the need to speak again because some friends who testified before me talked about these points.
Trial Judge -Briefly mention. Very briefly. With a few sentences.
MAZLUM DOĞAN: Yes. I will express that I agree with those points or …
Trial Judge – At which points do you agree, which do not you agree? Very shortly.
MAZLUM DOĞAN: Yes. Now, the general movement in Turkey, by the official press and publications, is introduced to the public as the Apoists. It is named as such among the public and among the various left-wing groups and bourgeois nationalist movements in Kurdistan, in Turkey. However, it is not right to introduce a political organisation under the name of a person. In fact, this is not the right name… It is a party and its name is Partiya Karkeren Kurdistan (Kurdistan Workers Party)).
Being named Apoists was mostly encouraged by the Kurdish bourgeois nationalists. This stems from the villager understanding of the people of Kurdistan, as well as the caste system. People, for example, identify CHP with Ecevit, identify AP with Demirel, etc. as. It was the same with us. With the encouragement or contribution of bourgeois nationalists and various media outlets, including the official media outlets of the state, because the name of one of the leaders and pioneers of the movement is Abdullah, the party has been promoted and spread among the public as the Apoists. In reality, it is not the Apoists but a political party, as it’s name clarifies.
This label of ‘UKOism’ is also the same. This leftist movements in Turkey, when the movements are established, have identified themselves as nationalist movements, they evaluate themselves as such, they use the words ‘nationalist’ or ‘nationalistic’. Then was spread among the people in the form of UKOism and especially with the northern fraction of the country, the movement was tried to be introduced and spread as such.
Actually, the movement (PKK) has no relation with UKO. In the official publications of the state, the term “UKOs” was used because of the arrests in Elazig, while I was outside, before being caught. Actually, I interpret this as follows; ‘the movement is not a party, it is not a political organisation or a political movement, but it is intended to be launched like a gang or an army’. For this reason, this name is used. There is no such thing, it is an ascription and an accusation.
The friends have touched on these, I repeated it a second time. In fact, there was not much need.
However, I will have to address the problem of the establishment of the Organisation. It is necessary that my deposition be understood clearly and also it is necessary for the depositions of some other prisoners.
Let me say this, I absolutely understand that the law is a superstructure institution, it is the manifestation of the sanctions of the ruling classes. If it has a sanctioning power, this may only be valid for that moment. Some legal laws or rules may apply at this moment. In other words, it may be valid only because it has sanctioning power. Historically, it is valid only if the crime prevents production forces from developing. But if these rules prevent or hinder the development of the forces of production, they have no historical validity. I will testify by taking into account the historical validity, not the current validity, of the decisions made about both me and other persons tried in this case, that is, I will give my deposition feeling I owe this responsibility to history.
In the indictment, it has been claimed that member of the Ankara Higher Education Democratic Association, Abdullah Ocalan, and other people have carried out discussions within the assembly, stating that the Kurds are exploited by the Republic of Turkey (in the declaration of the prosecutor, it says ‘the Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia region,’ we use the term ‘Central Northwest Kurdistan’) -Turkish colonisation and occupation is said to continue. That later in the Kurdish race, it was the work of the Kurdish which achieved the legibility of Turkish being a nation, leading to the establishment of a system of exploitation by Turkey and invasion by the Turkish military etc. Some things are true, but some are not.
Yes, some discussions were made and intensified about the Turkish army occupying Kurdistan; that Kurdistan is a colony, Kurdistan’s underground and above-ground fortunes are plundered, its social structure is intended to be dissolved, its language and culture is under pressure, its productive forces, which is not allowed to develop, are being blocked. But the question of race is incompatible with Marxism. For this reason, I do not think that topics such as the Kurdish race problem are brought up and I do not believe that such a thing has been done. It is not true.
Also, there is something like this; As a party member, not only me but others also, are of course aware of the Program of the Party, the Statute of the Party. I mean, I am not backward enough to be a member of this party without reading the party’s charter or program, and nobody is. There is a party charter here, in reality there is a big difference between the Party Charter I read and this.
While the investigations about the party are continuing, some things are said in the indictment especially in the part where a penalty is requested against us.
While talking about the purpose of the party, it is said:
“The goal of this movement or party is the establishment of a united Kurdistan State from the revolution struggle, independent of the Party’s system, in the area within Turkey which is accepted to have been exploited and occupied by Turkish military; targeting the scattered Kurdish social structures which have been exploited by Turk, Arab, and Persian exploiters. As defined in the Party Programme, the aim is to separate a piece of the land under the domination of the Turkish Republic state through armed struggle, from state administration. It has aimed the struggle of establishing a Kurdistan-state based on the foundations of Marxism-Leninism.”
Now, in this idea too, the right and the wrong are intertwined. The party indeed says that Kurdistan has been torn apart by Turkish, Persian and Arab colonists, that it was occupied, colonised, and has set a minimum and maximum revolution program in that direction, based on the tangible position of Kurdistan; but the party does not have an ideological determination that the social structure of the Kurdish people is completely dispersed. If the social structure of a people is already completely dispersed, they cannot be spoken of. But there is the following in the ideological determinations of the party; It is said that there is such a possibility. Within the target of the Turkish State’s “Misak-î Milli” (National Pact) is to create a single nation within the borders of Turkey, aiming the annihilation of other minority nationalities and nations, liquidating and assimilating the fractions that are in contradiction to this.
There is also the following; the indictment has described the Party as a “struggle for revolution based on Marxist-Leninist basis.” The ideological views of the party, the theory it guides, are Marxist-Leninist, this is true. In other words, its ideology is shaped on the basis of Marxist-Leninist principles. It basically maintains this policy. But it is necessary to consider the goals of the Party in two parts. This has already been stated in the Party Program. What attracts my attention is that there is no reference to the Party Program on this issue. The Party program could have been cited, it could have been referenced.
As far as I remember, there is a sentence in the Party Program; “Our supreme aim is socialism and communism,” it says. “That is, to create a classless society,” it says. This is not the minimum, nor the maximum program; it is the ultimate goal. The party’s current program is the Bourgeois Democratic Revolution program. This is the minimum program, that is, the creation of an independent, democratic country with a dictatorship formed of the people. The revolution will be a revolution developing not on a Marxist-Leninist basis, but on a national, democratic and popularist basis.
The national side of the revolution is already mentioned in the Party program, it is the one against foreign domination; The democratic aspect is the elimination of medieval residue in the country, the rejoining of peasants and their land, the elimination of the pressure on women, and the liberation of women. The revolution is rich in content, it is essentially a bourgeois democratic revolution, but the “bourgeois class, the bourgeois class in Kurdistan, is not a class that can realise such a revolution due to their historical position and the historical position of the country.” Therefore, it is said that the PKK will lead the struggle for the independence and democracy of Kurdistan, which is essentially a bourgeois democratic revolution, and of course on behalf of the proletariat.
Here is not correct to determine the revolution based on a Marxist-Leninist basis; the revolution is basically national, democratic and popular. Namely, it is based on the workers, peasants, urban tradesmen, petty-bourgeoisie, intellectuals and other patriotic groups that we refer to as people.
Politics is the concentrated expression of economy. An ideology can guide politics, or a policy can be formulated through an ideological system of ideas and a systematic of ideas: but the basis on which policy rises is not essentially an ideology, that is a superstructure institution like itself, but ideology can either guide a policy or formulate it. its narration can be manifested in the form of its being taken to the masses, its systematisation.
Since the revolution will be of a national, democratic and popular character, the form of power that this revolution will cause must necessarily be a national, democratic peoples’ dictatorship or a peoples’ state. The state cannot be a Marxist-Leninist state. Because the state becomes a national democratic state. That is why it is called “Independent, United, Democratic, Kurdistan.”
In other parts of the indictment it says a ‘Kurdish state based on a Marxist-Leninist basis’. Let me note that the PKK’s program is not a Kurdish state based on a Marxist-Leninist basis, as I have stated. There is an independent, democratic, united country, and this state will be national, democratic, it will be a form of government in which the people govern themselves. The program is formulated in this way.
In the indictment, all the propaganda activities of the party are wanted to be shown as armed propaganda. All kinds of actions, especially armed actions, are also wanted to be shown as propaganda activity. And the party is said to have made its way to armed propaganda. It has been stated:
“The Kurdistan Workers’ Party, in the face of the different views of a number of organisations engaged in separatism, is a model of self-emerging and self-organising organisation, taking into account that when the bourgeois democratic laws are restricted and that the works of the dominant classes will be completely removed during periods of oppression: the Marxist-Leninist view, which believes that the power it needs and that saves the peoples will rely primarily on trust in their own powers, and then on the support of the advanced and democratic peoples of the world, has been adopted and it is planned to organise and continue activities in line with these ideas.”
In addition, it has been argued that, this “in addition” is important:
“It has been argued that continuing acts of violence with propaganda and acts of violence should be accepted as a part of propaganda.”
Here, the right and the wrong, are both side by side and inside out. In the first part i have read, it determines that taking advantage of the laws of the state, it can carry out some legal activities, but essentially it should be organised and its activity should be carried out secretly. This is correct. It is one of the main distinctions between the Party, the PKK, and other bourgeois nationalist organisations in Kurdistan, it is a correct determination.
However, there is a determination that violent acts are carried out alongside propaganda and essentially violent acts are always considered as part of propaganda to achieve the purpose of the Kurdistan Workers Party. And this is attempted to be proven under the heading of the “Program Statute.” And to prove this, a document confiscated from Yıldırım and I is shown as a confirmation. I want to talk a little bit about this.
Now, it is necessary to distinguish between two things. The law or regulation is the rules set out in order to maintain order in the present concrete situation. What does the Republic of Turkey do? It establishes certain rules to protect and maintain order, and supports them with sanctions, army, police. The statute determines determines the operability of rules by any political organisation, any institution, any body. The program is different from these.
The program does not set the current operability rules. The program reveals and determines what needs to be done in the future depending on today’s concrete conditions. Let’s say that the PKK program is detecting what situation Kurdistan is in today. Based on this finding, it puts forward what it wants to do in the future. Therefore, there is no program statute. There can be an organisation’s statute, there can be an organisation’s program; but the program itself does not have a statute. This is not possible.
The first point is even technically incorrect. The second, based on the armed-propaganda experiments of other countries, I can say that armed propaganda is not the propaganda made of an action, or work which has been carried out. For example, let’s say that under the leadership of our Party, an invasion, a strike, a rally, a meeting or a demonstration was held here in Batman, Ceylanpınar or Kars. Making propaganda about this in Elazig or Ankara, is not armed propaganda. Or, similarly, it is not armed propaganda that an action carried out against an agent, a reactionary or a gang, is spread inside or even outside the country.
Armed propaganda is the use of the gun itself for propaganda purposes. The party is attempted to be depicted as a gang in the indictment, or to be shown as an army. In fact, it is a political organisation. Political organisations are tools of power struggles, they are tools of power. The PKK also has a target for power, and works in this direction -when it comes to struggle,
you and some sympathiser are compressing some things. Especially in relation to the form of struggle or armed struggle, some things are being reduced: it is not like this. There are many parties, each of which is in the struggle to come to power, to come to the government, but there are different ways and means to come to government and to come to power. The party is not a fan of bloodshed. We are not vampires, we are human. But if the power struggle necessarily requires the use of force, as an organisation that has the task of being in power, this cannot be avoided, it has to see from this point.
So let’s not kill people, let’s love people. Saying that we respect people, we are humanists but this does not prevent fighting when necessary. In many countries, whether they are socialists or capitalists today, they all have police, an army, a state, and why are these armies formed? It was created to fight when needed. In other words, it can be used as a tool in political struggle, but political struggle cannot be reduced only to armed force. There are several ways. The strike, the demonstration, the rally, the organisation, the propaganda. Agitation is also the means of political organisation.
Trial Judge: What is the procedure adopted by the PKK?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: PKK. It is not in understanding such as using this or that particular form or not. The PKK has set tasks in front of it, it has set goals.
Trial Judge – What is the target of these tasks?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: Excuse me, I will tell.
Appropriate tools are required to reach goals. For example, if I put the task of moving from Europe to America in front of me, I would probably not be able to use a horse or any other vehicle which I know: I have to use a ship, or a plane. In other words, a suitable vehicle is required. Our party has put supreme duties in front of it. These are the task of achieving the country’s independence and democracy as a minimum, with the task of creating a classless society, that is, eliminating classes, and ending all forms of exploitation and persecution.
Of course, the tools it will use will be the appropriate tools according to those goals and it is not possible to use tools that conflict with these targets. So it cannot adopt Machiavellian tools which contradict the lofty goals of the party. Because high goals, big goals require tools suitable for them, ugly tools cannot be used to achieve supreme goals. I will touch on the party later in regards to some accusations. Now, these tasks are determined by the historical conditions in which every party, every organisation is involved, and the conditions of the country. That is, the party can choose appropriate tools and methods, taking into account the conditions of the country. These tools include the press, the broadcast, if it can be acquired, if it can, there is a radio, the organisation of workers and peasants.
Among these tools – of course it is important – to use armed force, to form an armed organisation. In other words, this includes creating a military organisation. In short, the party is wanted to be depicted as a gang. Such a thing is out of question. But the party’s goals include creating a front, organising an army attached to this front; this is true. I am aware of these, especially as a person who knows the ideological views of this party.
Yes, I would like to mention one more point in addition to general things. Which is I came here before. I came and went with the other group.
We count about 30 terms based on the 168th article. Since we don’t have a law book or anything, we don’t know what these terms mean, I personally don’t. It may even sound a bit weird, some terms are used very often but we cannot grasp them because we have not studied law. It is the term of “apparatus”. Is it a term used by the police, or is it a legal term, we do not know. What is understood from this apparatus, we ask each other. There are other terms like this. But as far as we know, there are about 30 other terms. These terms are used and we do not know what is desired.
But it had come up before in our reviews, we can extract what articles 168 and 125 mean. Article 168, as far as I know, is to form a gang for various purposes and for this instance, it means forming a gang for political purposes. There is also Article 125. When our first papers came, there was a law book at that time, we looked there to understand what it is:
“The act of separating the territory under the state’s domination from the region of the state, for the purpose of annexation or for establishing an independent state or for other purposes.”
That is, the act of removing some of the territory under the state’s domination from the state and the penalty for this is execution.
In my opinion. Be it article 168, or 450, or 170, or other articles- and I do not know what they mean – the article applied to us is article 125, and we thought that execution can be requested according to this article and we came here to say this. But we did not know that we have the possibility of being tried according to the 125th article. We were of the opinion that execution would be requested according to the provision about us in 125, despite not knowing what the article meant. But article 168, militarisation and the other things… these are legal excuses that are incompatible with reality. Because our case is a political case, in my opinion, and a political case is much heavier than a legal thing.
As far as I know, article 125 includes political crimes, as well as a political crime. It does not oversee an ordinary forensic crime. It ought to be so. Since I do not have much information about the law, I do not have any more information on this subject because I do not have procedural laws or legal publications.
I want to touch one more thing: it could have been possible to submit a written statement, which would have enlightened the other defendants, it would have been possible to give a statement that could reveal many facts historically, which you may also want. If the intelligence documents in question could be handed over – we have asked – if we had the opportunity to give our statements in writing, we would be able to make extensive statements if we could have law books. But by taking the indictment in my hand here, I am not in a position to immediately explain all that I know and all that I have heard about the court – I am not an electronic brain, nor a super smart person, I am a normal person. So I could only make such a general recovery about the general things about the party, but there is, there are some accusations against the party. I will still answer the claims.
It has been accused that the Party is using force and bullying the people. If by ‘people’ the workers, peasants, intellectuals, youth and other patriots are understood, this is not true. But it is true if you refer to various feudal forces, reactionaries, agents, etc. The movement, against them, has applied hard force to protect itself. But let me clarify frankly that; It is not possible that the level of political and ideological consciousness of all people who are present in the ranks of the movement, or who support it and who fight with the movement, is the same. So people do not come out of the same moulds. Some of these people may either be rude, may have used hard force, or made certain pressures on behalf of the party or on behalf of the movement, but this does not reflect the party’s line or ideology. There is no such thing.
In other words, the party considers itself as having been born from the people. And it fights according to this. The organisation of the working class is based on the working class, and although it is based on the working class as a class, it has taken itself to another level representing the masses of people. Again, the accusation that a political organisation, which is based on the masses of the working people, and who draws strength from it, is oppressive to them and bullies them would mean the movement consumes itself.
In the light of this, I want to touch some claims. Let me also clarify:
We had a female friend with us during our interrogation. She said that she has no relation with the movement. In fact, she is the wife of one of our sympathisers. I really didn’t know her until then. But during our interrogation, I was in the fortification prison, she was taken to the Prison Number 1. Later, when I came to Number 1, I met her and she told me exactly: She said, “They forced me to sign two papers” I said she shouldn’t have signed them. she told me, “They raped me, they inserted a baton into me, and I had to sign it.” I have not said this anywhere until now, I did not explain it to anyone; but this is the truth.
So, this is the truth: torture, oppression, and hard force is the state’s long formalised policy. Even when you are questioning here, when you talk about our depositions with the prosecutor or our statements with the judge, you state that “this is your deposition given without being under pressure.” In other words, you implicitly acknowledge that the police apply torture and pressure.
Some of the party’s sympathisers, some of the supporters themselves may be of poor, labourer origins, they can only act with the class origins they know of. For this reason, they may have acted unpleasantly, rudely towards some, they may have misbehaved; but these are not the policy of the party, what the ideology of the party requires, is not this. These people are punished by the party; lightly condemned or warned. I gave the state as an example for this. Now I will touch on some things about myself. There are some accusations about me, I want to answer them, I want to start over, let me tell you in the form of my life story.
In the years of 1974-75, I had gained enough points during my exams to attend Hacettepe university. I registered to Hacettepe. Previously, I was leaning to the left, I was reading various leftist publications, newspapers, magazines, books. I was sympathetic to Marxism and Leninism. When I initially came to Yuksekova, there was the ADYÖD (Ankara Democratic Higher Education Association). I went to ADYÖD a few times, to DGB (Democratic Youth Union) and TSIP (Turkish Leftist Workers’ Party) once or twice but I did not meet many people there, I did not know many people. Later, ADYÖD was closed.
By this time, I had started to go to Hacettepe Assembly. Here I would talk and discuss with the people about the state, democracy, fascism, party, organisation, struggle. Of those who talked and discussed like me, one was Şahin Dönmez and we were in the same class with Şahin Dönmez in Hacettepe, we have been together since preparation year. After 1975, probably towards the middle of the year, Şahin Dönmez started talking about the right to determine the fate of the nations.
At the time, this subject was actually being discussed elsewhere too. Especially by TKIP, there were brochures such as “worker peasant problem in TKIP case” or something. They accused others of not having ideas about the nation issue, not having knowledge of determining the fate of nations. I read it.
Actually in this sense I am quite greedy. Wherever I saw a book, magazine, newspaper and so on I wanted to read it. I could read some, I couldn’t read some. This is a separate problem; but I was listing them all. At that time, I had a sister like me, who was a student in Ankara. She was also attending school, receiving her salary. I would ask her for money. When I got money, I would buy books. I was researching, reading.
I had already studied in other provinces of Turkey. I had studied in Balıkesir and in Eskişehir before. At the time when I was a revolutionary sympathiser, I was reading all the books I found on the state and democracy, on the basis of the nation issue. I was trying to grasp the views of Marxism-Leninism on all fundamental issues. In the meantime, we were talking to Şahin about the nation issue and the right to determine the fate of nations. Şahin’s clear, precise and accurate views were not developed yet. He did not know properly; but he was speaking as far as he had learned from the right and from the left.
As far as I can tell, and as far as is obvious, he was either in contact with other people who are dealing with this issue or he was talking about this issue and having a certain discussion with them, so he frequently brought it to the agenda. When we sat together, had tea, went to the cafeteria or something, he would highlight the nation issue in our conversations constantly, and asked us to express our opinion on this matter. He would like us to do research on this subject.
Of course, at that time other people were also talking, discussing, researching, and focusing on this issue. I started to research books on the national issue and read what I found. At that time, it was Lenin’s ‘right to determine the fate of nations,’ and Marx’s ‘nation issue’ etc. Pieces as such were not yet released. We searched, and hunted, asked from others. I did not find it, but I tried to learn the opinions of various other political groups or magazines and circles on this issue. I tried to read the books I found. By 1976, I had read a few books about the nation issue, and knew some things: but of course I had none of the clear views I was going to form later. Meanwhile, occasional conversations with Şahin were continuing. There were other people besides Şahin. They were not involved in this movement. They were also wording their opinions on the nation issue, claiming and expressing ideas.
I went to DDKD (Revolutionary East Cultural Associations) when the DDKD establishment meeting was held. I did not like DDKD and DDKD members. I regarded DDKD and DDKD members as bourgeois nationalists and I was definitely against them from the very beginning. I went there. I didn’t like the conversations there. I saw myself as a Marxist and Leninist in an internationalist line, or I was trying to be. I regarded them as nationalists, so I didn’t feel very close to them, I didn’t even talk to them much. Because they didn’t have much opinion about Marxism anyway.
A friend introduced me to Haki. I could not remember well whether it was the SBF dormitory or the Law garden. Haki told me his views on a variety of issues, including his views on the nation issue. Meanwhile, he criticised DDKD harder, more fiercely than me, and criticised that they were bourgeois nationalists, their working methods, their understanding, their ideology, and I liked it. In later periods, I wanted to find this person again and talk to him; but often I could not meet him, I could not speak to him. But I was fascinated by him, and this fascination gradually went on to acting with them, to adopting their ideology. However, rather than admiration for him, the thoughts he was sharing coincided with my thoughts. I didn’t know if these people were a group, a movement or something; but I wanted to be approved by them, to be assigned by them, I was very excited about this, when I came to my hometown, many people, including my brother, became friends of that friend, of Haki and again of Haki’s friends.
Like Cemil, like Turan: I immediately explained what I learned, there is an economic, political and social unrest in the Middle East. That the Middle East is of great economic importance in the world. Today, it is necessary to have Middle East’s oil in order to have a world economy. Throughout the ages, the Middle East has always been a very important centre politically. Those who want to dominate the world wanted to have the Middle East, whether in the first era imperialist states, or in the later feudal period or even in the capitalist period. The Middle East is today the focus of the conflict between capitalism and socialism. Kurdistan is located in a very strategic place in the Middle East. It is necessary to grasp the geopolitical importance of Kurdistan well, if imperialism is to be expelled in the Middle East, if the Middle East is to be removed from the imperialist-capitalist bloc, it is absolutely necessary to make a revolution in Kurdistan, the centre of the reaction of the Middle East. This is possible with a revolution led by the proletariat, not to leave the Kurdistan revolution, the leadership of the Kurdistan revolution, to the bourgeoisie nationalists. It is necessary to create an independent proletarian party in Kurdistan, and to organise workers, peasants, shopkeepers and other patriotic classes under the leadership of the proletariat. In this regard, Kurdish intellectuals, Kurdish youth have a duty. We have a duty to do, and we had been working on this issue and I have tried to explain the views that were told to us by the friends, that were defended by friends at that time.
In fact, I think it was June 1976. A young man was killed in Suruç, I don’t remember his name. He was a student of our school in Hacettepe, some friends had come to this person’s funeral in Ankara, Hayri and Kemal were also among them, they were caught, they were taken to prison in Suruç, Diyarbakır. Although I do not have a close relationship with these friends yet, I left Karakoçan and came to visit them. I don’t know as far as I remember, I gave them 1200 lira. I was very close with them and wanted to work together. Later, if I meet a teenager, or if I knew a Human, I wanted to go their area and tell them about the views of the movement.
I do not remember for sure that it was late 1976 or early 1977, but at that time I wanted to drop out of school, to give myself to operate in line with the ideology of the movement, I wanted to devote to it. There was no such organisation or assignment at the time. However, since I had not yet grasped the opinions of these friends, they did not trust me at that time, they did not give such duties or anything. For example, if there was something to be talked about, they would be talking ideologically, and I was sitting next to them and listening. This request was accepted. I would not speak.
I asked for this myself, I didn’t want money or anything, there wasn’t any anyway. We were making money in very interesting ways, for example I was asking my family, I was imposing that I would buy a suit. 1000, 800, 900, 600 liras; I was taking it, I was giving it to Haki, I was giving it to Cemil, I was buying a book, or let’s say I have a friend I know somewhere in Ankara or in Istanbul, I was looking for his home trying to find supporters by spreading the views of the movement.
So we were even dealing with individuals. If there was a person in lets say Batman, I would go after him and try to find him to win him if possible and to know the community there. Batman was a big workers city then. Establishing a broad mass foundation in Batman is the desire and purpose of those claiming to represent the working class, and especially of the political organisations.
Sometime before me, Haki came to Batman; but he had to leave Batman because he did not speak Kurdish and he was wanted by the bourgeois nationalists in Batman with different accusations because he is Turkish, ‘he is Turkish why is he defending the Kurds’ they would say. So Haki had to leave Batman. More precisely, before leaving Batman, Haki asked if there was a friend who knew Kurdish. I heard about it, I freaked out, I will go next to Haki, let me go I pleaded; But Haki himself left Batman. I told Haki, I said let me come, he was afraid that I was too new and inexperienced, to take on a duty that could be too heavy, he was afraid I would be crushed under a responsibility, and he did not want to break my enthusiasm and excitement. “Up to you,” he said.
Towards the end of 76, I collected my bags, taking the money I took from my family, it was not much at that time, it was 500 liras, and I came to the southern provinces. I was hearing what was going to happen in Ceylanpınar, I found out that a seminar was going to be given on fascism. I jumped into the car and went to Ceylanpınar. I sat in a coffee shop, sitting next to someone at work or at TOB-DER. I was trying to sleep at peoples’ homes, if possible, by establishing individual friendships with some people. The next day I was attending the seminar and defending the views I know. I was travelling like a tourist like this. Towards 1977, I started to stay in Batman. I often went to Batman, I was staying for a week, I was staying for 3 days, I was staying for 5 days.
Trial Judge: Where were you staying, who were you staying with?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: Sometimes I was left out. Especially towards the summer months. I could not find a house to sleep in April, I could not find a meal; I was sleeping outside. But let’s say I go to TÖB-DER and sit down, or Lis-Der, if a young man said “Stay at my home tonight”, I wouldn’t miss an opportunity, I would go directly to their house. At times I went uninvited the next day. In other words, I was trying to stay and make propaganda by barely managing. Let’s say a young person and I are sitting together, we are drinking tea, smoking, I was trying to open any topic and share the views of the movement and get his approval. Some people from the Batman group are here. On this matter, they have been witnesses, and some know that I slept out, know that I was hungry, I was in a difficult situation.
In short, the hospitality of the people was in fact fundamental, we never missed such invitations by young people. Let’s say some of our clothes are dirty and we were staying in their house, they were giving us clean clothes, shirts in the morning, we were changing our shirts. This is not valid only for me, but also for other friends, that is, we did not get along with a certain fund or a money from a centre or something.
Lets say we sit somewhere in a village, a town, here and there, some people may have been our relatives, some we may know from a distance, maybe even from a hello, we would know them personally and talk, then we will go after them if we find out where they are from. We would look for them, through them we would try to work there, get to know some people, take the ideology of the movement and take their opinions. This continued until late 1978.
Trial Judge- Have you stayed in Batman?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: No, my activities continued in this style until mid-1978, until August and July.
Here, while asking some defendants about propaganda, it is asked what actions they made propaganda for. They say ‘I made propaganda of the following action’. I personally never made propaganda for action, I never did. I made the propaganda of Marxism and Leninism. I made the propaganda of the Kurdistan revolution. I talked about Marxism and the state, about Marxism’s democracy, about Marxism’s organisation, about Marxism’s nation, about Marxism’s national liberation struggle, about Marxism’s military service.
I did not make propaganda of this or that action; But have I never done propaganda for an action? I have. For example, let’s say that conflict arose after 1978 with the Suleymans, a tribal feudal gang, I went to a village and sat down. I was talking about the reactionary nature of the Suleymans, their betrayal, their pressure on the people, and explained that the movement is struggling against them, that it was true. Others like me were also talking about it.
Many of those who say we have made propaganda are asked what actions they have made propaganda about. They said we made propaganda for this and for that. In fact, like me, they have formed an opinion about the state, democracy, Kurdistan’s state, economic, social and political situation, be it right or wrong. In other words, the only form of propaganda cannot be materialised in the form of propaganda of an action. I personally talked about the situation of the country and how it could be saved, what kind of struggle needed, what kind of tools should be used, I spoke mostly to intellectuals who would be able to grasp or investigate my words. They were people who could learn.
This does not mean that I never talked to the villagers, workers, or ordinary people. I talked to them too. If there was a young man who liked me, whenever he needed me or wanted to invite me to his village, I never missed the opportunity, I went to his village.
I mean, no matter how the relationship with the masses can be, wherever this opportunity arose, I didn’t miss it, whether it was in a coffee shop, an association, a union, village, road, or street, I benefited from this. I continued the propaganda function on my own, if there were issues that I was stuck on, if I had opinions that I could not express on behalf of the movement, I asked about them when I met other people who are making the propaganda of the movement like me. I asked, ‘what should I say about this?’ I would talk about the organisation, what to defend, what opinion to express, I discussed and discussed. I put forward the struggle of reaching the information I obtained to the masses.
This kind of activity lasted until June 1978 or late May, I do not know well, in general, I made oral propaganda in various places.
My name was given in an incident in Diyarbakır, I came across this for the first time. In the case of Ali Dursun’s kidnapping, this is not true, absolutely not true. Anyway, I have never participated in such actions, I have been a courier 1-2 times at most; So I took things from one place to another. Let’s say I was in Diyarbakır for a meeting, or for a discussion, for a conversation, or even if I have met, talked to somebody somewhere, to maintain relations with him, to win him, I will go to Batman, or go to Bismil. It is a book, a newspaper, a magazine, or a poster, I would take it with me. This is the most that I have done. I did not take part in actions.
At that time, I was not in Diyarbakır anyway. I learned what was being talked about, that is the kidnapping of Ali Dursun, from the newspaper. It was even miss-written in the newspaper, it was written as follows, I remember well: “Ali Dursun was killed by his friends who kidnapped him” and “Ali Dursin was killed by his friends according to the information received from the police.” Thats how I heard of it.
In the meantime, I would like to mention another very interesting point, which is the People’s courts. These people’s courts are for Hilvan and Siverek only, not in any other region. I want to talk about these public courts. People’s courts are a democratic form of trial: the people themselves exercising their jurisdiction. This party program is among the party goals; But how can the party be established in a non-dominated area, in an area where it cannot be governed if its judgement is not applicable.
If it has liberated an area, it allows the people to judge themselves and to establish administration there; but today the state of Kurdistan is under the control of Turkey, under Turkey’s authority, Turkey’s laws and rules apply, everything is dominated by it. So, there is no such thing as peoples’ courts. If it were, I would have heard. During my period in Hilvan, I would have heard of any trial.
There are very interesting things being said about public courts. For example, what is being called the people’s courts is also allegedly used to judge party members, judging and punishing party members. However, it is said in the party statute that:
“In relation to the prosecution of Party members, the member is referred by the Party Centre Committee to the Disciplinary Committee for the prosecution of party members. The disciplinary committee serves the sentence.”
The party has competent bodies to punish its members, it states in the charter, there is also the bylaws. In the party charter, the authority to judge how the members of the party will be punished, what kind of punishment they will be given is not decided through a public court.
Trial Judge: Now, what is it that conveys you to the idea of Kurdistan? Why do you say Kurdistan? Have you researched history?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: I did.
Trial Judge: From which sources did you examine history? What is its historical development? You also say that you are a Marxist. Why did you turn to this business even though you stated that Marxism rejected racism? Isn’t there a contradiction between your own ideas?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: Now the question about how and when I leaned towards the idea of Kurdish and Kurdistan is an interesting question for me. Because this is not something that I leaned to in a day. I’m 26 years old. Considering that the period I met this movement was 1976, I was 21 years old. Until this time, I had various practices and contacts with people in life. I read, I saw, I heard, I discussed. Of course, a certain idea begins to form in me.
The question of the existence or absence of the Kurds is a question that should not be discussed for me. I do not find it necessary to even discuss. Because this is a concrete fact that is extremely clear. This is now being adopted even by official circles in Turkey. Though the term ‘ethnic groups’ is used by TRT (Turkish state-owned channel), but other press is now using the term Kurdistan in Turkey, although this never used before; this is very interesting.
What do we describe as fascists? As I recall, MHP President Türkeş talked about the Azeris and the Kurds being massacred by the Khomeini administration, regarding the developments in Iran in 1978. He said that the state should not remain unmindful of this.
I myself read every single publication I could find in Turkey about Kurdistan. I read publications related to Kurdishness. I was not satisfied with that either. I even read the pieces that I thought a single sentence, a single word was about Kurdishness.
Trial Judge: What things did you read?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: I had a book called History of Contemporary Kurdistan, it was published in Germany, I read it.
Trial Judge: Yes. “Sun”,
MAZLUM DOĞAN: “The Struggle over Kurdistan in the 19th Century” was written by someone named Halfin. It was published by Komal publications, I read it. Mehmet Emin Zeki had an article on the history of Kurdistan and the Kurds. It came out as ‘Kurds and Kurdistan’, I read it. I have read the handwritten articles written by Zınar Silopi on Pashrivan’s Kurdistan. In ‘People without Lawyers’, there was a piece called ‘Kurds’, I read it. I read the chapter about Kurds in Evliya Çelebi’s Travel Book. I read the sections about minorities in the Ottoman history, the eight-volume İsmail Hakkı Uzun Çarş.
‘The Kurd sand the Origin of the Kurds’ by Osman Nuri, I read it. And so on and so on, I mean … I read the work of Bazil Nikiti named ‘Kurds’. So I have read many pieces where I understood that I can find something about the Kurds. By the way, let me say this. I also read a work published by the General Staff. This is a work called ‘Revolts in the Republican Period’. I studied this the time when I was in Ankara, exploring the nation issue. Here he talks about riots in the history of the republic. The official publication of the state clearly reveals the state’s policy towards Kurdistan, about the Kurds and Kurdistan. It is a pity that I could not read the entire piece. I have been desiring to read it for very long. I wanted to take notes. Regarding the Dersim movement. There were policies regarding the Sheikh Said uprising, their locations, and other things about them. I was able to browse for only one night. It was also officially written there.
Anyway, if there was no such problem as the Kurds and Kurdistan, there would be no need for people to deal with the Kurdish and Kurdistan problems.
Social and societal problems are as such, that when the time comes they impose themselves. In other words, societies, nations, classes, parties and organisations cannot set goals they cannot achieve. If they set targets that they cannot achieve, they may hit their heads with stones.
Why in the 1900s, 1600s, 1700s, and even 1945s. There was no Kurdistan Workers’ Party in the 1950s and 1960s. There was no problem called ‘Apoists’. This many people are not appearing before the court for horse theft or donkey theft. They are political cases, not another crime. This is obvious. I can also give information about the history of the Kurds: but I find it absolutely unnecessary to discuss the existence and absence of the Kurds. This is obvious.
Trial Judge: Yes, very briefly.
MAZLUM DOĞAN: About the history of Kurdistan, my …
Trial Judge: Is this the publication you are reading now based on the personal opinions of the authors, or by referring to a specific source?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: Some are based on their personal opinion, some are based on a specific source. For example, I read the history of Heredot. Heredot says some things about Medler. The things he transmits at that time, as of today, he has no art of writing, no understanding, of course, he writes on the basis of his own opinion. So there is Medler. Medler is like that. Or Evliya Çelebi, there is the state buying 23 safes of gold from the state of Hasankeyfi in Kurdistan, receiving 128 safes gold from the province of Diyarbakır. It takes as much from the state of Dhaka. In other words, he writes his views based on information at that time.
Or let’s say I read pieces about Turks. It is said that they came to Kurdistan for the first time in 1040 and met the Gurs. There are ideas written by historians or writers of that time that describe their relationship with the Gurs. There is no understanding like today. They narrate based on their own manners.
Also there is the following. In other words, it does not matter whether these Kurds come from this or that race. I know they come from Northern Europe. Coming from the Scandinavian Peninsula, the Russian steppes …
Trial Judge: Which author says this. That they come from Scandinavia.
MAZLUM DOĞAN: I do not have research on this subject myself. Only Abdullah has extensive research on this subject. He explained this in his speech, in his speech I said I had written, I read. It was said there. It is also said by others. In a book of M. Emin Zeki. In the book of İhsan Nuri. Zınar Silopi also says …
Trial Judge: how many years before Christ?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: It is said to have happened in a thousand years. This is not important for me. From my point of view, Kurds may come from one race or another.
Trial Judge: So, in Turkey, how do you thing the idea of Kurdistan. Coming from Scandinavia, where does the idea of establishing Kurdistan in this region come from?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: It does not matter to me. Whether they come from Scandinavia, from Latin America, from here and there. They got involved in the people here. Here, they have come and settled as a people on the lands of Kurdistan where we live throughout history.
There are tens and hundreds of peoples in history. Many of them disappeared in history, they were erased. Some have survived to this day. We read the Akas, we read the Eti, we read the Etruscans, we read the Welsh, we read and we read. There are many tribes in Mehmet Emin Oktay’s book, even in high school books, there are constant fights among these tribes, there are conflicts. Some are able to form political organisations, then fade and disappear: but some are able to continue these political organisations, to develop and become nationalised. They are able to take the historical scene in their current states.
So this is not important. Increasingly, these peoples mix and mingle with each other: but there is something concrete in today: there is a Kurdish language. This is a culture of the people and that has this language and culture …
Trial Judge: Well, do you have any research on culture?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: More than Kurdish language and culture research …
Trial Judge: if you have no research …
MAZLUM DOĞAN: I have. I have more than zero knowledge.
Trial Judge: If you don’t have research, couldn’t it be that the existence of a language like this, comes from various other languages? A language …
MAZLUM DOĞAN: It doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter to me. If it consists of various languages …
Trial Judge: But you say that there is a Kurdish language and culture. If this language is collected from various languages and inked from other words, will we still accept this language?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: It does not matter much whether this language takes or gives words from another language. Each language takes or gives words from other languages. Even two, three, four, five nations can use the same language. Indeed, the English language is used by many nations. Many countries in Latin America speak Portuguese or Latin. Their speaking Portuguese or Latin does not prevent them from forming as a separate nation.
It is also not important whether the Kurdish takes or gives words from this or that. The important thing is its grammatical structure rather than its phonetic structure. Kurdish has a grammatical structure separate from Turkish and this is from the Aryan group. It falls into the Indo-European language group. I know this much about this.
Trial Judge: Have these established a state in history?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: Yes.
Trial Judge: Which state has it established?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: Let me say this. The Med organisation is founded in 571, according to the dates. After 500 years it is destroyed, it does not last long. It was destroyed by the Persians.
Trial Judge – Where is it established at this date? Where is the Med State established?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: We can say the area where the Kurds live today.
Trial Judge: Where is this?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: It is located in an area that can be from the West of Urmiye to the Euphrates river, even exceeding the Euphrates and reigns here. It is then destroyed by the Persians of the same lineage. However, the Kurds continued their independence during the Persian period. In other words, during the slave-era period, whether under the pressure of the Armenians, or during the invasion of the Persians or even the invasion of the Byzantines, the Kurdish people are not faced with an attack against their own existence, as a tribe.
Maybe its political and social development can be brought to a halt. But it does not face the danger of destruction. In fact the Kurds face the danger of destruction only after the Arab invasion, with the arrival of Arabs to Kurdistan through Kadisiye, mid 834 or 737, so I do not remember exactly 740 or 840 or so. It is the first time that they have faced Arabs in this period. They are not only Islamized, but also under the influence of Islamic language and culture, and Arabic language and culture. It is after this period. After 1200, that is, the 13th …
Trial judge: Before, after?
MAZLUM DOĞAN: I am talking about roughly 1,300 after Christ. In this period, as we know, there are many principalities in Anatolia. Be it from the Ottoman Beylik to the Karesi Beylik. Until Karaman principality. In the same period, there are principalities in Kurdistan. There are feudalists who constantly try to survive, protect and develop. They exist also in Arabia. They exist also in Acemistan, but because Kurdistan is a permanent invasion area, a constant contention area, a fight area, it has been economically devastated and its productive forces have not developed much.
For this reason, while ‘central feudal states’ are formed more quickly in Anatolia, Acemistan and Arabia, this cannot be established too quickly in Kurdistan. This fight between the Kurdish feudalists lasted until the 16th century. While central kingdoms emerged in Western Europe in the 16th century, that is, when nationality borders were being established, there was a development towards a nation society that had the same language and culture within the framework of that kingdom and was gradually forming around a market. It did not happen. Kurdish feudal fought among themselves. They took refuge in the Ottomans and the Safavids, whom they see as stronger, when none of them could win. They get their support, and so Kurdistan later becomes the site of a conflict between the Ottomans and Safavids. We know the hisotry after that.
Trial Judge: Take your seat.
The decision was discussed: It was unanimously resolved that all of the defendants are kept in detention, to be sent to the military prison directorate for their presence at the hearing, and therefore to the date of the hearing on Friday, 19.6.1981, at 08.00.
PRESIDENT OF THE HEARING
MEMBER JUDGE STENOGRAF
