Turkey fraud exposes secret Swiss account of firm tied to gov’t

August 20, 2014 By administrator

A company with close ties to the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government stashed a great deal of money gained from public contracts in a secret Swiss bank account, a Turkish daily reported on Tuesday.

The revelation of the Swiss account was uncovered when one of the partners in the company filed a complaint in court claiming that he was cheated by his partners, who emptied the bank account without informing him.

According to the story published by the independent Taraf daily, the company, identified as the Ertuğrul Grup, a construction company owned by three cousins, Kemal E., Koray E. and Gıyasi Ö, has won major contracts from both government and AK Party-run municipalities over many years.

The total sum of contracts awarded to the company was estimated to be some $500 million. The company has won major contracts from the Ankara Metropolitan Municipality. As the company’s coffers were fattened with public contracts and tenders, the number of employees it hired also grew to some 1,000 people.

At one point, the cousins decided to open a secret, shared bank account in a Swiss bank that can only be accessed with at least two of the co-partners’ signatures. At first they put $9 million into the bank account, later adding more money until the amount in the account reached $15 million.

The daily reported that a disagreement arose among the partners and that one of them, Gıyasi Ö., wanted to leave the company. The other two partners made a deal to empty the
Swiss account without informing Gıyasi and had the money gradually transferred to an account in Turkey registered to the company’s secretary, Berna H. The company’s assets were also registered in Berna’s name without the knowledge of Gıyasi.

When Gıyasi went to court to sue his partners, the secret Swiss account was made public.

There are currently 20 separate legal disputes among the partners. One of the cases concerns loans which were taken out with forged signatures. It has been determined that the company took out a large number of loans using forged signatures after the cases were brought to court by Gıyasi.

The signatures given to apply for the loans turned out to be forgeries when they were examined by legal experts assigned by the court.

The daily claimed that the revelation of the secret Swiss account amid the dispute among the partners alarmed some officials in the ruling AK Party, who rushed to broker a deal among them to prevent fallout from the scandal.

The AK Party government was shaken with massive corruption allegations back in December that implicated senior officials within the party and the government. Four ministers had to resign after investigators found that they received huge sums of cash as bribes from Iranian businessman Reza Zarrab. The Dec. 25 investigation also involved allegations that the government of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan received kickbacks from companies that were awarded huge contracts and tenders to finance pro-government media.

In June, main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu called on the prime minister to prove that he does not have any secret Swiss bank accounts. The CHP leader noted that Erdoğan allegedly has eight Swiss bank accounts.

Swiss Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter visits Tsitsernakaberd

June 4, 2014 By administrator

As part of his official visit to Armenia, OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, President of the Swiss Confederation, Swiss Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter visited today Genocide Memorial in Tsitsernakaberd, where he laid a wreath at the memorial for the Armenian Genocide victims and laid flowers at the eternal fire.

The Swiss President also planted a fir tree in the Memory Park, the press service of the Armenian President reported.

Later today, an official welcome ceremony for Didier Burkhalter will be held at the Presidential Palace. Then there will be expanded negotiations with the participation of official delegations.

ECHR Grand Chamber to hear Swiss appeal on Perincek case

June 4, 2014 By administrator

June 03, 2014 | 20:01

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights agreed to hear an appeal on case of Dogu Perincek case.
The court decided to accept appeal of the Swiss government and hold hearings into the case.

In March Switzerland appealed the 2013 decision by ECHR overturning the conviction of Dogu Perincek for denying the Armenian Genocide.

On 9 March 2007, Turkish national Doğu Perinçek was sentenced in Canton Vaud to both a financial penalty and a criminal fine under Art. 261bis CC for denying the Armenian Genocide. The Cantonal Court of Canton Vaud and the Federal Supreme Court both rejected appeals against the judgment. In its ruling of 17 December 2013, the competent chamber of the European Court of Human Rights determined that the Swiss courts’ rulings violated the appellant’s right to freedom of expression.

Text of Swiss Appeal to European Court on Armenian Genocide Disclosed

April 2, 2014 By administrator

BY HARUT SASSOUNIAN

Two weeks ago — on the last day of the three-month deadline — the Swiss government decided to file an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on the Perincek vs. Switzerland lawsuit.

Even though the text of the Swiss appeal has been kept under seal pending ECHR’s consideration, I was able to obtain a copy in French. This is the first time that the content of the Swiss appeal appears in the media.

The ECHR ruled on Dec. 17, 2013, that Swiss courts had violated the rights of Dogu Perincek, a minor Turkish party leader, who had traveled to Switzerland in 2005 with the explicit purpose of denying the Armenian Genocide. He had dared the Swiss authorities to arrest him for calling the Genocide “an international lie.”

Following his conviction for violating a Swiss law on racial discrimination, denial of genocide, and other crimes against humanity, Perincek appealed his sentence all the way to the Federal Tribunal, the highest court in Switzerland, which confirmed his guilt. He then applied to the European Court of Human Rights, accusing Switzerland of violating many of his rights, including that of free speech. Surprisingly, five of the seven ECHR judges exonerated Perincek, finding that Switzerland violated certain provisions of the European Convention.

If left unchallenged, ECHR’s ruling would have been a major setback for recognition of the Armenian Genocide, particularly before the worldwide commemoration of the Centennial of the Genocide to be held on April 24, 2015. Even more importantly, by exceeding their mandate on the alleged infringements of Perincek’s rights, the majority of the ECHR judges raised questions about the validity of the Armenian Genocide. They also drew unwarranted and superfluous distinctions between the Armenian Genocide and the Jewish Holocaust, ruling that punishing the deniers of the former is illegal, while convicting those denying the latter is proper.

Given the detrimental consequences of this unjustified ruling on the Armenian Cause, the government of Armenia, Armenian communities worldwide, and Swiss-Armenians in particular, lobbied Switzerland to make sure that it appeals ECHR’s decision in the Perincek case. In reality, the Swiss authorities should not have needed any prodding from Armenians, since they had an obligation to defend the judgments of their own courts, including the Federal Tribunal, and the integrity of their country’s legal system!

The six-page Swiss appeal, filed on March 17, 2014, asserted that ECHR’s ruling raised “serious questions regarding the interpretation and application” of the European Convention on Human Rights for the following three reasons:

– The ruling involves an issue — the Armenian Genocide — that has never been considered by ECHR. This case raises two fundamental juridical questions that the Court has not dealt with: The juridical qualification of the Genocide and the scope of freedom of expression, when a state party to the Convention, in the framework of fighting racism, criminalizes the denial of genocide.

– The ruling reduces in an undue manner “the margin of appreciation” available to Switzerland under the jurisprudence of ECHR. Perincek had repeatedly stated that he would never change his mind on the Armenian Genocide. His denialist position is “particularly offensive.” The Court’s contention that such a person would bring any value to “the debate and historical research” on this issue “is a departure from ECHR’s established and balanced jurisprudence.”

– The ruling creates “artificial distinctions.” Perincek does not simply contest the use of the term genocide, but qualifies the Armenian mass killings as an “international lie.” Furthermore, even though there has not been an international verdict in the case of the Armenian Genocide, the Turkish Court’s 1919 verdict against the masterminds of the Armenian Genocide “constituted an element of reliable evidence, acknowledging the facts or unfavorable conduct” relative to the World Court’s jurisprudence. Furthermore, even “the Nuremberg Tribunal did not mention the term genocide and did not convict the Nazi perpetrators for committing genocide, but crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.”

The Swiss appeal has provided compelling arguments and convincing evidence that five of the seven ECHR judges made serious judgmental and factual errors in delivering a ruling in favor of Perincek and against Switzerland.

A panel of five new ECHR judges will now decide whether to refer Switzerland’s appeal to the 17-judge Grand Chamber for a final determination.