► (005) ◄ Denizli Court's Unanimous Decision

Denizli Court's Unanimous Decision

In their statements the witnesses said they knew nothing about the offences the accused were being prosecuted for, especially the report drawn up by the members of the experts' committee appointed under the chairmanship of Emin Büke of Ankara Criminal Court. The members were as follows: Professor Yûsuf Ziya Yörükhan, member of the Consultative Committee of the Ankara Directorate of Religious Affairs; Necati Lügal, Director of the Oriental Institute in the Language-History Faculty of Ankara University; and Yûsuf Aykut, member of the Investigating Committe of Turkish-Islamic Literature. They stated in their report, which had been drawn up from the documents, that there was nothing explicit or any sign even in the books and writings of Said Nursi, which they had scrutinized one by one, of his exploiting religion or any sacred matters; his inciting infringements of state security; or his attempting to found an association or society.

As for the prisoners who are Said Nursi's followers, with the idea of learning the tenets of religion and truths of the Qur'an, they embraced his learned and knowledgeable works, and being well-intentioned became attached to himself, only in regard to religious belief, and to the treatises which they read. It was understood from the contents of the letters they wrote with this view in mind that they harboured no ill intentions towards the government and that they were not acting with the idea of founding an association or religious order.

Although it was stated by the present examining magistrates in the Denizli experts' committee report, that among the documents were some inferring — but this was unsubstantiated — that he and his followers nurtured ill intent towards the government, the witnesses stated that they knew nothing of the imputed acts. Hence, according to the contents and nature of the report of the experts' committee ordered by Ankara Criminal Court, it was not considered necessary to pursue the matter. It was also established that the great majority of the accused were illiterate and that the rest had devoted themselves to the worship of God and therefore lacked the attributes of people likely to breach state security. Considering this evidence and that presented by the public prosecutor, the present court finds the prosecutor's evidence inadmissible and rejects it. The unanimous decision has therefore been taken by the court for the acquittal of the accused and if