Proposal for Possible Caste in Earthquake Cases

On February 6 and thereafter, earthquakes resulted in damage to 1,929,313 out of a total of 5,649,317 households in 11 provinces, with nearly 2 million houses being affected, according to official figures. Professor Hasan Sınar, a Criminal Law Expert and Faculty Member at Altınbaş University Law School, highlighted the difficulty of individually collecting evidence from each collapsed building.

Professor Sınar emphasized that it's not possible to reach everywhere and conduct evidence collection and preservation in all buildings. He noted that compared to the investigation processes following the 1999 Great Marmara Earthquake, where more than 17,000 citizens lost their lives, both the Ministry of Justice and the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) have shown great effort and diligence in focusing on evidence collection activities.

Describing the post-earthquake investigation process, Professor Sınar stated, "The Ministry of Justice established Earthquake Crimes Investigation Offices within the public prosecutor's offices in the affected provinces. Prosecutors assigned to these offices promptly initiated evidence searches in buildings where deaths occurred."

Within this context, Professor Sınar mentioned that expert witnesses were consulted in each case to determine the primary factors contributing to the collapse of buildings. He said, "Especially in the examination of concrete, core samples, and reinforcements, expert academics from Istanbul Technical University and expert researchers from Karadeniz Technical University played a significant role in determining the responsible parties for the collapse of the building and assessing their degrees of fault. The investigation activities conducted by public prosecutors were largely completed by the end of 2023, and indictments began to be prepared."

As of 2024, with the acceptance of indictments in numerous cases, the prosecution phase began, according to Professor Sınar. He stated, "In the prosecution phase, unlike the investigation phase, all procedures should be conducted openly in public hearings. As a result of this trial process, 'judgments' should be made against the responsible parties for each building where deaths occurred in the earthquake."

Professor Sınar mentioned that the majority of indictments were prepared under the charge of "reckless manslaughter." He explained, "The responsible parties for collapsed buildings anticipated the possibility of collapse in the event of an earthquake, given the violations of the Earthquake Regulations, but they did not intend for this consequence to occur. Therefore, they are charged with reckless manslaughter for acting with reckless negligence. This is a widespread practice, consistent with established jurisprudence, even in cases such as traffic offenses. However, it's incorrect. In such cases, the charge of 'reckless negligence' should be considered as 'possible intent' just as it is argued in traffic crimes."

According to Professor Sınar, those who constructed a building in violation of earthquake regulations or failed to fulfill their duties of prevention/detection/inspection concerning that building not only foresee the possibility of death in the event of an earthquake but also accept, risk, or at least continue to commit the act by remaining indifferent to this consequence.

Hasan Sınar argued that the principle advocated for years in traffic crimes should be prioritized and applied in earthquake cases by judicial authorities. He emphasized the need for Regional Courts of Justice and the Court of Cassation to establish a jurisprudential change by evaluating earthquake cases as having possible intent when they come before them. According to Sınar, this is the only way to satisfy public conscience in such cases.

Pointing out the prevailing culture of impunity in the penal execution system, Hasan Sınar said, "Due to the application of 'covered amnesty laws' to reduce overcrowding in prisons, it has become a tradition to release individuals after serving only a small portion of their sentences. Therefore, when someone receives a prison sentence for any crime in Türkiye, they do not consider the amount of punishment given by the court; what matters to them is 'how much time they will serve.'"

Hasan Sınar warned of a similar risk in the earthquake cases currently being heard. He said, "If the ongoing earthquake trials end with convictions for reckless negligence, even those currently being tried in custody are likely to return to society very soon." Sınar listed the necessary steps as follows:

Establish a sentencing system based on "possible intent" in earthquake crimes. Avoid enacting "covered amnesty laws" that would cover the responsible parties in earthquake cases. Maintain continuous and uncompromising public pressure to ensure that trials remain relevant over time.