Kordpress

The second hearing of the Lahore case of Sheikh Jangi Talabani, his brother Polad Talabani and 11 of their companions was held today in Sulaimaniyah Court in a politicized and controversial atmosphere; A meeting which, while important, raised serious questions in the field of transparency, accountability and independence of the proceedings due to the absence of the main plaintiffs of the case, namely Qabad Talabani and Bafel Talabani. The absence of these two central figures of regional governance, contrary to the expectations of public opinion and the standard criteria of public proceedings, without providing a convincing legal explanation, according to many observers, was the first sign of the balance gap between political power and judicial justice in this case.

During the meeting, the testimony of Hamresh, one of Riboar's bodyguards supporting Haji Ghali, added a shocking dimension to the nature of this case. He stated before the judge that his confession was obtained under torture. The direct question of the head of the court, "Have you been tortured?" And the witness's response, along with providing the stitch marks on the head and back as evidence, and the claim that he was "eunuched", elevated the meeting from the level of an intra-party dispute to the level of serious concern about the violation of human rights, human dignity and the legitimacy of the evidence in the case. From the point of view of criminal law and procedure, any confession under torture is not only invalid, but also requires an independent and impartial investigation into the commission of the crime of torture by officers or potential commanders; Something that has not been given a clear sign so far.

In his defense, Lahore Talabani, with harsh literature against Bafel and Qabad Talabani, accused them of "mafiaism, theft, oppression and illegal arrests" and presented these behaviors as a model and procedure rooted in the power structure, which according to him, there is no real response mechanism. These statements, regardless of the content's truth or content, show at the analytical level that the current case is beyond an individual criminal case and is a reflection of the deep divisions within the party, the competition for power and the crisis of public trust in the governing institutions in the Kurdistan region. From the point of view of political science, this type of judicial-political conflict, when accompanied by mutual accusations and the absence of an impartial arbiter, will lead to weakening the legitimacy of the entire governance system.

Representatives of some countries and international organizations present at the meeting, including the British Consul General, the Dutch Consul General, the Czech Consul and the representative of the American Embassy, ​​recorded their observations and considerations; Their presence, from the point of view of international law and diplomacy, is a sign of the sensitivity of the international community towards fair trial standards, the prohibition of torture and the use of the judicial system as a tool to eliminate or weaken political rivals.

Finally, the second session of the Lahore Talabani court is a link in a complex chain that started with Lalezar's incident and his arrest and now continues in the form of a challenging trial. The future path of this case, depending on how far the judicial system can keep itself away from political pressures, investigate torture claims independently and transparently, and guarantee the right of defense, the presence of plaintiffs, and access to the media, can either become a point for minimal restoration of trust in justice in the region, or become another example of politicization and erosion of governing institutions in the historical memory of Kurdistan society.