Prosecutors commit a crime by investigating

The Supreme Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) has decided that prosecutors Celal Kara and Mahir Akta?, who conducted the Dec. 17 and 25, 2013, investigations, and judge Süleyman Karaçöl should be tried.

This "extraordinary" decision has, in general, three justifications: To make the decision to allow the police to wiretap the known phone conversations between Reza Zerrab and other people, to not destroy the phone records and to seize the assets of the companies mentioned in the investigations.

The HSYK has decided that the above-mentioned judge and prosecutors are to be tried on these grounds. I find this decision by the HSYK illegal and biased.

The Dec. 17 and 25, 2013, operations are "bribe" investigations that legally fall into the "textbook crime" category. The content of the phone conversations are now known to the public as well. Also, in the EU Progress Reports, serious concerns are expressed about the handling of the anti-corruption strategy. 

In this case, which prosecutor would have refrained from opening an investigation on the grounds that there was no strong suspicion of crime? But now, this judge and those prosecutors are going to be tried on charges of "abusing power." 

The second charge against the prosecutors is for not destroying the wiretapping records. However, while the file was processed by the prosecutors, these records could have been evidence in the case to be opened; for this reason, they should not have been destroyed anyway. It is indeed wrong not to delete the private parts of the phone records that do not constitute any evidence but this can be a discipline crime frequently seen in many judges and prosecutors.

For instance Deniz Feneri

Another charge against the...