Nihat Omeroglu, who was recently elected to the position of Turkey’s Human Rights Defender by the country’s parliament—and who was one of the eighteen judges at the Turkish Court of Appeals panel that upheld a shameful sentence that was handed down against Hrant Dink, the founder and chief editor of Istanbul’s Agos Armenian bilingual weekly, who was gunned down in 2007 in front of his office building—, claims that he is not saying that his ruling against Dink was correct.    

Omeroglu argued that he upheld the verdict against Dink because that was what the law at the time required, T24.com website of Turkey reports. “The law changed in 2008. I’m not saying that I did what was correct by upholding Hrant Dink’s ruling, but that was what the law required at the time,” he stated.       

To note, Nihat Omeroglu’s election as Turkey’s ombudsman caused a huge reaction among the country’s progressive society. Also, Turkish main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) and pro-Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) MPs protested at the parliament while Omeroglu took his oath of office there.