Tag: corruption

  • UK: Hundreds of police accused of sexual exploitation

    UK: Hundreds of police accused of sexual exploitation

    Stephen Mitchell (left) and Steven Walters were jailed for sex crimes
    Stephen Mitchell (left) and Steven Walters were jailed for sex crimes

    More than 300 police officers have been accused of using their position to sexually exploit people, including victims of crime, a report has said.

    Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary said abuse of authority for sexual gain was now the “most serious” form of corruption facing police in England and Wales.

    The watchdog’s figures were gathered over two years to the end of March.

    The National Police Chiefs’ Council described the problem as a “disease”.

    It acknowledged that more needed to be done to “root it out and inoculate policing for the future”.

    Chief Constable Stephen Watson, the NPCC’s lead for counter-corruption, said: “It is the most serious form of corruption and it can never be justified or condoned.”

    HMIC said its police “legitimacy” assessment was positive overall, with high satisfaction among victims at how they were treated.

    The watchdog was asked to investigate the extent of the problem earlier this year, by the then Home Secretary Theresa May.

    It found that 306 officers, 20 PCSOs and eight police staff were involved in 436 reported allegations.

    The data also showed all but one constabulary had received at least one allegation, and that almost 40% of accusations involved victims of domestic abuse.

    Other people who were allegedly exploited were thought to include arrested suspects and people with drug or alcohol problems.

    Other findings outlined in the report:

    • Fewer than half (48%) of the 436 reported allegations had been referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission
    • There was an “apparent disconnect” between the numbers of alleged cases and any subsequent staff dismissals
    • Officers did not have a “sufficiently clear understanding” of boundaries around establishing or pursuing relationships with vulnerable people
    • Some counter-corruption units did not have the ability or capacity to seek information about potential cases
    • Almost half of forces inspected were unable to audit or monitor the use of all IT systems, which limited the ability to spot any staff accessing databases to identify vulnerable victims

    HM Inspector Mike Cunningham, who led the review, said the problem of sexual exploitation could be “more serious” than the reported numbers and forces needed to become “far more proactive in rooting out” such corruption.

    Mr Cunningham told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “Make no mistake about it, the sexual exploitation of vulnerable women is corruption. It is using authority for personal gain, which is a definition of corruption.

    “It is the most serious corruption problem in the sense that it is the ultimate betrayal of trust, where the guardian becomes the abuser. That is what we are seeing in these cases, and we’re seeing too many.

    “The allegations that we collected across the country are not closed allegations, they’re not confirmed or finalised allegations but nevertheless they are allegations.”

    Police and sexual exploitation

    England and Wales (two years to March)

    436

    reported allegations of abuse of authority for sexual gain

    • 306 police officers accused
    • 28 Police Community Support Officers and police staff also accused
    • 40% of allegations involved victims of crime
    PA

    Mr Cunningham said people such as former Northumbria officer Stephen Mitchell, who is serving two life sentences for serious sexual offences including rape, were clearly predators.

    Others, he said, were opportunistic and found themselves in circumstances where they could abuse their power and authority.

    Det Supt Ray Marley, of the College of Policing, said the report “highlighted a number of unacceptable cases which have a significant impact on the victims and public confidence”.

    Home Secretary Amber Rudd described the report as “shocking”.

    “It undermines justice and public confidence and there is no place in the police for anyone guilty of this sort of abuse,” she said.

    She said she had met the College of Policing and the NPCC to discuss action needed to tackle the problem.

    “The vast majority of police officers do their jobs with integrity and I know they will share my determination to ensure the most vulnerable in our society are given the protection they deserve,” she said.

    Former Northumbria police officer Stephen Mitchell was jailed for life
    Former Northumbria police officer Stephen Mitchell was jailed for life

    Police officers jailed for sex crimes include:

    • Northumbria Police constable Stephen Mitchell was jailed for life with a minimum of seven-and-a-half years in 2011 for raping and sexually assaulting vulnerable women he met while on duty in Newcastle
    • West Midlands Police constable Steven Walters, 48, was jailed for four years in October for assaulting a female passenger in his patrol car and groping another woman in her home
    • Metropolitan Police constable James Evans was jailed for four years in August after having sex with a 15-year-old rape victim he met on the dating app Tinder
    • Met Police detective constable Clifford Earl was jailed for 12 months in 2013 after he sexually assaulted two women in their homes

    In the wake of the report, IPCC chairwoman Dame Anne Owers has written to chief constables in England and Wales urging them to ensure that all cases involving abuse of authority for sexual gain are referred to the commission.

    Two forces were graded as outstanding, 36 as good and five as requiring improvement. No forces were graded as inadequate.

  • I reveal Tayyip Erdoğan’s numbered Swiss account!

    I reveal Tayyip Erdoğan’s numbered Swiss account!

    Opinion

    Burak Bekdil

    I have a feeling that our editor in chief, David Judson, will be mad at me for not sharing this scoop with the newspaper and instead revealing it in this column.

    Well… I have gained access to a document that shows two international companies, both with multibillion-dollar Turkish contracts in their portfolios, deposited unexplained funds into a numbered Swiss account that Swiss financial authorities have verified belongs to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

    The first document, endorsed by the bank’s executive board, verifies wire transfers into the account, one coming from a multinational energy giant, and another from a weapons manufacturer – both names withheld.

    The second one verifies that the numbered account, totaling $655.76 million as of April 9, 2009, belongs to Erdoğan.

    As a matter of journalistic ethics, I shall certainly avoid revealing my sources or how I have gained access to these documents, should any prosecutor dare to take legal action against the prime minister. I must admit, though, that there is one problem: The documents in my possession are photocopies forwarded from one PC to another. So, I advise Mr. Judson not to become angry with me, or I might produce documents proving his links to the armed wing of the Ergenekon gang.

    Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ was telling the truth when he said that an asymmetrical psychological war was being waged against the military. The fact that none of us could realistically vouch for the democratic credentials of each and every single member of the Turkish Armed Forces does not change the fact that political Islamists – not too well disguised as “liberal democrats” – have long been trying to systematically fight the military establishment, through means reminiscent of spy novels. In fact, this is a war of intelligence and public relations, and the asymmetrical warriors naturally have the upper hand over their symmetrical enemies.

    As a matter of fact, one principal casualty each time there is an asymmetrical war is the judiciary, which gets dangerously politicized. The grand coalition of Islamists – i.e., the neo-Islamists, post-modern Islamists, liberals, neo-liberals and opportunists disguised as democrats – looks so precisely “guided on target” that it may even prefer to sink the entire ship that sails under the name Turkey in order to destroy the whole chamber of the helmsman.

    How undemocratic can you behave in order to bolster democracy? Can you torture and shoot the enemies of democracy? Hang them en masse in public squares, all in the name of democracy? Only recently, Erdoğan angrily addressed the main opposition leader Deniz Baykal, saying, “If you cannot prove your allegations [against my party], you are despicable!” He was right.

    But who will be the despicable one if civilian prosecutors fail to verify the authenticity of the famous “coup document” that appears to be a photocopy, with its original not existing anywhere? Are “the despicable” only those who allege some foul play by the government but cannot verify it?

    The prime minister has the habit of viewing the judiciary through an entirely ideological pair of spectacles. For example, he has claimed that Baykal’s Republican People’s Party, or CHP, has defrauded its accounts, saying, “This was verified by a ruling from the Constitutional Court.” If – and naturally so – an irreversible verdict from the supreme court should suffice for a “public verdict,” then we would end up in the weird situation where Turkey’s ruling party has behaved unconstitutionally, as its various activities to undermine secularism in favor of political Islam also carry a seal of approval from the same court.

    Last week, the prime minister was typical Erdoğan again. He pledged immediate (legal) action should anyone get hold of the original “coup document.” Why did he take legal action against “coup-plotters” when the original document did not exist anywhere? As always, the motto is “all is halal [permissible] as long as it suits our political agenda…”

    Unfortunately, Erdoğan’s self-declared “liberal” supporters are no exception. Take, for example, prominent columnist, Hadi Uluengin, the liberal voice of daily Hürriyet and someone of whom I am quite fond. This is how he justified the storms around the photocopied document in his June 24, 2009, column, “Who’s wearing out whom?”:

    “Éwhether the plan to ’finish off the AKP and Fethullah Gülen’ is authentic or forgery… it would be purely legitimate if Turkey’s democrats, who have had to endure four coups, four coup attempts and several other [undemocratic actions by the military] in less than half a century got agitated by this document. They are endlessly right [about their retort]…”

    Uluengin is right about the history of undemocratic military practices in our country. But his reasoning – that even if the document were false, democrats would have every right to attack the military – is a little bit excessive.

    By the same logic, someone can always forge documents verifying corruption by the ruling Islamist elite, get them photocopied and distribute them to Erdoğan’s opponents – and since Turkey’s recent history is full of corrupt practices, it would be purely legitimate for our democrats to get agitated even though we could not authenticate these bogus papers.

    Is this how Turkey is going to become a more democratic place?

    hurriyet.com.tr, August 26, 2014

  • Turks stage fresh anti-corruption protests in Istanbul-Eastday

    Turks stage fresh anti-corruption protests in Istanbul-Eastday

    ISTANBUL, March 1 — Thousands of people staged fresh anti-corruption protests Saturday in Turkey’s coastal city of Istanbul over a leaked recording that came up earlier this week implicating the country’s prime minister.

    Demonstrations have been off and on across Turkey since the audio came under the spotlight. A phone conversation was allegedly recorded between Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his son Bilal on hiding a big sum of money from police raids.

    In Istanbul, demonstrations were held in the centers of several districts Saturday, demanding the government’s resignation. In Kadikoy district, protesters marched with huge safe boxes, symbolizing the money allegedly found Bilal’s house.

    Almost 1,000 riot policemen were present in iconic Taksim Square and Istiklal Street, firing tear gas to prevent people from entering the square.

    In a separate rally marking the 17th anniversary of the Feb. 28 coup, demonstrators in Istiklal Street protested “a parallel structure within the state” that they said controlled by U.S.- based cleric Fethullah Gulen.

    Gulen’s Hizmet movement is accused by the government’s supporters of running the “parallel state” and conducting a power struggle with the ruling Justice and Development Party.

    Analysts say the power struggle, the ongoing corruption probe and the recent audio scandal have deepened the polarization of the Turkish society.

    Source:Xinhua Net

  • Turkey Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Political Trouble

    Turkey Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Political Trouble

    Can Turkey’s Erdogan Stay in Power?

    The Turkish leader’s authoritarian streak is the most important issue ahead of key elections

    By Karl Vick @karl_vick

    Turkey's Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan greets his supporters as he arrives at a meeting at the Turkish parliament in Ankara

    Umit Bektas / Reuters

    Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan greets his supporters as he arrives for a meeting at the Turkish parliament in Ankara Feb. 25, 2014.

    Follow @TIMEWorld

    In its first eight decades as a republic, the biggest question facing Turkey was one of identity. Would it be the secular democracy envisioned by its founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, or a nation governed by the Islamic faith that defined the Ottoman Empire from whose ashes it rose? Ataturk did his best to secure the former option, sending the Caliph packing (on the Orient Express) and ordering Turks to use second names, abandon the fez and write in Roman letters. After he died, his acolytes enforced his vision with a rigidity grounded in an abiding mistrust of the masses. Four times in four decades, Kemalist generals deposed elected governments they deemed dangerous to secular rule.

    But everything changed in 2002, when Turks voted the Justice and Development Party (AKP) into government, led by the charismatic and irascible Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Once an avowed proponent of political Islam, Erdogan campaigned for Prime Minister on a platform of personal piety and fair play, especially in economics. Embraced first by the conservative Anatolian heartland distrusted by the Kemalist elite, the AKP’s support grew in subsequent elections.

    But as the country prepares for three more polls over the next 15 months, the most pressing issue is no longer about the secular or religious nature of the state. It’s Erdogan. Turks have to decide whether they prefer a strongman over the delicate calibrations required in a system of checks and balances.

    (MORE: Turkey’s “House of Cards” moment.)

    When spontaneous demonstrations erupted last May over the fate of a city park, Erdogan’s reaction validated the protesters’ assertion that the larger problem was his creeping authoritarianism. Riot police overreacted to the demonstrations, deploying tear gas and water cannons, and international outrage poured in. With the Prime Minister abroad, other AKP leaders, including President Abdullah Gul, struck a politic, palliative tone that lasted only until the boss got back. Erdogan blamed shadowy outside forces, invoking the reliable stewpot of bogeymen—hidden hands, Washington—for the unrest.

    He made the same play when a massive graft investigation burst into the headlines in December. In time, the AKP closed ranks, passing bills consolidating power around its embattled leader. Gul signed a measure restricting the Internet and tracking users. Another bill tightened executive control over judges and prosecutors, a convenient move as troubling corruption allegations crept toward Erdogan himself. (The allegations should be best assessed by a judiciary visibly independent both of the Premier and the “parallel government” supposedly run by Fethullah Gulen, a moderate Islamic leader resident in Pennsylvania, that Erdogan’s allies claim is driving the probe.)

    Municipal elections on March 30 will give voters their first say on all this. The opposition is uninspiring: led by Ataturk’s Republican People’s Party, it is riven by divisions and hampered by the lack of a compelling leader to take on Erdogan. But with the economy sliding, if the AKP ends up losing previous strongholds like Istanbul, the result would embolden Erdogan’s opponents. An electoral setback might also shake loose papered-over tensions within the AKP, perhaps exposing internal rivalries in time for the presidential election in August.

    According to an AKP spokesman, Erdogan, who is barred by party rules from returning as Premier, will seek that office. But if the incumbent, Gul, also chooses to run, the resulting split within the ruling party could give voters the credible alternative to Erdogan that the opposition has thus far failed to provide. Gul is a devout Muslim who, in contrast to the Prime Minister’s majoritarian tendencies, talks of pluralism and the rule of law.

    A more cynical scenario involves the parliamentary polls set for June 2015. Were Gul to vacate the presidency and were the AKP to prevail in the legislature yet again, analysts note he would be available to resume the premiership in place of Erdogan. Gul already performed that role in 2002, when a prior conviction for Islamist politicking barred Erdogan from immediately assuming office. Another job-swap in 2015 would for now close the door on the possibility that in the absence of a credible opposition, a viable alternative to Erdogan might emerge from within the AKP.

    via Turkey Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Political Trouble | TIME.com.

  • Erdogan recordings appear real, analyst says, as Turkey scandal grows

    Erdogan recordings appear real, analyst says, as Turkey scandal grows

    BY ROY GUTMAN

    McClatchy Foreign StaffFebruary 26, 2014

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan delivers a speech at a press conference in Istanbul LU ZHE/XINHUA — MCT Read more here:
    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan delivers a speech at a press conference in Istanbul
    LU ZHE/XINHUA — MCT
    Read more here: http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2014/02/26/3499532/erdogan-recordings-appear-real.html#storylink=cpy

     

    ISTANBUL — Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan tightened his grip Wednesday on the judiciary and the Internet in an effort to tamp down a corruption scandal that’s rattled his government and now appears to implicate his immediate family and him.

    Evidence mounted that a series of audio recordings in which Erdogan can be heard instructing his son, Bilal, to get rid of enormous sums of money are authentic, with the government firing two senior officials at the state scientific agency responsible for the security of encrypted telephones and a U.S.-based expert on encrypted communications, after examining the recordings, telling McClatchy that the recordings appear to be genuine.

    Erdogan on Tuesday called the five purported conversations an “immoral montage” that had been “dubbed.” But he acknowledged that even his secure telephone had been tapped.

    The only apparent “montage” was combining the five different conversations into one audio file, said Joshua Marpet, a U.S.-based cyber analyst who has testified in court on the validity of computer evidence in other Turkish criminal cases. He said there was no sign that the individual conversations had been edited.

    “If it’s fake, it’s of a sophistication that I haven’t seen,” he said.

    The purported telephone conversations took place over a 26-hour period, beginning on the morning of Dec. 17, when Turkish police launched raids on the houses and offices of members of the Erdogan government, businessmen and their families.

    “Whatever you have in the house, get rid of it, OK?” the prime minister can be heard telling Bilal in the opening conversation. Erdogan tells Bilal that his sister Sumeyye is on her way to help him and admonishes Bilal to tell others in the family also to get rid of cash, including Sumeyye’s husband, Bilal’s brother Burak, his uncle Mustafa Erdogan, and Erdogan’s brother-in-law, Berat Albayrak.

    “It will be good if you completely ‘zero’ it,” the prime minster is heard saying in the second conversation, which took place later that morning. In the fourth conversation at 11:15 that night, Bilal says he had almost “zeroed” out the money, but that there were some 30 million euros (about $39 million) left. When his father asks why he didn’t transfer all the money to Mehmet Gur, a contractor who was building the Erdogan family villa, Bilal responds: because “it takes a lot of space.”

    At different points, Erdogan can be heard warning Bilal not to use a regular telephone. In the final conversation on the morning of Dec. 18, after Bilal admits that the money had not been “zeroed out,” the prime minister again says Bilal should get rid of all the funds.

    “OK, Dad, but we are probably being monitored at the moment,” Bilal said. His father replied: “Son, you’re being wiretapped,” to Bilal responds: “But they are monitoring us with cameras as well.”

    Two more conversations were published on the Internet Wednesday night, one purporting to capture Erdogan and Bilal discussing how much money they should expect from a Turkish businessman, and the other recording two other businessmen discussing a payoff. More are expected, at least until the country votes in municipal elections March 31.

    If the recordings don’t unsettle politics in this vital U.S. ally of 78 million people, Erdogan’s new laws very well could. The legislation now being rushed through Parliament is widely viewed as Erdogan’s effort to control the corruption probe.

    Late Tuesday night, Parliament, where Erdogan’s Justice and Development party holds an absolute majority, gave final approval to a much-criticized bill that gives the government the right to block Internet content, subject to a court’s approval within three days, and gives it access to personal traffic data.

    Then on Wednesday President Abdullah Gul approved a controversial bill that gives Erdogan’s justice minister control over an agency that appoints judges and prosecutors and conducts investigations.

     

    Together with a bill now already approved by a parliamentary committee giving the state MIT intelligence service access to data held by the government, private institutions and courts upon the approval of one judge, the three bills appeared to be different ways to quash future corruption investigations.

    “These three laws together look like the government trying to arm itself against its critics and its opponents, in a way that restricts human rights,” said Emma Sinclair-Webb, the senior Turkey researcher at Human Rights Watch. “This is reactive legislation, being rushed through…It is occurring at the time of a massive political fight, and a corruption scandal the government is trying to bury.”

    Even Gul, who’s a party ally of Erdogan, had deep misgivings on the law giving the government virtual control over the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors. He said in a statement he had found 15 provisions of the original bill that were unconstitutional, but that several of them were fixed before it came to his desk. Those remaining should be addressed by Turkey’s constitutional court, he said.

    Among the most surprising revelations this week was that Erdogan’s conversations with his son – about where to stash the tens of millions of dollars in the homes of family members – were conducted on secure, government-issued telephones and were tapped by another agency of the government.

     

    The eavesdropping now appears to have been facilitated by staff at the government’s Scientific and Technological Research Council, known as Tubitek. Fikri Isik, the minister of science, industry and technology, announced Wednesday that two department heads had been dismissed and that five employees responsible for the encrypted telephones had been suspended.

    He noted that Erdogan had not requested an analysis of the alleged conversations with his son but said the institute was ready to do so if asked.

     

    At McClatchy’s request, Marpet, the managing principal of Guarded Risk, a Wilmington, Del., cyber analytics firm, examined the conversations purported to be between Erdogan and his son.

    Marpet, who has a background in law enforcement and has done work for the Federal Reserve Bank in Philadelphia as well as testifying in Turkish criminal cases, said there were small sound “spikes” in the recording when one of the speakers mentioned a place name or an individual, but they could be annotations by whoever was monitoring the recording.

    Marpet said the audio levels were consistent in each call. The speaker said to be Erdogan had a more “pixilated” or mechanical sounding voice, while the speaker said to be Bilal sounded clearer throughout. This could be because of differences in the phones – pro-government newspapers identified them as CryptoPhones – or in the way they were monitored. Marpet said it was possible that Erdogan’s phone was being intercepted electronically, while Bilal’s phone might have had a listening device planted in the receiver.

    Based on the judgment of a Turkish-speaking McClatchy special correspondent that the two men’s voices sounded natural and that the question and answers flowed naturally, and the tone was appropriate for the conversation, “then I’m actually thinking it’s probably real,” Marpet said.

    Read more here:

     

  • “10,000,000 dollars is not enough”

    “10,000,000 dollars is not enough”

    10,000,000 dollars is not enough

    A new recording of a phone call between Prime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan and his son Bilal has been leaked last night.

    In the alleged recording, Erdoğan and his son are discussing the amount of the bribe to be taken from a businessman named Sıtkı Ayan. Erdoğan finds the offered 10 million dollars insufficient, and instructs his son not to accept unless Ayan provides the amount he promised.

    Sıtkı Ayan is the owner of SOM Petrol, a London-based corporation that owns oil and gas wells in various countries and turns over billions of dollars every year. Turang Transit Transportation, also owned by Mr. Ayan, was awarded the government contract to build a $11.5 billion pipeline to transport natural gas from Iran and Turkmenistan to Europe. The investment was subsidised by the government, and the corporation was held exempt from VAT and various other taxes and duties.

    According to the whistleblowers who leaked the call, Mr. Ayan pays regular bribes to Prime Minister Erdoğan, just like the “other businessmen”.

    Transcript:

    Bilal Erdoğan: Mr. Sıtkı came yesterday, saying he couldn’t do the transfer properly, that he currently has about 10 or so (million dollars), that he can give it whenever we want…
    Tayyip Erdoğan: No no, don’t you take it.
    Bilal Erdoğan: No I won’t, but I don’t know what we’ll do now.
    Tayyip Erdoğan: No, don’t take it. If he’s going to bring what he promised, then let him bring it. If not, then no need. Others can bring it, so why can’t he, huh? What do they think is? But they are falling now, they’ll fall on our laps, don’t you worry.
    Bilal Erdoğan: OK, daddy.

    Click here to listen to the recording (in Turkish):

    Alternative link: watch?v=4GZBw369nEM