Claims About the Coronavirus and the Prayer Bans
The "He Brought the People Out onto the Streets and Disturbed Public Order" Claim
Unfounded
Claim
Fact
The night of 21 May 2020, Adana. There was an intervention against a small group that wanted to perform the tarawih prayer in the open air; counting those who were beaten, the number of people taken into custody reached 47 over the course of the night. Only after this did people gather in front of Kuytul's house.
The sequence is the reverse of the claim. The crowd came together not to perform the prayer, but for their friends in custody. In Kuytul's own words:
"The reason for our gathering is not the tarawih prayer; it is that our friends were sworn at and that they were beaten and taken away to the police."
Kuytul was not there when the incident began; he was at an iftar meal with a few people at another end of Adana. He came home because the police station to which those taken into custody had been brought was close to the house.
As for the "disturbance" claim, the answer is this: the wait continued until nine the next morning and not a single incident occurred. When the time for the pre-dawn meal came, simit and ayran were sent to those at the police station, one for each of them; those waiting in front of the house had their pre-dawn meal in the same way.
When one looks at the side that closed the roads that night, kept those who wanted to come waiting for hours in the side streets and raised the number of people in custody to 47, no description of a crowd disturbing public order is left standing. The reason for the wait is also clear:
"We could not have been so disloyal, ungrateful and irresponsible as to sleep comfortably in our homes while our friends had been beaten and were in custody."
The sequence matters
According to the claim, a call was made first, the crowd poured out onto the streets, and the events arose from that. The sequence of the night of 21 May 2020 is this:
- Five or ten people want to perform the tarawih prayer in Merkez Park, the police announce the ban, and the group begins to move away.
- As they are moving away, there is an intervention; those who are beaten are taken into custody.
- Those in custody call their relatives; those who come to the police station to ask what has happened are taken into custody as well, and the number rises to 47.
- Those who hear of this gather in front of Kuytul's house.
So the gathering is not the cause of the incident but its consequence. Nor is the cause the tarawih prayer; it is the beating of their friends and their being taken into custody.
Where was Kuytul at the moment of the incident?
Some reports said that he himself led the prayer and was at the head of the crowd. When the incident began Kuytul was at another end of Adana, at an iftar meal with a few people; he heard of it afterwards and returned home because the police station to which those in custody had been taken was close to the house. He said this openly the following day.
What happened until morning?
The reason for the wait has been explained too: it was suspected that the custody procedures would be drawn out deliberately and that those held would be kept until the end of the religious holiday. Since the period of custody can legally be extended for days, the wait in front of the house was maintained as a means of pressure.
"We waited there until nine in the morning, and we did not cause the slightest disturbance."
What those who waited that night were faced with was this:
- All the roads leading to the house were closed; some were kept waiting in the side streets until morning.
- Women who wanted to come were stopped at the entrance of an apartment building; they were kept waiting half an hour, an hour, an hour and a half. One of them wanted to go to the mosque next door or to a nearby house to perform her ablutions and pray; she was not allowed to.
- Announcements were made continuously in front of the house in an attempt to cut off Kuytul's speech.
- When the time for the pre-dawn meal came, it was said that no pre-dawn meal would be given to those at the police station; thereupon simit and ayran were sent, one for each of them. Those in front of the house also had their pre-dawn meal with simit and ayran.
Towards morning the procedures were sped up and those in custody were released.
The criterion of provocation
Two separate things were said to Kuytul about this incident: those of ill intent said that he had staged a provocation, those of good intent that he had fallen for a provocation. He answers both with the same criterion — a provocation means deliberately causing an incident:
"To fall for a provocation is to attack, it is to make a mistake. We did not make a mistake."
Looked at by this criterion, there is no attack, no incitement and no damage. The other side does not have a single record of any disturbance from that night; against this, there are the medical reports on the beating of those taken into custody.
The criterion Kuytul used at the forum of 29 May 2020 points in the same direction: a person who wants to incite chooses their place and their time deliberately, and performs their prayer in front of the police or the governor's office. What was at issue here, however, was a handful of people who wanted to pray off to one side at night.
Who disturbed public order?
This is the weakest point of the claim. The chain that led that night to the streets being closed, to hundreds of people being kept waiting on the road for hours and to the number of people in custody rising to 47 began not with the announcement of the ban in the park, but with the intervention against people who were moving away. Had there been no intervention, the prayer would have been performed, the crowd would have dispersed, and the matter would have ended without anyone hearing of it.
The other two claims concerning the same night: the "they attacked the police" claim and the "they prayed at zero distance" claim.