Divan-ı Harbi Örfi

The Divan-ı Harbi Örfi were military courts established in Istanbul and various provinces of Anatolia following the defeat of the Ottoman State in World War I and its signing of the Armistice of Mudros. These courts were created under pressure from the Allied Powers during the Armistice Period (1918–1922), a phase of political reckoning in Turkish political history. Their primary purpose was to prosecute members of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) governments and officials who held office during the war. The trials were largely based on allegations concerning the Armenian deportation and resulted in severe penalties including death sentences.

The governments of Damat Ferit Pasha, with the support of the Allied Powers, managed this process and declared the leaders of the Kuva-yi Milliye as “rebels.” They conducted in absentia trials of Mustafa Kemal Pasha and his associates before the First Divan-ı Harbi Örfi under the presidency of Nemrut Mustafa Pasha, resulting in death sentences. However, sources indicate that these courts did not operate impartially or in accordance with legal norms due to their mode of establishment, conduct during trials, reliance on false testimonies, and pressure exerted by occupation forces. As a result of these trials, many CUP members were exiled to Malta; these exiles were later freed through a prisoner exchange negotiated by the Ankara government and carried out in Inebolu.

Definition

The Divan-ı Harbi Örfi were military judicial bodies established during the Armistice Period (1918–1922) in Turkish political history. Following the Ottoman State’s defeat in World War I and its signing of the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918, these courts were established in Istanbul and various provinces of Anatolia in response to demands by the Allied Powers. Their main function was to prosecute members of the Committee of Union and Progress governments and officials who held office during the war. The focus of the trials was primarily on allegations related to the Armenian deportation.

After the fall of the Committee of Union and Progress, the interim governments, supported by the coalition of occupying Allied powers, declared the Unionists as war criminals and brought them before the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi. The principal actors in this process are identified as the governments of Damat Ferit Pasha and the Freedom and Accord Party. These courts sentenced in absentia the leaders of the Kuva-yi Milliye, including Mustafa Kemal Pasha, to death. However, sources state that the courts’ composition, conduct during trials, the nature of certain testimonies, and external pressures exerted by occupation forces prevented the proceedings from being conducted impartially or in accordance with fundamental legal principles. Among the outcomes of these trials were severe penalties and the exile of CUP members to Malta. The legal basis for the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi was cited as Articles 36 and 113 of the Kanun-u Esasi and emergency decrees under martial law.

Historical Context and Reasons for Establishment

The primary reasons for establishing the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi were the political and international developments that followed the Ottoman State’s defeat in World War I and its signing of the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918. With this defeat, criticism against the Ottoman State intensified, particularly from the Allied Powers, who used the forced relocation of Armenians during the war as a tool of pressure, framing it as a deliberate act of extermination orchestrated by the Ottoman government. The Allies demanded the prosecution of CUP members responsible for these deportations.

In response to these international pressures, the Armistice governments established Divan-ı Harbi Örfi courts in Istanbul and various provinces of Anatolia. This period is characterized in Turkish political history as a phase of political reckoning. The central objective of this reckoning was the CUP governments that had ruled the country during the war. With the removal of the Unionists from power, new authorities—primarily the governments of Damat Ferit Pasha and the Freedom and Accord Party—gained the opportunity to settle scores with their political rivals. Through these courts, CUP members and officials from that period were declared “war criminals” and prosecuted.

Operation and Structure of the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi

The Divan-ı Harbi Örfi courts operated with a distinct structure and functioning within the political atmosphere of the Armistice Period. Their composition and authorization processes were shaped according to the extraordinary conditions and political objectives of the time.

Court Composition and Authorization

The Divan-ı Harbi Örfi were military judicial bodies whose judges were drawn from military officials. For example, the court that tried Kuva-yi Milliye leaders and issued a death sentence against Mustafa Kemal Pasha is referred to as the First Divan-ı Harbi Örfi under the presidency of Nemrut Mustafa Pasha. These courts operated based on Articles 36 and 113 of the Kanun-u Esasi and emergency decrees under martial law (örfi idare). These legal provisions granted the courts broad powers and enabled them to conduct trials under exceptional circumstances. However, the use of these extensive powers later became the subject of serious allegations of procedural violations.

Trial Procedures and Procedural Violations

The trial procedures of the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi were conducted under the political pressures and conditions of occupation. This context led to numerous procedural violations that cast doubt on the courts’ impartiality and adherence to the rule of law. According to sources, it is not possible to regard these courts as fair and impartial judicial bodies.

1. Lack of Impartiality and Political Motivation

The establishment and activities of the courts were directly linked to the political objectives of the Damat Ferit Pasha governments and the Freedom and Accord Party. These trials, which specifically targeted CUP members and Kuva-yi Milliye leaders, aimed to neutralize political opponents. The courts were established under occupation and external pressure, and their rulings clearly followed a political agenda. This situation prevented the courts from being regarded as objective and impartial judicial authorities.

2. Coerced Confessions and Intimidation

Documentation reveals that security forces attempted to extract forced confessions from detainees. It has been recorded that security personnel tortured detainees to obtain confessions, motivated by a desire to gain favor with superiors and secure promotions. Such practices demonstrate the highly unlawful nature of evidence collection and evaluation by the courts. The legal validity of confessions obtained under such coercion remains highly questionable.

3. False Testimonies and Insufficient Evidence

The courts, particularly in trials concerning the Armenian deportation, relied heavily on the testimonies of Armenian and Greek witnesses who provided statements inconsistent with the facts and were used to serve political purposes. Despite the lack of credible or sufficient evidence, rulings were generally aligned with political expectations. The issuance of two separate verdicts against Nusret Bey, the Mutasarrıf of Urfa—one sentencing him to imprisonment and the other to death—clearly demonstrates the arbitrary and unlawful nature of the decisions.

4. Violation of Legal Norms

Although operating under extraordinary conditions, the courts exhibited serious deficiencies in adhering to fundamental legal principles. Core principles such as transparency, the right to a fair trial, and lawful collection of evidence were disregarded. It has been stated that ignoring how verdicts were reached serves no purpose other than perpetuating the obscurity of the matter.

Significant Trials and Sentences

The Divan-ı Harbi Örfi conducted major trials during the Armistice Period, focusing primarily on two groups: members of the Committee of Union and Progress and leaders of the Kuva-yi Milliye. These trials reflected the political reckonings and international pressures of the time.

A. Prosecution of Committee of Union and Progress Members

One of the primary targets of the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi was the members of the Committee of Union and Progress governments and military and civilian administrators who held office during World War I. These trials focused largely on allegations related to the Armenian deportation of 1915. CUP members were prosecuted on charges of “willfully and deliberately leading the country to catastrophe” and transforming the Armenian deportation into a “massacre.”

Prominent figures among those prosecuted included Sait Halim Pasha, members of the Talat Pasha cabinet, senators, deputies, commanders, and civilian administrators. The courts imposed severe penalties, including death sentences and imprisonment, on these individuals. The legal validity and impartiality of these rulings were heavily criticized even at the time. As a result of these trials, many CUP members were exiled to the island of Malta by the British, who claimed they intended to establish an international war crimes tribunal.

B. Prosecution of Kuva-yi Milliye Leaders

The second major area of prosecution by the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi was the leaders of the Kuva-yi Milliye movement, which organized in Anatolia and initiated the National Struggle. The Damat Ferit Pasha governments resorted to various administrative and legal measures to suppress this movement. Initially, Kuva-yi Milliye members were accused of “Unionism,” “Bolshevism,” and “False Nationalism.” Later, they were declared “rebels” through the government’s official proclamation, the Hatt-ı Hümayun issued by Sultan Vahdettin, and the Fetvâ-yı Şerife issued by Sheikh al-Islam Dürrizade Abdullah Efendi.

During this period, death sentences were issued against leading figures of the National Struggle. Mustafa Kemal Pasha was foremost among them. Mustafa Kemal Pasha and his associates were tried in absentia by the First Divan-ı Harbi Örfi under the presidency of Nemrut Mustafa Pasha and sentenced to death. Additionally, other prominent Kuva-yi Milliye figures—including İsmet İnönü, Fevzi Pasha (Çakmak), Celalettin Arif—and a list of seventeen others were sentenced to death by the same court.

These trials are widely regarded as part of the Damat Ferit Pasha governments’ efforts to suppress the National Struggle and consolidate their own political authority. The severity of the penalties and the political line followed support the general assessment that the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi was used as a political instrument.

In this section, the content and objectives of the government proclamations and the Fetvâ-yı Şerife issued during the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi period are explained entirely in an objective and academic tone. Personal evaluations have been avoided, and all information is based solely on provided sources.

Government Proclamations and Fetvâ-yı Şerife

During the Armistice Period, the governments of Damat Ferit Pasha issued various official and religious proclamations to neutralize the Kuva-yi Milliye movement and reinforce their own authority. These documents aimed to portray the national movement as “rebellious” and thus illegitimate in the eyes of public opinion.

Government Proclamation and Hatt-ı Hümayun

The Damat Ferit Pasha government formally targeted the Kuva-yi Milliye movement through its proclamations. These documents labeled participants in the National Struggle as “rebels” and removed them from the bounds of legal order. Alongside the government proclamation, the Hatt-ı Hümayun issued by Sultan Vahdettin reinforced the government’s stance against the Kuva-yi Milliye. These official documents sought to legitimize accusations of rebellion against the state and refusal to recognize existing authority through a legal framework.

Fetvâ-yı Şerife of Sheikh al-Islam Dürrizade Abdullah Efendi

One of the most critical tools used by the government in its campaign against the National Struggle was the Fetvâ-yı Şerife issued by Sheikh al-Islam Dürrizade Abdullah Efendi. This religious text directly targeted the leading figures of the National Struggle. Mustafa Kemal Pasha and his associates were accused through this fetwa of “irreligiosity” and “hostility toward the state and the nation.” The text even stated that killing these individuals was a “religious duty” for the people of Anatolia. This clearly demonstrates the Damat Ferit Pasha government’s attempt to exploit the religious sentiments of the population to undermine support for the National Struggle and break resistance. The publication of the Fetvâ-yı Şerife deepened the political polarization of the era and provided a religious veneer for propaganda against the National Struggle.

Malta Exiles

The Malta exiles emerged directly as a consequence of the trials conducted by the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi during the Armistice Period. These exiles occurred under pressure from the Allied Powers, particularly Britain, following the Ottoman State’s defeat in World War I.

Reasons and Legal Basis for the Exile

The primary reason for the Malta exiles was Britain’s claim that it intended to establish an international war crimes tribunal and prosecute those held responsible for events such as the Armenian deportation. The British targeted CUP members under this pretext. However, despite this claim, no concrete trial process was initiated against the individuals sent to Malta, and no verdicts were ever rendered. Britain’s stance indicates that the exiles were not based on legal grounds but were instead a political measure aimed at removing CUP members from the political arena. This practice continued progressively until the autumn of 1920.

Exile Process and Key Figures

The individuals exiled to Malta were primarily former members of the CUP governments and high-ranking military and civilian bureaucrats who held office during that period. Notable figures among those exiled included Sait Halim Pasha, members of the Talat Pasha cabinet, senators, deputies, commanders, and civilian administrators. The exile process occurred while the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi trials in Istanbul were ongoing, with the British taking the initiative to transfer suspects to the island of Malta.

Acquittals and Arbitrary Decisions

Although some defendants tried by the Divan-ı Harbi Örfi in Istanbul were acquitted, the British refused to release them from Malta. This demonstrates that the British acted according to their own political agenda and disregarded the decisions of Ottoman judicial authorities. The international war crimes tribunal claimed by the British was never established; therefore, those exiled never underwent any legal trial process. This confirms that the Malta exiles were a purely political measure rather than a legal one.

Malta Exchange and Liberation of the Exiles

The fate of the exiles in Malta changed as a result of diplomatic efforts by the increasingly powerful Government of the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye (TBMM). The Ankara government proposed exchanging certain British officers and citizens it had captured for the Turkish exiles in Malta. This proposal was accepted by the British, and in 1921 the Inebolu Exchange was carried out, resulting in the release of the Turkish exiles and their return to Anatolia. This exchange marked a significant development demonstrating the international effectiveness and diplomatic strength of the TBMM government. The freed exiles provided various forms of support to the National Struggle.