By 
02-08-2024
Nil Başgezer
Women’s Rights Researcher
Global Human Rights Defence
Tarık Kanyılmaz, who threatened the woman he was in the process of divorcing with a gun, was not arrested on that day. Tragically, five days after receiving these threats from Tarık Kanyılmaz, Bahar Kanyılmaz was found dead (Ekmek ve Gül, 2024).
Three years ago, Bahar (22) and Tarık Kanyılmaz (28) were married and had two daughters. However, Bahar endured constant abuse from her husband. Due to this, she frequently left her home to return to her father’s house and, on several occasions, sought refuge in women’s shelters, where she stayed for a while. Yet, each time, she was convinced to return to her husband, primarily because she could not bear to be away from her children and due to pressure from relatives (Hürriyet, 2024).
Despite the continuous abuse, Bahar decided to take her two children and move back to her father’s house in Zonguldak Ereğli last January, resolving to file for divorce. On January 23, Tarık Kanyılmaz went to Ereğli to take their children. However, Bahar refused to hand over their youngest daughter, citing the need to breastfeed her. In response, Tarık Kanyılmaz, in front of numerous witnesses, pointed a gun at her head and threatened to kill her. Following Bahar’s complaint, the prosecutor’s office launched an investigation and issued a restraining order against Tarık Kanyılmaz. Despite this, no arrest or detention was made, and he was only summoned for questioning (Hürriyet, 2024).
Ignoring the restraining order, Tarık Kanyılmaz went to Ereğli again on January 28th, claiming he wanted to see his children and talk to his wife one last time. After seeing the children, Kanyılmaz tried to persuade Bahar not to proceed with the divorce. However, Bahar, adamant due to the abuse she had suffered, refused to change her decision. Enraged, Tarık Kanyılmaz drew the gun he had brought with him and shot Bahar in the chest and head, killing her. A subsequent investigation led to charges against Tarık Kanyılmaz for “premeditated murder of his spouse,” and a case was filed with the Karadeniz Ereğli High Criminal Court, demanding a life sentence. The first hearing of the case was held on July 19th (Hürriyet, 2024).
In his defence, Tarık Kanyılmaz claimed that his wife had psychological issues, left home six times, and even went to a women’s shelter once. Regarding the day of the incident, Kanyılmaz alleged that Bahar insulted him and claimed that their children were not his. He stated that “she said her family would kill me. I then drew my gun, aimed it at her left shoulder, and it was over in a second. I did not mean to kill her” (Hürriyet, 2024).
In his statement, Kanyılmaz claimed that he had been carrying the gun since he acquired it, always with four bullets in it, and that he had never used it. He asserted that his only intention was to scare Bahar Kanyılmaz. He explained that when he aimed the gun, it accidentally discharged when her brother jumped on him, and he was unaware that the safety mechanism of the gun was faulty (T24, 2024).
However, the expert report included in the indictment contradicted his claims. The report stated that the firearm was not defective, and without any malfunction, it was impossible for the bullet to hit the victim’s head without a deliberate pull of the trigger following the initial shot. It further noted that the semi-automatic gun required the trigger to be pulled for it to fire and that it could not have discharged on its own due to external interference. Additionally, it was highlighted that Kanyılmaz’s behaviour of fleeing the scene was inconsistent with his claim that he did not intend to kill his wife (T24, 2024).
The indictment also revealed that after fleeing the scene by taxi, Kanyılmaz contacted a police officer he had met following previous incidents with his wife. It was discovered that Kanyılmaz had arranged to meet the officer and travelled to Düzce for this purpose (T24, 2024).
During the trial, the family’s lawyers requested that records of Bahar’s stays at women’s shelters be presented to the court. The court accepted this request and issued official letters to the Düzce and Ereğli district governorships, asking for records indicating whether the deceased had stayed at women’s shelters, the duration of her stays, and the number of times she stayed. The court decided to continue the defendant’s detention and adjourned the hearing (Hürriyet, 2024).
Çisel Demirkan, representing the Önce Çocuk ve Kadınlar Derneği (First Children and Women Association) and one of the family’s lawyers, stated that “we have learned that shortly before the murder, Bahar was handed over to her husband from the shelter where she had been staying. This means Bahar was returned to the very person who had threatened her with death and abused her. This is a scandal. It is a blatant case of delivering her to her killer” (Hürriyet, 2024).
Sources and further readings:
Ekmek ve Gül. (2024, July 29). 23 Ocak’ta ölümle tehdit edilen kadın 5 gün sonra katledildi. Retrieved August 2, 2024, from <https://ekmekvegul.net/gundem/23-ocakta-olumle-tehdit-edilen-kadin-5-gun-sonra-katledildi>.
Hürriyet. (2024, July 29). Ya katil 23 Ocak’ta tutuklansaydı? Hürriyet. Retrieved August 2, 2024, from <https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/ya-katil-23-ocakta-tutuklansaydi-42496095>.
T24. (2024, July 29). Boşanmak isteyen eşini öldürdü: Silah bozukmuş, niyetim korkutmaktı savunmasını rapor yalanladı. T24. Retrieved August 2, 2024, from <https://t24.com.tr/haber/bosanmak-isteyen-esini-oldurdu-silah-bozukmus-niyetim-korkutmakti-savunmasini-rapor-yalanladi,1174898>.
Comments