- In the Gezi trial in which manager Ayşe Barım was tried, the Court evaluated the act within the scope of “attempting to overthrow the government” but considered Ayşe Barım not a direct perpetrator but an “aider.” The base sentence was determined as 15 years in prison. However, with discretionary reduction applied, the sentence given to Barım was reduced to 12 years and 6 months.
- The prosecution had requested 30 years in the indictment and later demanded aggravated life imprisonment in its final opinion on the merits.
Semra Pelek
The third hearing of the case filed against manager Ayşe Barım on the charge of “aiding the attempt to overthrow the government of the Republic of Turkey” was held at the Istanbul 26th High Criminal Court.
The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office had sought up to 30 years in prison for Ayşe Barım in the indictment on the charge of “aiding the attempt to overthrow the government.” However, in its opinion on the merits submitted on Jan. 16, the prosecution changed the legal qualification of the crime and demanded aggravated life imprisonment. In the opinion, it was argued that Barım’s actions constituted the crime of “attempting to overthrow the government,” and the “aiding” provision in the indictment was not applied.
Hearing began one hour late
The hearing, which was supposed to begin earlier, started about an hour late due to the delay of the panel. Ayşe Barım attended with three lawyers.
When asked about the prosecutor’s opinion on the merits, Barım said, “Since 2025 I have been going through a process I have never experienced in my life. I did not direct my actors to Gezi Park. I have never been a political person.”
Referring to her health problems, Barım described the operations she had undergone and said, “I am innocent. I am a woman devoted to my country, trying to fulfill her duties as a citizen. I have only worked throughout my life. I expect from you a decision that protects my right to life; I request my acquittal.”
Defense: “There is no force or violence”
Lawyer Sedat Özyurt stated that the opinion on the merits was not based on evidence and said, “According to the Constitution, there can be no crime without law. In this file, there is an unlawful accusation of crime,” referring to Article 38 of the Constitution.
Özyurt said that the element of force and violence had not been proven in the file and that it had been established that the artists went to Gezi Park of their own free will, not on Ayşe Barım’s instruction. “The defendant has no act involving force or violence; nor does she have any post praising force or violence,” he said.
Özyurt also stated that actors Halit Ergenç and Ceyda Düvenci met with then-Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and that the names were determined from Ankara, arguing that this meeting should be evaluated within the scope of democratic reconciliation and resolution processes.
Özyurt said that a co-perpetrator relationship between Barım and Gezi case convicts Osman Kavala, Can Atalay and Çiğdem Mater had not been proven, arguing that being present at the scene alone does not constitute joint perpetration.
Özyurt stated that the Gezi protests were presented at the time as an “environmental protest” and that Barım tried to resolve the process through dialogue, saying that Barım acted within the framework of freedom of expression and the right to assembly. “Ayşe Barım did not think the protests were unlawful,” he said.
Reference to Court of Cassation decisions
Lawyer Aslı Kibar recalled the decisions given by the Court of Cassation in the main Gezi trial, stating that acquittal decisions were given for Mücella Yapıcı, Hakan Altınay and Yiğit Ali Ekmekçi and that the legal qualification of the crime was changed and evaluated within the scope of Law No. 2911 on Meetings and Demonstrations.
Kibar also recalled that in the Gezi Çarşı trial the legal qualification of the crime was changed and an acquittal decision was given, saying that Barım should also be acquitted. She stated that Barım went to Gezi Park only once and for professional purposes.
“Investigation began without evidence”
Lawyer Deniz Ketenci argued that the investigation began with a complaint and that there was no evidence of a crime in the complaint and its attachments. She said that the complainant applied based on what he read on social media and stated that he did not know Barım.
Ketenci also stated that Barım’s phone calls and HTS (communication traffic) records with Osman Kavala and Çiğdem Mater were presented as evidence, but that no accusation of crime was made regarding these calls. She argued that the calls took place in the context of a film event and academic activities.
Verdict: 12 years and 6 months in prison
In her final words, Barım said, “I am innocent, I want my acquittal.” The court adjourned until 2:00 p.m. for the verdict.
After the break, the court announced its ruling.
In its decision, the court first stated that the act was evaluated within the scope of Article 312 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK), which regulates the crime of “attempting to overthrow the government by using force and violence.” However, concluding that Ayşe Barım was not a direct perpetrator but in the position of an “aider,” the court applied a sentence reduction and determined the base sentence as 15 years in prison.
The court then applied discretionary reduction provisions and reduced the sentence to 12 years and 6 months.
The court subsequently applied discretionary mitigation provisions and reduced the sentence to 12 years and 6 months. With the decision, the house arrest imposed on Barım was lifted, while the travel ban was ordered to remain in place.
