Lawyers representing journalist Yıldız Tar have filed an application with Turkey’s Constitutional Court, arguing that Tar was unlawfully arrested on February 21 solely due to her journalism and civil society activities. Tar was detained as part of an investigation into the Peoples’ Democratic Congress (HDK) and charged with “membership in an armed organization.”
The petition, submitted by lawyers from the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) and the LGBTQ+ rights group Kaos GL, contends that Tar’s rights to liberty, fair trial, freedom of expression, press freedom, and freedom of association were all violated.
Arrest based on journalism, not crime
In the petition, Tar is described as a journalist since 2013 who has worked at various media outlets and currently serves as editor-in-chief of Kaos GL. She is also a member of several civil society organizations working in the field of human rights. The case against her is reportedly based on two text messages from 2012–2013, 10 phone calls, and one audio surveillance recording from the same period.
The petition states that these recordings do not include any criminal content or incitement to violence and are instead related to news gathering or civil society work. It emphasizes that using such recordings—obtained unlawfully and more than a decade ago—as evidence amounts to a violation of evidentiary law and a clear interference with fundamental rights.
Violations of privacy and freedom of expression
The application also states that Tar’s right to privacy was violated when police raided her home early in the morning, searched her residence, and seized digital materials. The arrest is described as a direct violation of press and expression freedoms, with the petition arguing that classifying journalist-source conversations as criminal breaches constitutional protections and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Tar’s participation in HDK meetings, gender equality initiatives, and student protests—peaceful and within constitutional limits—are listed in the indictment as evidence of “membership in a terrorist organization.” The petition argues that this conflates legal activism and journalism with terrorism-related charges.
The lawyers also claim that Tar’s rights to freedom of assembly and association were violated, both of which are protected under Turkish and international law.
Arrest based on vague claims of “high participation”
The petition notes that Tar was referred for arrest without having given a formal statement and that the arrest was justified solely by vague claims of “high participation in HDK meetings.” The case file reportedly contains only four such meetings, with no concrete evidence showing that they were organizational in nature. Attending these events as a journalist, the lawyers argue, cannot be considered a criminal act.
The application underscores that Tar was arrested without “concrete, current, and sufficient evidence” of criminal activity, in violation of Article 19 of the Turkish Constitution and Article 5 of the ECHR. It criticizes the use of decade-old, non-violent, and non-instructional phone calls as evidence of terrorism, calling it a clear violation of personal liberty and legal predictability.
Fair trial violations and political motives
The petition also details how defense lawyers were denied access to the case file under a confidentiality order, preventing them from even seeing the detention warrants. Despite this, the court imposed pretrial detention, which the lawyers argue undermines the right to a fair trial and the principle of equality of arms.
The petition further claims that Tar’s arrest is politically motivated, targeting her journalism and human rights work. It argues that the investigation is designed to suppress freedom of expression and association, contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution and Article 18 of the ECHR, both of which stipulate that fundamental rights may only be limited for legitimate purposes.
Surveillance recordings obtained without court order
One of the central issues raised in the petition is the use of surveillance recordings obtained without a judge’s authorization. According to Turkish criminal procedure law, such recordings should have been destroyed immediately, yet they have instead been presented as evidence. Citing Court of Cassation precedents, the petition notes that unlawfully obtained wiretaps cannot be considered evidence and may only be treated as circumstantial indicators.
It also argues that using Tar’s journalistic phone calls from 13 years ago as evidence for “terrorism” charges today violates the principle of legal foreseeability. The petition draws a parallel to the European Court of Human Rights’ ruling in the Osman Kavala case, which found that reopening closed investigations years later and using them to justify harsh measures threatens freedom of expression and association.
The petition concludes by emphasizing that Tar is a well-known journalist and human rights advocate, and that her detention sends a chilling message not only to her personally but to Turkey’s entire civil society sector. The lawyers are calling for her immediate release and for the Constitutional Court to recognize her detention as a violation of fundamental rights.
