A court has rejected a request to have complainant expert witness Satılmış Büyükcanayakın appear in person and be re-heard in the trial of journalists Barış Pehlivan, Suat Toktaş, Kürşad Oğuz, Seda Selek and Serhan Asker.
The journalists are standing trial in connection with a case involving Büyükcanayakın, who is listed as the complainant and an expert witness. The court declined the defense request to have him present at the hearing for further questioning and testimony.
ISTANBUL — A Turkish court on Thursday rejected a defense request to have complainant expert witness Satılmış Büyükcanayakın appear in person and testify again in the trial of journalists Barış Pehlivan, Suat Toktaş, Kürşad Oğuz, Seda Selek and Serhan Asker.
The seventh hearing in the case was held at Istanbul's 54th Criminal Court of First Instance. The journalists are being tried over the publication of a conversation with Büyükcanayakın that was previously disclosed to the public by Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu.
The defendants face charges of “recording non-public conversations between individuals” and “publishing recorded conversations through the press and broadcasting.”
A key issue at the hearing was whether Büyükcanayakın, who is both the complainant and an expert witness in the case, should be questioned again in court.
Beliz Özkan, lawyer for defendant Kürşad Oğuz, argued that Büyükcanayakın should be brought before the court and heard again in accordance with the right to a fair trial and the principle of confrontation, which allows defendants to directly question witnesses whose statements may be used against them.
Lawyers for Pehlivan, Toktaş and Selek reiterated their previous defense statements and requested acquittals for their clients.
The court rejected the request to re-hear Büyükcanayakın. The judge said the complainant had already testified, that the necessary questions had been asked, and that hearing him again would not contribute to determining the merits of the case.
The prosecutor requested that, if there were no further investigative steps to be taken, the file be sent to the prosecution so that an opinion on the merits of the case could be prepared.
The court adjourned the hearing until 2:30 p.m. on Nov. 20, citing the upcoming judicial recess, the court's workload and the allocation of July court sessions to cases involving detained defendants.
What had happened?
At earlier hearings, Büyükcanayakın failed to appear before the court for four consecutive sessions, prompting the court to issue an order for his compulsory appearance.
His testimony was eventually taken during an interim hearing on Jan. 21. Defense lawyers later said they had not been notified of that hearing and were therefore prevented from questioning the complainant and confronting him directly.
The journalists' lawyers argued that this violated the principle of confrontation in criminal proceedings, under which defendants have the right to face and question individuals who provide statements against them in court. They therefore asked the court to ensure Büyükcanayakın's presence at a regular hearing and hear his testimony again.
