The case file of human rights defender Nimet Tanrıkulu, whose prosecutions have twice been met with rulings of lack of jurisdiction, has been referred to Turkey’s Court of Cassation.
The file was referred to the higher court due to a dispute between courts in Istanbul and Diyarbakir over the consolidation of the cases.
Medine Mamedoğlu
The case file involving two separate prosecutions against human rights defender Nimet Tanrıkulu on allegations of membership in an armed organization has been referred to the 5th Criminal Chamber of Turkey’s Court of Cassation after courts in Istanbul and Diyarbakir failed to agree on which court should hear the merged case.
The dispute emerged after the Istanbul 24th High Criminal Court issued a lack-of-jurisdiction ruling and transferred a case file to Diyarbakir, the largest city in predominantly Kurdish southeastern Turkey. At the second hearing of a related case before the Diyarbakir 8th High Criminal Court, judges ordered the two cases merged and referred the file to the Court of Cassation to resolve the jurisdictional dispute.
The Court of Cassation will decide which court will hear the consolidated case.
The first case against Tanrıkulu was filed in 2024. She was detained on Nov. 26, 2024, as part of an investigation that was subject to a confidentiality order and was taken to Ankara the same day.
On Dec. 12, 2024, the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office prepared an indictment against her. Prosecutors cited Tanrıkulu’s past travel, her participation in civil society activities during Turkey’s “solution process” — a failed peace initiative aimed at ending the conflict between the Turkish state and the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) — and mobile phone base station records as evidence.
A court in Ankara later ruled that it lacked jurisdiction and transferred the case to Istanbul.
Proceedings subsequently began before the Istanbul 24th High Criminal Court, where Tanrıkulu was released pending trial at the first hearing.
As the trial continued, the court issued another lack-of-jurisdiction ruling, saying that a separate case arising from the same investigation was already pending in Diyarbakir, and sent the file there.
In the Diyarbakir case, prosecutors based the charges on Tanrıkulu’s participation in a Newroz celebration in 2012. Newroz, widely celebrated by Kurds across the region, marks the arrival of spring and the new year.
After the indictment was accepted, the first hearing was held on March 30. In her defense statement, Tanrıkulu said she was a human rights defender, rejected the allegations and requested acquittal.
At the second hearing in May, her lawyers renewed their request for acquittal. The prosecutor requested that the file transferred from Istanbul be merged with the existing case.
The court agreed to merge the cases and referred the file to the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation to resolve the jurisdictional dispute. Proceedings will continue after the chamber issues its ruling.
