EYLEM SONBAHAR
Seventeen individuals arrested during the May Day 2024 celebrations in Istanbul were acquitted of charges including "participating in an unlawful assembly and failing to disperse," "making propaganda for a terrorist organization," and "praising crime and criminals." The verdict was issued at the third hearing of the case held at the Istanbul 24th High Criminal Court.
The charges stemmed from their attempt to march from Saraçhane to Taksim Square, during which police intervened and detained them. Prosecutors had previously cited banners and vests featuring the text "Partizan" and images of Ibrahim Kaypakkaya—a Marxist-Leninist revolutionary—claiming they constituted criminal evidence.
Prosecutor's argument and police testimony
In the October 18 submission, the prosecutor recommended convictions for "participating in an unlawful assembly and failing to disperse" and "making propaganda for a terrorist organization," while suggesting no penalties for "praising crime and criminals."
Three police officers who participated in the arrests testified at the trial. One officer claimed the group began marching with slogans such as, "We are marching under Kaypakkaya’s leadership; we do not recognize your laws," prompting police to take preventive measures and use force to detain them.
Another officer stated, "The group was chanting Ibrahim Kaypakkaya slogans. Despite our warnings, they refused to disperse, so we had to act." When asked if time was given for the group to disperse, the officer replied, "I recall around five minutes being given before we intervened."
Defense arguments: 'Slogans fall under freedom of expression'
Defense lawyers argued that the actions did not meet the legal criteria for a crime. Attorney Ömer Taş criticized the inconsistency of legal outcomes, pointing out that a recent case involving similar slogans was dismissed. "Where is the violence in the slogan, 'Our leader is Ibrahim Kaypakkaya'? Freedom of expression includes opinions that might be unpopular or controversial," he said.
Attorney Şükrü Alpsoy added, "These cases are usually dismissed outright. The criminal act here is not what the defendants did but how law enforcement intervened."
Court decision: no crime committed
The court concluded that the charges lacked sufficient grounds and acquitted all defendants. The ruling emphasized that the defendants' actions did not constitute criminal offenses, upholding their right to freedom of expression.
