Thirty-five people died in the Ezgi Apartment building.
- Five court-appointed experts who prepared reports in favor of the defendants in the trials over the Ezgi Apartment building and Sait Bey Complex, where dozens were killed in the earthquake, have filed a criminal complaint on eight charges against earthquake survivors, relatives of victims, and journalists İsmail Arı and Timur Soykan.
- The experts defended their reports as having been described as “commendable” and argued that the journalists were “not experts on the subject.”
- The complaint, filed two years ago, came to light in February this year, on the anniversary of the earthquake, when Nurten Özdemir, who lost relatives in the disaster, was summoned to give a statement.
Semra Pelek
Five academics appointed as experts in the trials concerning the Ezgi Apartment building and Sait Bey Complex, both of which collapsed in the Feb. 6 earthquakes centered in Kahramanmaraş in southern Turkey, applied to the Kahramanmaraş Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office over news reports and critical social media posts about their findings. The panel requested that earthquake survivors seeking justice, people who lost relatives, and two journalists covering the trials be prosecuted.
The academics — T.Ç., C.Ö., M.U., H.E., and B.S. — who serve at the Civil Engineering Departments of Istanbul University’s Faculty of Engineering and Yıldız Technical University’s Faculty of Civil Engineering, submitted a joint petition to prosecutors on Dec. 17, 2024. The complaint petition, which prosecutors had reportedly kept pending for two years, became known after Nurten Özdemir — who lost her sister, brother-in-law, and two nieces and nephews in the Ezgi Apartment building in Kahramanmaraş — was called to give a statement by the Gürpınar Police Station Directorate.
Claim that “non-experts targeted” them
In their petition, the experts stated that they had submitted a 96-page principal report to the court on July 31, 2024, and that the report was based on an examination of the case file, technical assessments, five separate structural models, and static calculations.
The petition argued that after the report was submitted, defamatory broadcasts were made on social media and television programs in which the experts’ names and the universities where they work were openly mentioned. The experts defended their report as having received praise as “commendable,” stating:
“Members of the panel, who have adopted impartiality and independence and honesty as principles, who have served in international arbitration files, who have been appointed in thousands of files in Istanbul courthouses, and whose reports have been described as ‘commendable’ by the Istanbul Regional Courts of Appeal, have been subjected to a lynching campaign through unfair, untrue, biased and defamatory comments and news reports on certain social media platforms and TV channels, where even their names and the institutions they work for were clearly given.”
In the petition, the experts accused earthquake survivors who were rescued from the buildings for which they prepared reports, or families who lost relatives in the collapse of those buildings and are therefore parties to the trials, as well as journalists Timur Soykan and İsmail Arı who reported on the findings, of “not being experts.” The petition stated: “Defamatory accusations have been made by persons who are not experts on the subject without examining the content of the file.”
Eight separate criminal accusations
Claiming that they were being pressured through these news reports and posts, the experts requested that a public case be filed against the earthquake survivors, people who lost relatives, and journalists İsmail Arı and Timur Soykan on the following charges: “Slander,” “False statement,” “Knowingly misleading judicial authorities,” “Written threat via email,” “Attempting to influence an expert performing a judicial duty,” “Violation of the Law on the Protection of Personal Data,” “Unfounded complaint,” and “Insult.”
The petition also alleged that some members of the panel had received threatening messages via email.
Who is under investigation?
In the investigation launched by the Kahramanmaraş Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, earthquake survivors from the Ezgi Apartment building and those who lost relatives, as well as journalists, are listed as “suspects.”
Mulla Kenger: One of two people rescued alive from the rubble of the Ezgi Apartment building. He lost his wife in the earthquake.
Muhammed Emin Kenger: Lost relatives in the earthquake.
Mesut Kenger: Rescued injured from the rubble of the Ezgi Apartment building; he lost his mother.
Nurten Özdemir: Lost her sister, brother-in-law, and two nieces and nephews in the earthquake.
Nurgül Göksu: Lost her son, daughter-in-law, and grandchild in the Ezgi Apartment building.
Timur Soykan: Columnist for the daily BirGün; followed the earthquake trials.
İsmail Arı: Reporter for BirGün; wrote news reports on the earthquake trials.
Ramazan Eyigün: Sent an email to the expert panel.
Background: Reports and releases
The expert panel in question had previously drawn public attention with reports it prepared in the trials over the Ezgi Apartment building, where 35 people died, and the Sait Bey Complex, where 44 people were killed in the Feb. 6 earthquakes.
In the Ezgi Apartment trial in Kahramanmaraş, the panel expressed the opinion that fugitive defendants were not at fault. In the Sait Bey Complex trial in the same city, it assessed that no fault could be attributed to certain defendants, and the court ruled to release some of them.
A disciplinary investigation had previously been launched against the panel, but the Istanbul Regional Board of Expert Witnesses rejected the complaint in its decision dated Oct. 25, 2024, stating that there was no concrete evidence.
What is a SLAPP lawsuit?
The fact that the complaint was filed over news reports and criticism concerning earthquake trials that closely concern the public has sparked debate in terms of freedom of expression and press freedom.
Subjecting journalists and rights seekers to judicial processes on numerous criminal accusations due to reporting and criticism on matters of public interest is defined as a “strategic lawsuit against public participation” (SLAPP). Such lawsuits are said to have a chilling effect on critical expression.
The investigation launched by the prosecutor’s office is ongoing.
