EYLEM SONBAHAR
The first hearing in the trial of 62 people detained during the 2024 May Day protests in Istanbul has begun, with defendants alleging police violence, arbitrary detentions, and a media blackout during their arrests.
The trial is being held at Istanbul’s 28th Criminal Court of First Instance, where the defendants face charges of “participating in unlawful meetings and marches without arms and refusing to disperse despite warnings.” The charges stem from events on May 1, 2024, when demonstrators attempted to march to Taksim Square—long a symbolic center of labor protests in Turkey—despite a government ban.
Due to the large number of defendants and limited courtroom capacity, the hearing was moved to the larger courtroom of the Istanbul 23rd High Criminal Court. Before defense statements began, lawyers requested the immediate acquittal of their clients. The judge denied the request, stating that there was no reason to grant immediate acquittal and that those present would be heard in accordance with the case file.
One of the defendants, Şahin Tümüklü, stated that he and another person, Hatice Deniz Aktaş, were detained in front of Okmeydanı Hospital after police told them, “you match a description.” According to Tümüklü, police compared their IDs to photographs and then detained them. “They tortured us in the police vehicle. We were subjected to police violence while exercising our constitutional rights. No warning was issued, and no one acted aggressively,” he said.
Tümüklü’s lawyer, Özlem Gümüştaş, added that her client was detained before even reaching the protest site under the pretext of an identity check. “That’s why he does not appear in any of the official observation reports,” she said.
Another defendant, Berdar Koçak, said he had intended to go to Taksim in response to calls from political parties and was unaware of the Istanbul Governor's ban. He also claimed that police issued no warning before the intervention.
Defendant Cemil Aksu described being handcuffed behind his back and held in a police vehicle from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. despite having taken no action against the police. “There was no criminal conduct,” he said.
Çise Yıldız said that everyone who approached the protest area encountered police intervention. “We experienced both physical and psychological violence in the police bus. They used plastic handcuffs behind our backs. While trying to remove the cuffs, they couldn’t find scissors and used a knife instead. When the blade touched my skin and I warned them, they replied, ‘Then maybe we just won’t remove your handcuffs,’” she said.
Okan Danacı, who is currently in pretrial detention in another case and joined the hearing via videoconference, claimed, “We were exercising our democratic constitutional right. The police blocked us without any reason or warning, and we were subjected to reverse handcuffing. They kept the press away to prevent filming. In that isolated environment, we were subjected to violence and insults.”
Mazlum Ortaç, also detained in another case, said he is a university student at Sakarya University and intended to join the protest to raise awareness about student issues. “Police pinned me to the ground and handcuffed me. Even while sitting in the police vehicle, they punched me in the face. I did nothing to justify any charges,” he said.
Defense attorney Diren Yeşil argued that May Day celebrations in Taksim are historically and legally legitimate, referencing the 1977 May Day tragedy in Taksim and emphasizing that international agreements protect the right to assembly. “This right draws its legitimacy from its historical roots, even beyond legal protection,” she said.
Attorney Baran Elma criticized the Istanbul Governor’s ban as arbitrary and lacking accountability. He stated that the ban violated the essence of constitutional rights, including freedom of expression and assembly as outlined in Articles 25, 26, and 34 of the Turkish Constitution, as well as Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. He also claimed that the elements of the alleged crime were not present.
The court ordered the forcible appearance of two defendants who were absent and issued a detention warrant for one other person. It also requested the Istanbul Governor’s Office to clarify whether any district- or neighborhood-level bans were issued in relation to the events described in the indictment, and if so, to provide documentation. The next hearing is scheduled for Oct. 23.
