Eylem Sonbahar
A Turkish court has acquitted journalist Çiğdem Akbayrak of charges of “insulting the president” during a retrial prompted by a Constitutional Court ruling that found the earlier proceedings violated her rights.
The second hearing of the retrial took place at the 2nd Penal Chamber of the Trabzon Regional Court of Justice, following the Constitutional Court's decision deeming the prior verdict a rights violation. The case had originally been triggered by a social media post in which Akbayrak criticized Turkey's military operation in Afrin, Syria, in 2018, posting a tweet with the phrase "no to war."
Akbayrak, whose defense was provided by the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA), faced charges of “insulting the president” based on this post. In the initial trial, the Küçükçekmece 5th Criminal Court of First Instance had sentenced her to 11 months and 20 days in prison, but the sentence was suspended through a “deferment of the announcement of the verdict” (commonly referred to as HAGB in Turkey). The MLSA subsequently challenged the decision, leading to the Constitutional Court’s ruling that HAGB orders constituted a violation of freedom of expression in this case.
During the retrial, Akbayrak’s legal representative, attorney Hazal Sümeli from MLSA’s legal unit, participated via video link from the original court’s hearing room using Turkey's Audio and Visual Information System (SEGBİS).
In the December 18 hearing, the prosecutor had reiterated their demand for Akbayrak’s punishment on the grounds of “insulting the president.” However, Sümeli strongly defended her client’s right to free expression, highlighting the Constitutional Court’s stance on the incompatibility of HAGB orders with freedom of expression.
Sümeli argued that Akbayrak’s comments fell squarely within the bounds of freedom of expression, emphasizing that as a journalist, her client’s right to critique should be interpreted more broadly. Sümeli stated, “The president, given his position, should be more open to criticism than others. My client’s words must be evaluated as an exercise of freedom of expression. Based on the Constitutional Court’s violation ruling, we demand her acquittal.”
The court ultimately ruled in favor of Akbayrak, acquitting her of all charges.
Background on the case
The charges against Akbayrak stemmed from her tweet opposing Turkey’s military operation in Afrin, a region in northwestern Syria, launched on Jan. 20, 2018. Prosecutors argued that the tweet amounted to “insulting the president.”
In the initial trial, Akbayrak was handed an 11-month-and-20-day prison sentence, with the announcement of the verdict deferred under HAGB rules. The MLSA challenged this decision, taking the case to the Constitutional Court, which found that the HAGB order violated Akbayrak’s freedom of expression. This led to the retrial, where the Trabzon court reexamined the case and delivered the acquittal.
