- Journalist Feyza Nur Çalıkoğlu was acquitted in a case in which she was tried over her reporting on alleged ill-treatment at the Çatalca Removal Center, with the court ruling that the legal elements of the offense were not met.
- Lawyers who testified as witnesses at the hearing emphasized that the accounts regarding rights violations at removal centers were based on factual grounds, and the court took these statements into consideration.
MLSA - The third hearing in the trial of Çalıkoğlu, who was charged with “publicly disseminating misleading information” for reporting on allegations of ill-treatment at the Çatalca Removal Center, was held at the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance.
The hearing began approximately one and a half hours late due to workload. Çalıkoğlu attended the session. Lawyers Abdülhalim Yılmaz and Beyza Bengisu Akyüz, whose views were included in the news report, were heard as witnesses.
Witness Abdülhalim Yılmaz stated that he is a lawyer, that the statements included in the news report belonged to him and that he reviewed them before publication. He said Çalıkoğlu reported the information she received from him. “We often do not provide information to journalists in order to avoid consequences against our clients. However, we share information we are sure is accurate. We have filed applications to the Constitutional Court, the Human Rights and Equality Institution of Turkey, CİMER (the Presidential Communication Center) and public prosecutor’s offices regarding our clients who have been subjected to rights violations. There are also court records related to these applications,” he said.
Another lawyer heard as a witness, Beyza Bengisu Akyüz, said she has long worked in the field of migrant and refugee rights and, due to her profession, has had the opportunity to personally listen to rights violations experienced by foreigners held under administrative detention in removal centers. Akyüz stated that in her meetings she observed that access to basic hygiene materials was not provided, that the centers were holding people far beyond their capacity and that “voluntary return” documents were made to be signed by force. She emphasized that these accounts were not exceptional. “The accounts of my clients who stayed at different times and in different removal centers overlap with each other,” she said.
Akyüz stated that Çalıkoğlu, as a journalist, asked her about the situation in removal centers. “What I conveyed is based on factual grounds,” she said. Akyüz also added, “If a penalty results from this case, it will not only be a penalty given to Feyza Nur Çalıkoğlu. This decision would cause foreigners who are subjected to rights violations in removal centers to fall silent and their voices not to be heard.”
Speaking last at the hearing, Feyza Nur Çalıkoğlu said she did not accept the prosecutor’s opinion on the merits and requested her acquittal.
After the defense statements and witness testimony, the court ruled to acquit Feyza Nur Çalıkoğlu on the grounds that the legal elements of the crime were not established.
