Eylem Sonbahar
An Istanbul court acquitted journalists Barış Pehlivan, Seda Selek, Serhan Asker, Suat Toktaş, and Kürşad Oğuz of "attempting to influence judicial officials" in a case related to Halk TV’s coverage of an expert witness. The court ruled that the charge of "recording and listening to conversations between individuals in public" would be sent to a mediation office. While ordering Toktaş’s release, the court also ruled that all defendants' travel bans would remain in place.
The trial, held at Istanbul’s 54th Criminal Court of First Instance, was initiated over Halk TV’s broadcast of a conversation between expert witness Satılmış Büyükcanayakın and journalist Barış Pehlivan. The conversation was made public after Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu mentioned the expert’s name. The defendants included Halk TV’s Editor-in-Chief Suat Toktaş, Coordinator Kürşad Oğuz, presenter Seda Selek, and responsible manager Serhan Asker.
Defense arguments highlight press freedom concerns
During the trial, Seda Selek argued that the charges against her lacked legal justification and requested acquittal. Her lawyer, Hüseyin Ersöz, emphasized that Selek had no role in deciding to air the recording and requested the removal of judicial control measures.
Lawyer Enes Hikmet Ermaner criticized the indictment for failing to substantiate the alleged crime, calling for an immediate acquittal.
Journalist Suat Toktaş, who had been in pretrial detention since Jan. 30, entered the courtroom escorted by gendarmes and was greeted with applause. His co-defendant, Kürşad Oğuz, described the case as an attack on journalism, stating: "This case is not just against me but against the entire profession of journalism." He defended the decision to record the conversation as a journalistic necessity, arguing that the public had a right to hear the expert’s statement directly.
Oğuz’s lawyer, Beliz Özkan, insisted that the act of recording and publishing the conversation fell under press freedom. "Our clients are dedicated journalists whose only goal is to report the news accurately. Instead of being prosecuted, they should be recognized for their work," she said.
Barış Pehlivan, another defendant, argued that the trial was politically motivated, comparing it to past judicial abuses by members of the now-defunct Gülen movement. He also criticized selective legal enforcement, stating: "If we were drug lords, corrupt bureaucrats, or religious sect leaders accused of abuse, this case would have been dismissed."
Toktaş, in his defense, rejected the charges and questioned the rationale for his detention. "If I wanted to flee, I could have done so that day. But I didn’t. There is no evidence to be tampered with. I won’t accept judicial control either. This is my country—I won’t leave even if you throw me out," he stated.
Court orders Toktaş’s release but upholds travel bans
The prosecutor had requested the continuation of Toktaş’s detention, arguing that evidence was still being collected. Toktaş, responding to the request, said: "I’ve spent 30 years in journalism. I will go back to prison if I have to. But is it really that easy to call for continued detention?"
After a recess for deliberation, the court acquitted all defendants of "attempting to influence judicial officials." However, since the required mediation process had not taken place for the charge of "recording public conversations," the case was referred to a mediation office. The court ordered the release of Toktaş but maintained travel bans for all defendants. It also lifted the requirement for defendants to check in with authorities weekly.
