- At least 16 people were tried in freedom of expression cases heard during the week of May 4; defendants included journalists, a student, a lawyer, and broadcasting workers.
- Verdicts were issued in two cases during the week; journalists were acquitted while a student was handed a judicial fine.
- Inadequate courtrooms, lengthy delays, and SEGBİS technical failures drew attention throughout the week.
- The exclusion of journalists, observers, and some lawyers from courtrooms, along with police interventions, brought fair trial concerns to the fore.
At least 16 people were tried across six hearings monitored this week. Among the defendants were seven journalists and a student; the cases largely concerned social media posts, news coverage, press statements, cartoons, and other acts falling within the scope of freedom of expression. Verdicts were reached in two cases: journalists were acquitted in one, while a student received a judicial fine in the other. The remaining cases were adjourned.
The second hearing in the case against six LeMan magazine employees — charged with "publicly inciting hatred and enmity" over a cartoon published in the magazine's issue dated 26 June 2025 — was held at Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance. The court decided to await the enforcement of an arrest warrant for defendant Mehmet Tuncay Akgün and adjourned the hearing to 13 October 2026. A request to join the case as a complainant by a person identifying himself as Muhammet Hasan Medineli was rejected; it emerged that Medineli had previously sought complainant status in the Charlie Hebdo case in which Cumhuriyet writers were tried.
The first hearing in the case concerning the murder of journalist Hakan Tosun was held at Bakırköy 17th Heavy Criminal Court. Detained defendants Adnan Şahin and Abdurrahman Murat face charges of "intentional killing." The court ruled to maintain the defendants' pre-trial detention, requested HTS (call records) data, and decided to waive the testimony of certain witnesses, adjourning the hearing to 8 July 2026. The hearing was overshadowed by police intervention and the refusal to admit journalists, lawyers, and observers to the courtroom.
No verdict was reached at the 10th hearing in the "insulting the President" case brought against journalist Sedef Kabaş over social media posts. Istanbul Anatolian 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance decided to propose the consolidation of the file with another case pending before Istanbul 36th Criminal Court of First Instance, on the grounds that Article 43/1 of the Turkish Penal Code could be applied should the act attributed to Kabaş be established; the hearing was adjourned to 8 October 2026. The hearing began an hour and a half late and concluded in approximately five minutes.
The fourth hearing in the case against journalist Hatice Şen, charged with "membership of an organization," was held at Diyarbakır 1st Heavy Criminal Court. The file includes testimony from anonymous witnesses. The hearing was adjourned to 19 November 2026 to allow time for defense submissions.
A verdict was reached in the case against journalists Zeynep Kuray, Mahsum Sağlam, Pelin Laçin, and Yadigar Aygün, and university student Yağmur Filiz, who were prosecuted for attending a press statement in Şişhane held to commemorate journalists Nazım Daştan and Cihan Bilgin, killed in Syria. Istanbul 39th Criminal Court of First Instance acquitted the defendants of the charge of violating Law No. 2911; however, student Yağmur Filiz was sentenced to a judicial fine of 35,400 TL on the charge of "insulting a public official." The journalists were acquitted while the student received a fine.
A civil lawsuit filed by Bilal Erdoğan seeking 250,000 TL in moral damages against journalist Furkan Karabay over a social media post was heard at Istanbul 45th Civil Court of First Instance. The court ruled to await the outcome of the criminal proceedings concerning the same post, pending before Istanbul 47th Criminal Court of First Instance, and adjourned the hearing to 17 December 2026.
Singer Mabel Matiz was acquitted in the case in which he faced an "obscenity" charge over the lyrics of his song "Perperişan." Istanbul 54th Criminal Court of First Instance ruled that erotic connotations in song lyrics cannot, on their own, constitute grounds for criminal conviction, and acquitted Matiz.
The third hearing in the case against Swedish journalist Joakim Medin — defended by MLSA — on charges of "membership of an armed terrorist organization" and "making organization propaganda" began one hour late and was adjourned within three minutes.
Fair trial violations
Fair trial concerns reflected in monitoring reports were among the most prominent issues of the week.
In the Hakan Tosun case, observers, journalists, and some lawyers were barred from the courtroom on the grounds of insufficient space; police shields were deployed, and access to the hearing was only secured after approximately an hour of tension. Defendants appeared via SEGBİS (video-link system) while a heavy police presence was recorded both inside and around the courthouse.
In the LeMan case, the courtroom was reported to be small and poorly ventilated, with case files stored in sacks on the floor.
In the Sedef Kabaş case, the SEGBİS connection could not be established, while the hearing lasted only a few minutes despite a lengthy delay.
Across several cases, late starts due to heavy caseloads, difficulties in observer access to courtrooms, and inadequate physical conditions that undermined the public nature of proceedings emerged as recurring fair trial concerns of the week.
Other developments of the week
Following Yeni Akit's targeting of BirGün correspondent Sarya Toprak and her family, it was announced that her father, Hasan Toprak, had been removed from his post.
An investigation was launched against journalist Ahmet Güneş over social media posts concerning attacks on Rojava.
MLSA lawyers filed an appeal with the Council of State (Danıştay) against the Ankara Regional Administrative Court ruling that reinstated the ban on the film Rojbash. The application emphasized that the ruling constitutes a disproportionate interference with freedom of expression and artistic freedom.
