- Journalist Ali Barış Kurt, although he was supposed to be released in November 2025, continues to be held in prison by a decision of the Prison Administration and Observation Board.
- Kurt stated that his release was prevented on the allegation that he “was not remorseful,” and drew attention to the conditions of Maltepe No. 1 L-Type Closed Prison, where he is being held.
MLSA — Journalist Ali Barış Kurt, who is held in Maltepe No. 1 L-Type Closed Prison, continues to be kept in prison by a decision issued last November by the Prison Administration and Observation Board, although he was supposed to be released in November 2025. The Board’s justification was that Ali Barış Kurt “was not remorseful.”
Kurt, whose sentence of 2 years and 4 months in prison for his professional activities and social media posts was upheld by the Court of Cassation, was arrested on Feb. 8, 2025 and sent to prison. Kurt stated that despite the expiration of the date on which he should have been released, he continues to be held in prison due to decisions taken during the execution process.
In a message he sent to MLSA, Kurt said, “I was supposed to be released in November 2025, but the Observation Board unanimously prevented my release because I did not accept remorse. The Enforcement Judgeship and the High Criminal Court found the decision to be in accordance with law and procedure.”
Kurt conveyed that the Board’s decision contained “baseless justifications” and stated that he was not released due to a disciplinary penalty. “I have been in prison for approximately 400 days due to my journalistic activities,” said Kurt, also drawing attention to prison conditions: “Our friends who have spent 30 years inside and who are ill are also not being released. There is someone who has been held for 32 years, and someone who is 82 years old...” he said.
Saying, “We will stand by journalism and the truth under all conditions and in every place,” Kurt stated that the evaluations regarding his release process are unlawful.
Background
Prison Administration and Observation Boards, within the scope of Law No. 5275 on the Execution of Sentences and Security Measures, make assessments regarding whether convicts can benefit from conditional release and probation.
Objections to Board decisions can be made to the Enforcement Judgeship, and objections to Enforcement Judgeship decisions can be made to the High Criminal Court.
According to execution law, disciplinary penalties and administrative evaluations can affect a convict’s conditional release date. Article 19 of the Constitution guarantees the right to liberty and security of person, while Article 36 guarantees the right to a fair trial.
Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) regulates the right to liberty and security, Article 6 regulates the right to a fair trial, and Article 13 regulates the right to an effective remedy. In its judgments, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) emphasizes that deprivation of liberty must be “lawful” and “foreseeable.”
In terms of prison conditions, Article 3 of the ECHR regulates the prohibition of ill-treatment. In ECtHR case law, it is stated that if prison conditions lead to a situation contrary to human dignity, this article may be violated.
With regard to procedures concerning the execution process, an individual application can be made domestically to the Constitutional Court. After the exhaustion of domestic remedies, there is a right to apply to the ECtHR.
