- The Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) has filed an application with Turkey’s Constitutional Court on behalf of journalist Tuğba Tekerek, who is being held in pretrial detention at Sincan Prison in Ankara.
- The application argues that Tekerek’s detention without concrete evidence violates her right to liberty and security, that the use of her journalistic activities as grounds for criminal charges violates her freedoms of expression and the press, and that restrictions on her right to defense violate her right to a fair trial.
- The application also cites practices during her detention in police custody, delays in accessing medical care and interference with her private life. MLSA has asked the Constitutional Court to order an interim measure that would secure Tekerek’s release.
The Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) has filed an application with Turkey’s Constitutional Court on behalf of journalist Tuğba Tekerek, who was arrested as part of an operation publicly known as “My Family Is Safe” (“Ailem Güvende”). The application states that Tekerek has no concrete ties to Kaos GL, an LGBTQ+ rights organization in Turkey, beyond her journalistic activities, but was nevertheless detained on allegations that she managed the organization’s social media account.
The application argues that the criminal suspicion used to justify Tekerek’s pretrial detention was not supported by concrete evidence, that the detention order was issued without considering her individual circumstances, and that her appeal against detention was rejected without addressing the grounds she raised. MLSA has requested that the Constitutional Court prioritize the application and issue an interim measure to secure Tekerek’s release.
Tekerek’s only connection to Kaos GL was through her journalism
The application states that Tekerek covered Georgia’s 2024 elections and wrote a news report titled “Being LGBTQ+ during Georgia’s election: I feel like I’m both a hero and living in a dystopia.” It emphasizes that Tekerek received a freelance fee solely for this news report, which was published on Kaos GL’s website.
The application also states that Tekerek was never a member, employee, volunteer or manager of the organization and had no role in managing its website or social media accounts. It further notes that there is no concrete evidence linking the journalist to the preparation or publication of any other content under investigation.
Basis for allegation that Tekerek managed Instagram account not disclosed
According to the application, the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office launched an investigation on Sept. 9, 2026, into certain content published on Kaos GL’s website and social media accounts. Tekerek was among those named as suspects in the investigation.
On Sept. 11, authorities initiated procedures to search Tekerek’s home on Büyükada, an island off Istanbul, seize her digital devices and take her into custody. Tekerek was detained on Sept. 13 following a search of her home that morning and was subsequently taken to Ankara.
The application states that law enforcement authorities identified Tekerek as the person operating the Instagram account “kaosgl” but did not disclose the technical data underlying that determination. It notes that neither Tekerek nor her lawyers were provided with concrete digital evidence, such as IP records, platform data, device examination findings or account administrator records, showing that she managed the account.
During her statement to police on Sept. 14, Tekerek denied managing Kaos GL’s social media accounts, said she had no institutional ties to the organization and stated that she was seeing many of the posts under investigation for the first time. She also explained that her news report published by Kaos GL was the product of her journalistic work in 2024.
The application stated:
“The applicant’s defense lawyer also asked during questioning what specific documents or technical data supported law enforcement’s assessment that she was ‘the person operating the KAOS GL Instagram account.’ However, neither the applicant nor her lawyer was provided with any IP records, platform data, account access logs, device examination findings, technical reports or other concrete digital evidence supporting that determination. As a result, the applicant was forced to present her defense without knowing the factual basis for the central allegation that would later be used to justify her pretrial detention.”
No concrete facts presented to justify detention
On Sept. 15, Tekerek was referred to Ankara’s 6th Criminal Judgeship of Peace with a request for pretrial detention, alongside 15 others, including members of Kaos GL’s executive and supervisory boards. The court ordered the detention of Tekerek and seven members of the organization’s executive and supervisory boards, while seven others were released under judicial supervision.
The application emphasizes that the detention order referred to the suspects’ “positions within the organization,” even though Tekerek held no position at Kaos GL. It argues that the decision was issued without an individualized assessment of the journalist’s circumstances or her alleged connection to the investigation.
The application further notes that Tekerek has maintained a permanent residence on Büyükada for many years, that her home had already been searched and that her digital devices had been seized. It argues that authorities failed to present any concrete facts indicating a risk of flight or evidence tampering. The application also states that the court did not explain why less restrictive measures, such as judicial supervision, would be insufficient.
Tekerek’s lawyers appealed the detention order on Sept. 21. However, the Ankara 10th Criminal Court of First Instance rejected the appeal in a final ruling on Sept. 25. According to the application, the court failed to individually address the defense’s arguments concerning Tekerek’s alleged ties to Kaos GL, the absence of technical evidence linking her to the social media account and the lack of concrete grounds justifying her detention.
Request for access to investigation documents goes unanswered
On Sept. 30, Tekerek’s lawyers filed a request with the Cybercrime Bureau of the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, seeking access to the information and documents used to identify the journalist as the person operating the Instagram account “kaosgl.” The application states that page 53 of a 55-page investigation file contains this assertion but does not specify the concrete information, documents or technical analysis on which it was based.
The application also notes that the complaint reportedly used to initiate the investigation, along with its attachments, was not available in Turkey’s National Judiciary Informatics System (UYAP), the country’s electronic judicial case management system. Pages 20, 21 and 22 of the investigation file were also missing.
According to the application, the lawyers received no response to their request for all relevant documents, including investigative findings, official records, reports, correspondence and technical examinations.
The application argues that the failure to disclose the basis for the central allegation used to justify Tekerek’s pretrial detention restricted her ability to mount an effective defense against the charges.
Treatment during police custody also cited in application
The application states that Tekerek was subjected to a drug test during police custody without any explanation of its relevance to the investigation. Blood, hair and urine samples were collected after she was warned that force would be used if necessary. Her request to have her lawyers notified was also denied.
The application further argues that authorities made individuals detained in separate investigations move together and filmed them in handcuffs, portraying Tekerek as guilty in the eyes of the public.
It also states that Tekerek experienced severe migraine pain while in custody but that her requests for a medical examination and painkillers were not granted until several days later.
Journalistic activities used as grounds for criminal allegations
In its application, MLSA argued that journalist Tuğba Tekerek’s pretrial detention violated her right to liberty and security under Article 19 of Turkey’s Constitution. It also stated that the use of her journalistic activities as grounds for criminal suspicion violated her freedom of expression under Article 26 and freedom of the press under Article 28.
The application further argued that denying Tekerek access to the information and documents used to justify her detention, along with the failure to adequately assess her appeals against detention, violated her right to effectively challenge her detention under Article 19(8) and her right to a fair trial under Article 36 of the Constitution. It also noted that the detention order failed to adequately consider Tekerek’s individual circumstances and the allegations against her.
MLSA argued that the collection of blood, hair and urine samples under threat of force, the filming of Tekerek in handcuffs and delays in providing medical care during police custody violated her right to protect her physical and psychological integrity under Article 17 and her right to respect for private life under Article 20 of the Constitution.
MLSA further alleged that the investigation and detention measures were intended to obstruct Tekerek’s journalistic activities, raising concerns under Article 13 of the Constitution, which establishes safeguards governing restrictions on fundamental rights and freedoms, and Article 14, which prohibits the abuse of rights. The application argued that these complaints also engaged Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits restrictions on rights from being applied for purposes other than those prescribed, in conjunction with Article 5, protecting the right to liberty and security, and Article 10, protecting freedom of expression.
The application also alleged violations of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, concerning liberty and security; Article 6, concerning the right to a fair trial; Article 8, concerning respect for private life; and Article 10, concerning freedom of expression.
MLSA calls for Tekerek’s immediate release from pretrial detention
MLSA asked Turkey’s Constitutional Court to urgently review the application and issue an interim measure to end Tekerek’s pretrial detention.
The application seeks a ruling that Tekerek’s rights to liberty and security, freedom of expression and the press, a fair trial, respect for private life, and protection of her physical and psychological integrity were violated.
MLSA also requested that the court find violations arising from restrictions on access to the information and documents used to justify Tekerek’s detention and the failure to effectively review her appeals against detention.
The organization further asked the court to order measures to remedy the violations and their consequences and to refer its ruling to the relevant judicial authority to secure Tekerek’s release.
