- The court emphasized that participation in demonstrations and press statements alone cannot be considered membership in an organization, recalling that freedom of expression and assembly are safeguarded by the Constitution, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and United Nations documents.
- In its reasoned decision, which cited Court of Cassation precedents, the court stated that non-violent expressions of opinion and participation in meetings cannot be evaluated as “organizational activity”; the defendant benefited from the principle of doubt.
The Istanbul 25th High Criminal Court published the reasoning for its acquittal of journalist Elif Akgül, who had been tried alongside politician Mehmet Saltoğlu on charges of “membership in an armed terrorist organization” on the grounds of alleged activities within the Peoples’ Democratic Congress (HDK). The ruling clearly set out that attending meetings and demonstrations or making press statements cannot, on their own, constitute evidence of membership in an organization.
The court evaluated the meetings, protests, and press statements attended by Akgül as a natural part of freedom of expression and the right to assembly and demonstration. The reasoning recalled that these rights are guaranteed by the Constitution, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and stressed that such peaceful activities cannot be punished.
Considering together the law enforcement reports in the file, the indictment, and the defense statements, the court found that there was no concrete and convincing evidence that Akgül was within the hierarchy of the PKK/KCK or had established a relationship with the organization characterized by continuity, diversity, and intensity. The court specifically placed on record that merely participating in meetings and marches does not amount to membership in an organization.
“In criminal proceedings, conviction cannot be based on probabilities”
The reasoned decision also referred to established precedents of the Court of Cassation. Citing rulings of the 3rd Criminal Chamber dated March 29, 2023 and December 12, 2023, the court stated that non-violent expressions of opinion and participation in meetings by individuals associated with the Democratic Society Congress (DTK) or similar structures cannot be interpreted as “organizational activity.” These precedents emphasize that, in order to speak of membership in an organization, concrete indicators must exist, such as the use of a code name, armed or ideological training, or contact with the organization’s armed cadres.
The court further stated that the defendant’s name appearing on certain meeting lists cannot, by itself, be considered incriminating evidence, as no direct link was established between those lists and the defendant’s will and actions. It stressed that in criminal proceedings, conviction must be based not on probabilities but on definitive evidence free from any doubt, underlining the principle that “the defendant benefits from doubt.”
Within this framework, the court concluded that it had not been established that Elif Akgül was a member of an armed terrorist organization and recorded that she was acquitted pursuant to Article 223/2-e of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Akgül had been held in prison for 101 days
Akgül had also been acquitted at the hearing held on January 19, 2026, together with politician Mehmet Saltoğlu. Despite the prosecutor’s request for punishment, the acquittal and the subsequently published reasoned decision once again made visible the limits drawn by the judiciary against the criminalization of freedom of expression and the right to peaceful assembly.
Within the scope of this case, Elif Akgül was arrested on February 21, 2025, and after being held for 101 days in Bakırköy Closed Women’s Prison, she was released on June 2, 2025.
