The prison sentence given to journalist Çetin Yılmaz using the evidence obtained through ‘virtual patrol’ has been taken to the Constitutional Court
The Legal Team of the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) has brought the prison sentence given to journalist Çetin Yılmaz for “making propaganda for a terrorist organization” before the Constitutional Court. The application emphasized that the sentence given to journalist Yılmaz violated Article 13 of the Constitution, which stipulates the restriction of fundamental rights and freedoms and Article 20, which guarantees the privacy of private life.
On March 30th, 2022, the Manisa 2nd High Criminal Court sentenced journalist Çetin Yılmaz to 1 year 6 months and 22 days in prison for “making propaganda for a terrorist organization” because of some social media posts. The Legal Team of MLSA applied to the Constitutional Court on the grounds that the sentence given to Yılmaz violated Articles 25, 26 and 28 of the Constitution and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which protects the freedom of expression. In the application, it was emphasized that the social media posts which were cited as the ground for conviction were gathered with the purpose of manufacturing evidence and that the conviction targeted the journalistic activities of Yılmaz.
Recalling the judgment of the Constitutional Court, in which the court found it unlawful for the police to gather evidence through a method called “virtual patrol”, MLSA lawyers argued that the interference with the journalist’s right to freedom of expression in this way has no place in democratic societies. Yılmaz’s lawyers further argued: “On 19.02.2020, the Constitutional Court ruled to annul the Article 6, Paragraph 18th of the Law No. 2559 on the Duties and Discretion of the Police (PSVK) which granted the police the authority to gather evidence through virtual patrol. The trial which resulted in conviction began with an investigation that was carried out through a virtual patrol. In this way, the investigation itself was carried out in an unlawful manner and through the following trial which resulted in the applicant’s conviction constituted the violation of Articles 13th and 20th of the Constitution.”
In their application to the Constitutional Court, Yılmaz’s lawyers also argued that the right to a fair trial, which is protected by Article 36 of the Constitution and by Article 6 of the ECHR, was violated. It was shared with the High Court that the local court sentenced the journalist without allowing adequate and further investigation on the social media posts in question and without considering the fact that the social media posts in question did not belong to the journalist.