EYLEM SONBAHAR
The trial of five police officers accused of beating and unlawfully detaining lawyer Murat Çelik during a peaceful Saturday Mothers demonstration in Istanbul has begun, with controversy erupting over the courtroom conditions and the judge’s dismissive response to concerns about a fair trial.
The officers are facing charges of “exceeding the limits of the authority to use force” and “intentional injury” over the July 8, 2023, incident during the 954th weekly protest of the Saturday Mothers—an initiative of families seeking justice for relatives who disappeared in state custody during the 1990s.
The first hearing took place at Istanbul’s 62nd Criminal Court of First Instance. The five defendants did not attend the hearing, while complainant Murat Çelik was present along with his legal team. Representatives from the Istanbul Bar Association, Human Rights Association (İHD), Contemporary Lawyers Association (ÇHD), Association of Lawyers for Freedom (ÖHD), the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (TİHV), and numerous lawyers and journalists observed the proceedings.
Judge rejects request for larger courtroom: ‘We would deliver justice even in a field’
Lawyer Murat Çelik addressed the judge, saying, “I’ve been dealing with serious health issues due to the assault. My colleagues and I are standing throughout this hearing. I don’t believe a fair trial can take place under these conditions. We request to move the hearing to a larger courtroom.” The judge responded, “We would deliver justice even in a field,” dismissing the concern.
Attorney İbrahim Ergün added that a formal request for a larger courtroom had been submitted on the 1st of the month but was only rejected on the 8th, despite multiple available large courtrooms. “This is one of the smallest courtrooms in the building. We believe this was done deliberately to restrict the trial,” he said.
Despite these objections, the judge ruled to continue in the same small courtroom, denying all requests to move the hearing.
An attorney from the Antalya Bar Association criticized the decision, saying, “Even in rural districts, larger courtrooms are arranged for sensitive trials. Holding a case like this in a courtroom not designated for this court risks undermining the principle of open and fair trial.”
‘They said they would break his arm’ — serious assault allegations
Lawyer Seval Ballıkaya Çelik cited findings from multiple civil society reports monitoring the July 8 demonstration, stating that Murat Çelik identified himself as a lawyer in front of a police van and objected to being handcuffed. She said he was kicked repeatedly by several officers and was hit in the head with police boots. “One officer said, ‘We’ll break your arm,’ and another later told him, ‘They didn’t do enough.’ He was struck in vital areas. A medical evaluation by the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey concluded he was subjected to torture and inhuman treatment,” she said.
Only Istanbul Bar and Turkish Bar Association allowed to join case
Several organizations, including the Turkish Bar Association, Istanbul Bar Association, ÖHD, ÇHD, Antalya Bar Association, the Lawyers’ Union, and İHD, requested to join the case as intervening parties. After a recess, the prosecutor requested that only the Turkish Bar Association and Istanbul Bar Association be granted intervenor status, citing potential harm resulting from the crime.
The judge accepted the prosecutor’s recommendation, admitting only the two bar associations to the case and rejecting the others. A lawyer who requested to join as an observer was also denied.
‘We just went through something like a trial’
Lawyer İbrahim Ergün criticized the chaotic process, saying: “Someone outside thought Murat Bey was the one on trial. That’s the impression this setup gives. You brought us here and what we did today wasn’t even a proper hearing. We request again that the next session be held in a larger courtroom. Four of the officers submitted medical reports and didn’t appear. We request that all five be ordered to appear by force at the next hearing.”
After a second recess, the judge denied the request to compel the five officers to appear. The next hearing is scheduled for Feb. 18, 2026, at 10:30 a.m.
