- A total of 46 people were tried in 10 hearings monitored this week; at least 27 journalists and media workers, 12 activists, 6 students, 1 politician, and 1 filmmaker appeared before a judge.
- Among the monitored files, acquittal decisions were issued in only three cases.
- The METU protests case, the Altan Sancar file, and the case in which filmmaker Rojhilat Aksoy was tried resulted in acquittals; the majority of the other files were postponed.
- Practices that undermine the right to a fair trial—such as frequent delays, inadequate courtroom conditions, defendants not being brought to hearings, and heavy law enforcement presence—were observed in the hearings.
MLSA – The week began with the case in which journalist Evrim Deniz is being tried on charges of “unlawfully obtaining and disseminating personal data” due to the news story titled “Gang suspect builds a police station,” published on Bianet. Deniz, who only gave a statement at the İzmir 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance, said that the information in the report was available in the publicly accessible Turkish Trade Registry Gazette; since the main case is being heard at the Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance, the hearing was adjourned to June 23.
On the same day, in a case heard in Diyarbakır, filmmaker Rojhilat Aksoy—who was on trial for “publicly insulting the state” due to the screening of the film Aurora’s Sunrise, which is about the Armenian Genocide—was acquitted.
In the Selahattin Demirtaş case heard at the Batman 3rd Criminal Court of First Instance, proceedings on charges of “insulting state institutions” were adjourned to July 7 due to a request for consolidation.
In İzmir, the first hearing of the case in which 11 rights defenders involved in the management and supervision of the Young LGBTI+ Association are being tried for “violating the Law on Associations” due to five illustrations shared on the association’s social media account was held with heavy attendance. Due to insufficient courtroom capacity, the trial was moved from the İzmir 47th Criminal Court of First Instance to the courtroom of the 6th High Criminal Court. After defense statements and lawyers’ submissions, the court decided to request inspection reports from the Ministry of Interior and the file regarding the dissolution of the association, and adjourned the trial to October 14.
Following a violation ruling by the Constitutional Court, the retrial of journalist Neşe İdil on charges of “making propaganda for an organization” began. At the Istanbul 22nd High Criminal Court, the prosecutor presented an opinion requesting punishment; the trial was adjourned to April 22 to allow time for the defense.
In another case at the Istanbul 25th High Criminal Court, journalists Esra Solin Dal, Mehmet Aslan, and Erdoğan Alayumat—accused of “membership in an organization” based on their reporting and social media posts—also faced a prosecutorial opinion requesting punishment submitted the previous day. The court accepted requests from absent lawyers and adjourned the hearing to June 9 for defense statements on the merits.
At the 10th hearing of the case at the Diyarbakır 4th High Criminal Court, where 19 journalists and media workers are being tried for “membership in an organization,” defendants emphasized that they have been prosecuted for nearly four years due to their journalistic activities. Requests by lawyers to lift travel bans and return seized items were raised; the court adjourned the case to July 9 for defense statements on the merits.
At the Ankara 30th Criminal Court of First Instance, seven people tried for participating in protests held at Middle East Technical University (METU) following the detention of Ekrem İmamoğlu and many others were acquitted.
Journalist Altan Sancar, who was tried at the Ankara 27th Criminal Court of First Instance for “publicly disseminating misleading information” due to his reporting on debates over “absolute nullity” following a lawsuit concerning the CHP congress, was also acquitted.
In another case at the Istanbul 27th Criminal Court of First Instance, the prosecutor requested punishment for Yunus Kılıç, who participated in a pro-Palestine protest held at Şişhane Square on March 30, on charges of “insulting the president.” The court adjourned the hearing to June 18 for the preparation of a defense statement against the opinion.
Another file was the Saraçhane case. In Istanbul, 49 people tried for attending a rally on March 25 were acquitted, and the court also ruled that a criminal complaint be filed regarding allegations of torture and ill-treatment.
Problems highlighted in terms of the right to a fair trial
The most common problem observed in the hearings monitored this week was delays due to the courts’ workload. Observers reported that hearings in the cases of Evrim Deniz, Rojhilat Aksoy, Mehmet Üçar, the 19 journalists case, the METU protests file, and Altan Sancar started late due to workload. In the Neşe İdil file, delays occurred because other cases were prioritized. This situation pointed to a structural problem in conducting trials within a reasonable time and in an orderly manner.
Significant issues were also observed regarding physical conditions. In the METU protests case, the courtroom was reported to be small and poorly ventilated. In the Young LGBTI+ Association case, the initially designated courtroom at the İzmir 47th Criminal Court of First Instance was deemed insufficient, and upon lawyers’ request, the hearing was moved to the larger courtroom of the İzmir 6th High Criminal Court.
The presence of law enforcement in courtrooms also stood out in some cases. In the Young LGBTI+ Association case, two plainclothes police officers were reported to be observing the hearing from the back rows. In the METU protests case, uniformed police officers were present both inside and outside the courtroom. Particularly in trials concerning freedom of expression and assembly, heavy law enforcement presence was noted as creating a risk of pressure on defendants and observers.
Regarding access for observers, no serious obstruction was generally reported. In the Young LGBTI+ Association case, all observers were able to follow the hearing, and in the Evrim Deniz and Neşe İdil files, observers did not encounter problems entering the courtroom. In this respect, observer access was largely ensured in the week’s cases.
The overall picture showed that rather than clear and direct interventions, more structural issues undermining the right to a fair trial came to the fore. Delayed hearings, inadequate courtroom conditions, the absence of defendants in court, and the atmosphere created by law enforcement presence once again raised questions about the extent to which procedural safeguards are ensured in freedom of expression trials.
Other developments
Among other developments related to freedom of expression, the rejection of an appeal against the detention of BirGün reporter İsmail Arı stood out. Following the rejection, Arı began preparations for an individual application to the Constitutional Court.
It was also announced during the week that the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office launched an investigation into journalist Bahadır Özgür following a criminal complaint by MASAK. The investigation is reportedly based on allegations of “disclosing a confidential report containing state intelligence information” due to a news report published in BirGün four years ago.
Pressure in the digital sphere also continued. According to posts by Free Web Turkey, journalist Roza Arpa’s X account was blocked on April 6, and journalist Abdurrahman Gök’s X account was blocked again on the same day. Just before the week began, on April 5, a second access ban on journalist Dilan Babat’s X account was also announced; although it falls just before the bulletin week, it drew attention as an indication of the continuation of pressure on online expression.
