- In this week’s trials, hearings started late, were short, or were not held at all. Small and poorly ventilated courtrooms undermined the principle of publicity, and the right to defense was recognized only in form.
- Police presence extended into the courtrooms themselves. In some case files, law enforcement statements were given priority, while lawyers’ defense statements were interrupted with the directive to “stick to the merits.”
- Even in trials where lengthy prison sentences are being sought, the right to a hearing was effectively obstructed. One hearing was postponed by the judge, citing “inadequate courtroom” and “I’m sick” as reasons.
- This week, three journalists were also arrested. Access bans were imposed on the social media accounts of media organizations.
In the first week of February, trials concerning freedom of expression remained on the agenda through hearings held in various cities and ongoing investigations. In the case files observed this week, journalists, activists, and one lawyer stood trial; in some cases hearings were held, while in others procedural issues prevented proceedings from moving forward.
Over the course of the week, a total of four trials were observed. In these trials, two journalists, nine activists, and one lawyer were prosecuted. The charges against journalists largely centered on allegations of “membership in an organization” and “insulting the president,” while the case against the activists was opened on the grounds of their participation in a protest action.
Violations of the right to a fair trial
The hearings observed this week once again revealed how structural problems concerning the right to a fair trial manifest in courtroom practice. While some hearings started on time, particularly in Istanbul, delays occurred in several proceedings due to “workload,” which hindered the actual access of parties and observers to the hearings. Most hearings were kept short, and in some sessions, adjournments were declared without substantive discussion.
The physical conditions of the courtrooms emerged as one of the most prominent problems in terms of fair trial rights: small and poorly ventilated rooms undermined the principle of publicity; in some hearings, the courtroom door was left open, making it possible for law enforcement officers outside to hear the statements made inside. In more than one case, a noticeable presence of police and plainclothes security officers inside or around the courtroom created a sense of pressure on defendants and their lawyers.
Regarding the right to defense, although in general the defense statements were heard, in particular in the case against the activists, the lawyers' political and contextual arguments were cut short with the justification that they “were not addressing the merits,” while more space was given to the statements of police officers testifying as witnesses. This unequal approach pointed to a de facto violation of the principle of equality of arms.
Taking all these elements together, although hearings were held in form, factors such as timing, space, police presence, and the approach to defense created a practice that limited the right to a fair trial.
This week’s trials
In the case against journalist Perihan Erkılınç Okay on the charge of “membership in an organization,” no actual hearing could be held. The second hearing, which was supposed to take place at the Istanbul 23rd High Criminal Court, did not proceed due to a dispute over which court has jurisdiction. The jurisdictional disagreement between the Istanbul and İzmir courts continues with the file having been sent to the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation. This process has caused the trial of the journalist to be extended for an indefinite period, while judicial control measures in the case remain in place. A detailed assessment of the jurisdictional crisis was included in the news report on the case.
At the Istanbul 8th Criminal Court of First Instance, the fourth hearing was held in the case of nine activists prosecuted for participating in a protest during President Erdoğan’s speech at the TRT World Forum, demanding that trade with Israel be suspended. The small and poorly ventilated courtroom caused notable problems in terms of the principles of publicity and the right to defense. Contradictions were observed in the testimonies of police officers who were heard as witnesses, and there were some interventions during the defense. The court postponed the hearing to June 16, 2026, after sending the file to the prosecutor’s office to prepare its opinion on the merits. Details of this hearing were shared with the public in the news report on the case.
In the “boycott posts” trial, in which Cem Yiğit Üzümoğlu is also among the defendants and where long prison sentences are being sought for 21 defendants, the first hearing could not be held in practice. The judge stated that the hearing was postponed due to being sick and the physical inadequacy of the courtroom. However, the judge continued to hear other cases with fewer defendants on the same day. In a case where the defense was present and ready, the postponement of the hearing on such grounds—and the fact that the courtroom and the judge’s health were only considered obstacles for this specific case—raised serious questions about the seriousness, foreseeability, and fairness of the trial, particularly regarding the principle of equality of arms. These developments were included in our report.
Another notable hearing of the week was the ninth session in the trial of journalist Sedef Kabaş, who is facing charges of “insulting the president” due to 25 social media posts. Held at the Istanbul Anadolu 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance, the hearing began late due to workload. During the hearing, defense statements were heard, and the court decided to wait for the outcome of related cases, adjourning the proceedings to May 5, 2026. The travel ban imposed on the journalist remains in effect.
Other developments
In addition to court hearings, important developments in the field of freedom of expression also took place throughout the week. In Istanbul, arrests of reporters and editors during operations targeting Etkin News Agency (ETHA) raised serious concerns regarding press freedom. ETHA editors Nadiye Gürbüz, Pınar Gayıp, and reporter Elif Bayburt, who were detained in the Istanbul-based operation, were arrested following their statements at the courthouse.
Digital access bans were also on the agenda. The shutdown of Mezopotamya Agency’s WhatsApp channel and access restrictions imposed on various news sites and journalists’ social media accounts revealed different dimensions of the pressure on freedom of expression and the press.
On the international front, the European Court of Human Rights’ decision to accept the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) as a third party in the Osman Kavala case drew attention. This decision was seen as significant both in terms of the case itself and broader debates around freedom of expression and personal liberty in Turkey.
In conclusion, the week of February 2 was marked by postponed hearings, ongoing jurisdiction crises, and renewed debates around the right to defense. The trials against journalists and activists continue to be closely monitored, both in terms of judicial practice and the boundaries of freedom of expression.
