- A total of 47 people appeared before judges this week. The most prominent cases included the trial of 36 people over the Trans Pride March, the case involving eight former HDP members of parliament, and proceedings against three journalists.
- The harshest prison sentences of the week were handed down to journalists. Ahmet Altan received 4 years and 6 months, Nazlı Ilıcak was sentenced to 3 years and 9 months, and Enver Aysever received a 10-month prison sentence.
- Late-starting hearings, inadequate courtrooms, the interruption of defense statements, difficulties imposed on observers, the rejection of objections to the presence of police officers in the courtroom, and repeated adjournments stood out as violations of the right to a fair trial.
- In the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IBB) trial involving 402 defendants, disputes over fair trial standards and motions to recuse judges also surfaced. Attempts to move journalists to a “blind spot” in the courtroom further intensified debates over the public nature of hearings.
One of the most notable hearings of the week was the first session of the trial of 36 people detained during the 11th Istanbul Trans Pride March held on June 22, 2025, in the Acıbadem neighborhood of Istanbul. In the case heard by the Anadolu 12th Criminal Court of First Instance, issues included the small size of the courtroom, attempts to prevent observers from entering, the judge frequently interrupting defendants and their lawyers during defense statements, and the refusal to remove police officers from the courtroom. While judicial control measures imposed on the defendants remain in place, the file was split into two due to the high number of defendants and the hearing was adjourned; proceedings were postponed to March 12.
A verdict was issued in the retrial of journalists Ahmet Altan and Nazlı Ilıcak at the Istanbul 26th High Criminal Court. After the Court of Cassation overturned the previous ruling, the case continued on charges of “aiding an organization without being a member.” The court sentenced Altan to 4 years and 6 months in prison and Ilıcak to 3 years and 9 months, making it the week’s heaviest conviction.
Journalist Enver Aysever appeared before a judge for the first time in a case heard at the Küçükçekmece 30th Criminal Court of First Instance. He was charged with “inciting the public to hatred and hostility” over a video broadcast. The court sentenced Aysever to 10 months in prison and subsequently ordered his release. The week thus also saw a case involving both conviction and release for a journalist.
No verdict was issued this week in the case heard by the Silvan 1st Criminal Court of First Instance involving eight former HDP members of parliament. The 16th hearing, which the defendants did not attend, was adjourned until June 3 to address missing procedural issues; the file remained without a decision once again.
Journalists were asked to move to a “blind spot”
The IBB trial held this week and described as a “historic case” also illustrated the expanding scope of judicial pressure. On the first day of the trial, which involves 402 defendants including Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, disputes over fair trial standards and motions to recuse judges came to the fore. The case was recorded as the largest mass trial of the week.
Journalists’ working conditions also became a matter of debate during the hearings in the IBB case. During a break in the hearing, after journalists directed brief questions to Ekrem İmamoğlu, the panel—based on information received from the gendarmerie—asked that journalists be moved to a location in the courtroom that would make it more difficult for them to follow the proceedings. Journalists stated that no explanation was given for the decision and that conditions allowing them to properly monitor the hearing were not provided. Lawyer Fikret İlkiz said that limiting the number of journalists in large courtrooms set up inside prison complexes and placing them in locations where it is difficult to hear the proceedings has been a longstanding problem. The Journalists’ Union of Turkey and the Journalists’ Association of Turkey also reacted, stating that the practice violates the principle of open hearings and the public’s right to receive news.
Other developments during the week showed that pressure on freedom of expression is not limited to courtrooms. An investigation was launched after images recorded during the IBB trial hearing at Marmara Prison were shared on social media. The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office also opened an investigation into the social media account called the “Presidential Candidate Office,” which shared posts by Ekrem İmamoğlu, on allegations of “insulting the president” and “publicly spreading misleading information.”
Other developments during the week
Another notable development affecting cultural expression was the filing of a case under Article 301of the Turkish Penal Code against filmmaker Rojhilat Aksoy over the screening of the animated film Aurora’s Sunrise in Diyarbakır. The file stood out because it placed the narrative of the Armenian genocide before the courts.
Meanwhile, a report published during the week by MLSA on cases under the so-called “Censorship Law” revealed that 72% of defendants in cases under Article 217/A of the Turkish Penal Code are journalists, showing that prosecution itself has become a tool of punishment.
On the front of access bans, the former X account of Velvele was blocked from access in Turkey; posts about the possibility of rising oil prices containing economic content were restricted by a decision of the Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK); access to the X account “Presidential Candidate Office” was blocked under Article 8/A of Law No. 5651; and finally, the Instagram account of Mezopotamya Agency was also blocked.
The overall picture for the week of March 9 showed, on the one hand, courtroom conditions in mass trials that make the exercise of defense rights difficult and, on the other, ongoing criminal prosecutions against journalists and politicians, along with a widening sphere of pressure through investigations and access bans. Throughout the week, courts emerged not only as places where verdicts are delivered, but also as venues where lengthy trials and procedural pressure continue.
