After a one-month judiciary recess, legal proceedings resumed in Turkey under the shadow of the coronavirus. The number of coronavirus cases and deaths are once again on the rise in the country.

Minister of Justice Abdülhamit Gül stated that strict measures will be taken against the coronavirus in courthouses and that the judicial videoconferencing system SEGBİS will be used widely in hearings.

Trials were suspended in August due to the judiciary recess; however, attempts to bring journalists into line continued under violent forms.

Investigations and interrogations against journalists continued, and incidents of psychological and physical violence increased at the same pace.

In August, at least 15 journalists were subjected to psychological and physical violence:

During a row in CHP’s İzmir Province Youth Branch Congress, 6 journalists covering the incident were assaulted. First two groups fought with each other, before targeting the journalists. Journalists were prevented from taking footage and then battered. One journalist’s phone was confiscated, the computer of another was broken, and a chair was hurled at another’s head. One journalist obtained a legal medical report for battery and filed a criminal compliant.

İzmir Association of Journalists, İzmir Young Journalists Platform and Progressive Journalists Association’s İzmir Branch jointly organized a press conference to condemn the incident and demanded an investigation to be initiated. CHP’s İzmir branch leaders paid a visit to the Association of Journalists to apologize. Furthermore, they announced that they had established an investigative committee to identify the assailants, initiate disciplinary procedures, and shed further light on the event.

• Journalist Cengiz Anıl Bölükbaş, working for Evrensel Newspaper’s Diyarbakır Office, indicated that on August 24th, 2020, he was withheld in a shop by three individuals, who claimed to be police officers and attempted to “convince” him to become a police informant, after listing detailed information on him, his family and professional activities.

• A member of MHP’s Central Executive Committee, Osman Şişman threatened journalist Şirin Payzın, by posting the obituary of Payzın’s father, along with the words, “Chased from the nightingale’s nest, you are wallowing in sewers on the other side of the river; you will soon face THE END (sic) for what you have done and will do against the Turkish fatherland; as the Turk’s roots strangle you, you will go mad, gasping for air.”

• Yıldıray Çiçek, an advisor to the MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli threatened Karar Newspaper’s columnist Ahmet Taşgetiren, saying “The nationalists have not yet forgotten your insults and calumnies… Someone may pluck off your beard, watch out…”

• Journalist Gökhan Özbek stated on his social media account that the police raided his home, saying “The police searched my house. They claim to have received a tip-off. They have left now. I opened the door after seeing their police IDs”.

• Kanal D correspondent İbrahim Konar and cameraman Volkan Kamber were assaulted physically while following a news story, and their technical equipment was smashed. The journalists filed a criminal complaint.

• The owner of the news web site “Haber Ünye Portalı” published in Ünye, Ordu, Samet Girme stated that he was battered for 40 minutes by two individuals, who asked him “Why do you write pieces against Hilmi Güler?”, before inserting a gun’s barrel in his mouth. Girmeç filed a lawsuit against the mayor of the Ordu Metropolitan Municipality, on the charge of “incitement to crime”, and against the two assailants on charges of “willful injury, threat, insult, violation of liberty”.

• The owner of Yörem Newspaper published in Karacabey, Bursa, Şaban Önen, was assaulted by 4 individuals in the parking lot of the Municipal Truck Garage. It was claimed that the assailants were the relatives of the district mayor.

• In Antalya, unidentified assailants opened fire on journalist Yakup Kocabaş’s home.

At least 8 journalists were detained or summoned to testify; faced lawsuits, investigations and/or criminal complaints:

• In Batman, an investigation was launched against İdris Yayla, one of the first journalists to report on the specialized sergeant Musa Orhan’s sexual assault on the 18-year-old İpek E. Journalist İdris Yayla stated that, at the police station, he was asked questions such as “Why did you pen such a news story? Why did you post it on social media?” and that “he was prevented from contacting the family and investigating the incident while following the story.”

• Journalist Mehmet Erol was summoned to testify by the police due to social media posts by Democratic Regions Party (DBP), where he used to work as media advisor. Erol had previously been tried and acquitted for the same matter. In the statement which he gave while being accompanied by his lawyer, Erol refused the accusations saying that the posts in question were shared after he resigned from his position at DBP.

• In the first weeks of the coronavirus outbreak, the government had launched the donation campaign titled “Biz bize yeteriz Türkiyem” (“Turkey can take care of its own”) and published IBAN numbers for bank transfers. Journalist Hakan Aygün had criticized the campaign with a social media post that read “Oh, those who believe in IBAN”, and was arrested for ”inciting the population to hatred and enmity, or humiliating the people”. Although he was released at the first hearing, a separate indictment was drafted against him and the two cases were merged. Aygün was detained a second time for the same matter and released after a police interrogation.

• Journalist Eylem Akdağ was taken into custody in Ankara, while following the protests against the government’s attempt to withdraw Turkey from the İstanbul Convention.

• Author Sebahattin Önkibar stated that President Erdoğan filed a lawsuit against him on allegations of insulting him in a YouTube video.

• A lawsuit was filed against journalist Can Ataklı who, in his program titled ‘Gün Başlıyor’ on Tele 1 TV, asked how the taxes collected for earthquake preparedness were spent. He faces 1 year 2 months to 4 years 8 months in prison.

• A lawsuit was filed against Rize Nabız Newspaper’s Concessionaire and Rize Branch President of Progressive Journalists Association (ÇGD) Gençağa Karafazlı, for his news story on “President of AKP’s Rize Province Assembly and his wife, who were acquitted from charges of membership to FETÖ, before being offered jobs in a state-owned bank,” with 50 thousand TL claimed for damages. Access bans were placed on the news story in question, and on news stories about the access ban on the news story.

CHP’s İzmir deputy and Chief Media and Corporate Communications Advisor to the Party Chairman, Tuncay Özkan announced that he would file a lawsuit against Süleyman Özışık, who made various claims about him in an article published on Türkiye Newspaper.

Separately, Özgür Boğatekin, an editor and writer with Adıyaman Gerger Fırat Newspaper, had been tried for 4 of his articles criticizing the Gerger District Governor of the period, and sentenced in 2015 to 1 year 15 days in prison on the charge of “successive slander”. He had appealed against the verdict. 5 years on, the Court of Cassation has upheld the sentence. Boğatekin was placed in prison. However, on the next day, the reinforcement of the sentence was deferred due to coronavirus measures, and he was released.

Although most hearings were suspended in August due to the judiciary recess, the 29th hearing of the trial against Mehmet Baransu -in prison since March 2015- and Ahmet Altan, Yasemin Çongar and Yıldıray Oğur took place.

These journalists stand trial for the news stories published in the now shuttered Taraf Newspaper in 2010, where it was claimed that “Some groups within Turkish Armed Forces planned a coup in 2003”.

Baransu faces 35 to 75 years in prison, while Altan, Çongar and Oğur each face 20 years to 52 years 6 months in prison.

The prosecutor is expected to present his opinion as to the accusations in the next hearing scheduled for October.

In September 60 journalists will appear in court in 7 provinces in Turkey.
(This report has been written by Press in Arrest editor Yeşim Yavuzer.)

In the trials, the prosecutors demanded 7 counts of aggravated life sentence, and prison sentences of at least 376 years, 11 months to 970 years, 10 months against journalists.
Sinan TARTANOĞLU

The freedom of press and expression of journalists and therefore of the society is violated on an almost daily basis: at interrogation rooms in police stations or prosecutors’ offices, prisons, courthouses and courtrooms.

Sometimes six journalists stand trial in a single day; sometimes one journalist stands in three different trials in a single day.

Some journalists are forced to present their defense statements from prison to a panel of judges, which changes at almost every hearing in certain trials, and via the monitors and cameras of the judiciary videoconferencing system called SEGBİS.

Those who can present a defense statement in person in the courtroom come under the supervision of police officers or private security guards.

Courtrooms are closed to the press or observers on the pretext of the coronavirus outbreak.

All of these constitute violations of “the right to fair trial”

In September at least 64 journalists -20 of whom are women- appeared in court for 38 press trials in 7 provinces.

(İsmail Yıldız, Erdal Güven, Semin Sezerer, Selman Keleş, Arif Aslan, Uğur Koç, Mustafa Kömüş, Aydın Keser, Barış Pehlivan, Barış Terkoğlu, Erk Acarer, Ferhat Çelik, Hülya Kılınç, Murat Ağırel, Zana Bilir Kaya, Eren Keskin, İnan Kızılkaya, Engin Korkmaz, Pınar Gayıp, Semiha Şahin, Onur Emre Yağan, Müyesser Yıldız, Pelin Ünker, Ahmet Sever, Hakan Dirik, Gülsün Altan, Kadır Cesur, Koçali Özipek, Nahide Aslan, Serdar Altan, Sibel Eren, Mustafa Gökkılınç, İdris Sayılgan, Arafat Dayan, Hayri Demir, Filiz Koçali, Ragıp Zarakolu, Canan Coşkun, Can Uğur, Ali Açar, Aziz Oruç, Ferhat Parlak, Can Dündar, Hüseyin Aykol, Sabiha Temizkan, Reyhan Çapan, Havva Cuştan, isminaz Temel, Çiğdem Toker, Fatih Portakal, Zehra Özdilek, İnan Ketenciler, Derya Okatan, Ersin Çaksu, Olgun Matur, Kenan Baş, Cihat Ünal, Osman Yakut, Özkan Mayda, Ömer Özdemir, Serhat Şeftali, Hasan Yavaşlar, Ali Orhan, Durket Süren.)

7 journalists (İsmail Yıldız (Rawin Sterk), Barış Pehlivan, Hülya Kılınç, Murat Ağırel, Müyesser Yıldız, Mustafa Gökkılıç, Aziz Oruç) appeared in court under detention. Two of them are women.

Journalist Müyesser Yıldız spent almost three months in prison waiting for an indictment to be drafted against her under a trial, and appeared in court for a separate trial in the same period.

Journalists İsmail Yıldız (also known as Rawin Sterk), Barış Pehlivan, Hülya Kılınç, Murat Ağırel and Mümtazer Türköne were released from prison under trials that still continue.

Courts extended Mustafa Gökkılıç and Aziz Oruç’s detentions this month.

In September;

Journalists faced a total of 7 counts of aggravated life sentence, and prison sentences of up to 970 years, 10 months

• In the trials, the prosecutors demanded 7 counts of aggravated life sentence, and prison sentences of at least 376 years, 11 months to 970 years, 10 months against journalists.

• In lawsuits for damages filed against 3 journalists, the complainants demanded a total of 340 thousand TL in moral compensation.

6 journalists prosecuted in multiple lawsuits

• Journalists Ahmet Sever and İnan Kızılkaya stood trial in three separate lawsuits while journalists Can Dündar, Aziz Oruç, Erk Acarer and Zana Bilir Kaya stood trial in two separate lawsuits each.

Prosecutors attended 13 trials for the first time

• Of the 38 trials against journalists, 21 were held in high criminal courts, 13 in criminal courts of first instance, and 3 in civil courts of first instance.

With the start of the Judicial Year 2020-2021, a previously cancelled practice has been reintroduced in courthouses. Accordingly, prosecutors can now participate in hearings at criminal courts of first instance. Fifteen journalists tried in 13 separate lawsuits at criminal courts of first instance had to defend their freedom of press and expression not only before the judge, but also before a prosecutor. Just like in high criminal courts, they had to appear before prosecutors whose benches are at the same height with the judge’s bench…

9 journalists appeared in court for the first time this month

• In September, the first hearings were held in trials against three journalists (İsmail Yıldız (Rawin Sterk), Fatih Portakal, İnan Ketenciler).

• 6 journalists (Erdal Güven, Semin Sezerer, Onur Emre Yağan, Ali Açar, Can Uğur, Canan Coşkun), the first hearings of whose trials were postponed in March, April, May and June due to the coronavirus outbreak, appeared in court for the first time in their trials.

Right to a public trial violated at least 10 times

• The coronavirus outbreak has affected journalists’ trials as well. In 9 trials concerning 13 journalists, the court did not allow observers in the courtroom on the pretext of the coronavirus outbreak. Only the journalists on trial and their lawyers were allowed to enter.

• At the first hearing of journalist Mustafa Gökkılıç‘s trial (widely known as the ‘MİT Conspiracy Trial’), the court had closed the hearing to the public on the pretext that “the trial may reveal issues that could jeopardize public safety and national security.” The second hearing in September was likewise closed to the public.
  As such, 10 trials concerning 14 journalists were held without public oversight.

5 hearings under the supervision of police officers or security guards
In September, hearings against 5 journalists were held under the supervision of police officers or private security guards.

• At the hearing of journalist İdris Sayılğan‘s trial for “spreading continuous propaganda for a terror organization via the media”, a police officer was in the courtroom throughout the session.

• At the fifth hearing of Hayri Demir’s trial for “membership of an armed terror organization” and “spreading propaganda for a terror organization via the media”, the judge did not allow any observer in the courtroom on the pretext of the coronavirus outbreak. Six police officers -five of whom in plain clothes- waited at the door of the courtroom from before the hearing until its end.

• Three plainclothes police officers were present in the courtroom where journalist Ferhat Parlak was tried on the charge of “membership of an armed terror organization”.

• The fifth hearing of the trial against journalist Durket Süren on the charges of “membership of an armed terror organization” and “spreading propaganda for a terror organization” was likewise attended by two plainclothes police officers.

• Prior to the first hearing of the trial against journalist Fatih Portakal for “damaging the reputation, prestige or assets of a bank”, private security guards were invited to the courtroom. The judge allowed only four journalists / observers to attend the hearing. However, the private security guards were in the courtroom throughout the hearing.

2 journalists presented their defense statements via SEGBİS

• Journalists detained pending trial, İsmail Yıldız (Rawin Sterk) and Aziz Oruç attended the hearings from prison over SEGBİS. The system draws harsh criticism since it violates the principle of face-to-face trial in cases where important verdicts are reached concerning the freedoms of journalists. For instance, in a trial, Aziz Oruç was forced to present his defense statement over SEGBİS from prison and the court ruled for the continuation of his detention.

Panel of judges changed in at least 13 trials

• In at least 13 of the 38 trials against journalists, the panel of judges was different from that of the previous hearing. It was observed that there were especially changes among the judges, but in two hearings the hearing prosecutor had also changed.

The panel of judges that oversaw the detained journalist Aziz Oruç’s trial changed completely compared to the previous hearing. Oruç attended the hearing from prison via SEGBİS and saw before him a completely different panel of judges, which ruled to keep him in prison.

2 journalists faced charges brought for the first time in two years
Two journalists presented their defense against charges that no journalist faced in the past two years.

• Journalist Fatih Portakal is charged with “damaging the reputation, prestige or assets of a bank” as per the Banking Law, and now faces one to three years in prison as well as a judiciary fine of one to two thousand days.

• Journalist İnan Ketenciler is charged with “illegally obtaining or revealing private data” as per Turkish Penal Code, and faces two to four years of imprisonment. Although the trial began on this charge, the charge was changed in the course of the hearing to “unauthorized audio and video recording or transmission concerning investigation and prosecution procedures”.

Charges based on 5 different laws
In September, at least 64 journalists faced charges on the basis of 5 separate laws, namely Turkish Penal Code, Anti-Terror Law, MİT (National Intelligence Organization) Law, Banking Law, and Law on Meetings and Demonstrations. Some journalists faced charges based on multiple laws. * 54 journalists were charged as per various articles of Turkish Penal Code, and 45 journalists as per Anti-Terror Law. 43 journalists faced charges based on the articles of both Anti-Terror Law and Turkish Penal Code.

• 7 journalists faced prison sentences on the basis of Turkish Penal Code and MİT Law.

• 1 journalist was charged pursuant to Law on Meetings and Demonstrations and 1 journalist was charged pursuant to Banking Law.

• 3 journalists stood trial in lawsuits for damages.

24 journalists charged with ‘membership of an armed terror organization’

• In September, the largest number of journalists appeared in court to face the charge of “membership of an armed terror organization” as per Turkish Penal Code, Article 314/2 and Anti-Terror Law, Article 5.

• Trials against 24 journalists on this charge continued in September. One journalist facing this charge (İsmail Yıldız (Rawin Sterk)) was under detention during the hearing.

21 journalists charged with ‘spreading propaganda for a terror organization’

• In September, 21 journalists faced the charge of ‘spreading propaganda for a terror organization’ as per Anti-Terror Law, Article 7. In these trials, the prosecutor demanded that the prison sentence based on this charge be increased by half since the crime was committed via the media. Furthermore, the prosecutors claimed that six journalists committed this crime of “spreading propaganda for a terror organization via the media” in a “continuous manner”. As such, the prison sentences demanded were further increased by one-fourth to three fourths. In September, journalists had to plead against these requests of aggravated prison sentences.

15 journalists faced longer prison sentences

• In September, a total of 15 journalists thus faced longer prison sentences on the pretext of committing a crime in a “continuous manner” or insulting a complainant “publicly”.
  _In this respect, as frequently underlined in Press in Arrest reports, 15 journalists had to defend the freedom of press against charges which have been virtually turned into “major crimes” with the claims of committing a crime “in a continuous manner”, “via the media” or “publicly”. _

A wide range of charges

• On the other hand, in September, 7 journalists faced the charge of “revealing confidential information,” 6 journalists of “violating the MİT Law,” 5 journalists of “explicitly humiliating the military apparatus of the state,” 5 journalists of “publicly insulting a state official,” and 5 journalists of “willingly and knowingly aiding an armed terror organization without being a member”, in the courtroom.

Beyond data analysis, the Press in Arrest team reports the following from the hearings that it observed:

The court launched the procedure for seizing journalist Can Dündar’s property, claiming that he went overseas “to foil the investigation against him”…

• Journalist Can Dündar stands trial for the news stories concerning the MİT trucks bound for Syria, and the 18th hearing was scheduled for February 18th, 2021. However, the hearing was brought forward to September 17th, 2020, and at the hearing, it was revealed that Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office had submitted a petition to the court on September 8th, 2020. The Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office requested in the petition that the court initiate the process to label Dündar as a fugitive. The court accepted the request of the prosecutor at the hearing which was brought forward. The court ruled to issue a call for Dündar, in the form of a newspaper announcement or an advertisement to be posted on the door of his residence, stating that if he did not appear in court within 15 days, all his property would be confiscated since he would be deemed a “fugitive”. Interestingly, the court verdict stated that Dündar went overseas “to foil the investigation against him”

Detained journalist imposed a judiciary fine that includes the cost of the newspaper ad for the verdict…

• Journalist Müyesser Yıldız is imprisoned pending trial for a lawsuit and had to spend about three months in prison before an indictment was drafted against her. Yıldız was sentenced to 20 thousand TL for moral compensation in a separate lawsuit filed by Hulusi Akar, former Chief of General Staff and current Minister of Defense. Yıldız did not attend the hearing, as upon returning to prison, she would have to pass 14 days in the quarantine ward set up due to the coronavirus outbreak. Yıldız had filed a countersuit against Akar as well. The court sentenced Yıldız to pay moral compensation, but did not sentence Akar to any fine. The court also ruled that the verdict against Yıldız would be published in a newspaper with a high circulation, and that the ad cost would be covered by Yıldız, who is still in prison.

Turkish flag in the SEGBİS room

• Journalist İsmail Yıldız (Rawin Sterk) appeared in court for a lawsuit where he is detained pending trial. The trial was held in İstanbul and Yıldız attended the hearing from the Ankara prison where he is held, over SEGBİS. It was seen that a Turkish flag was hanged in the room of the Sincan Prison where Yıldız connected to SEGBİS. The Turkish flag placed behind Yıldız drew the attention of the observers in the courtroom in Istanbul. As such, for the first time a Turkish flag was seen behind a defendant in a SEGBİS room.

Prosecutor asked journalist her “press card”

• At the second hearing of the trial against Sabiha Temizkan for “spreading propaganda for a terror organization via the media”, the hearing prosecutor asked Temizkan whether she had a press card or not. Temizkan presented to the court her press card issued by International Federation of Journalists (IFJ). The judge asked Temizkan what her profession was. Temizkan said, “I am a freelance journalist.” The judge responded, “What is freelance journalism, what does that mean?” Temizkan indicated that she was paid a copyright per news story.

Judge refused to lift travel ban citing Can Dündar’s trial

• Journalists Havva Cuştan and İsminaz Temel attended the 10th hearing of their trial for “membership of an armed terror organization”. In response to İsminaz Temel’s lawyer’s request that the overseas travel ban be lifted, the judge responded by giving an example from journalist Can Dündar’s trial: “Investigations are launched against judges lifting the probation and overseas travel ban in terror-related cases. As such, we do not lift the overseas travel ban in such cases. In the highly publicized Dündar case, Dündar could leave the country because the panel of judges lifted the ban.”

Trial continues although the complaint was withdrawn

• In the second hearing of the trial where journalist Onur Emre Yağan stands trial for “publicly insulting the President in a continuous manner”, President Tayyip Erdoğan withdrew his complaint. Nonetheless, the court did not reach a verdict and instead gave the defense lawyer extra time to draft his defense statement.

One journalist, one book, and three separate trials in a single day…

• Journalist and writer Ahmet Sever, who used to serve as ex-President Abdullah Gül’s advisor, faced three separate trials for his book “Letting it Out / Memoirs”. President Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Parliament’s Speaker Mustafa Şentop, and Minister of Industry and Technology Mustafa Varank filed separate complaints about Sever. All three politicians claimed that the journalist insulted them in his book. The trials were held at the same court on the same day, and then adjourned. In total, Sever faces a prison sentence of three years, nine months, 15 days to 11 years, one month.

Aside from these hearings, in September,

At least 11 journalists were detained or summoned to testify; faced lawsuits, investigations and/or criminal complaints.

• Journalist Oktay Candemir was taken into custody in Van for a critical social media post about the TV series “Resurrection: Ertuğrul” broadcast on TRT. He was charged with “defaming a deceased person’s memory” as per Turkish Penal Code, Article 130. According to the Press In Arrest database, this is the first time that a journalist faces this charge. Candemir was detained for one night, and then released with an overseas travel ban and probation, namely giving signature at a police station once a week. According to TPC Article 130, this is an offense prosecutable on complaint; however, there are no complainants registered in Candemir’s file. Journalist Candemir and his lawyer talked to Press in Arrest about the incident.

• Journalist Alican Uludağ was summoned to testify for a tweet criticizing Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor Yüksel Kocaman who got married and then visited the President together with his wife. Uludağ was imposed an overseas travel ban and a probation measure of giving signature at a police station. The day after Uludağ testified, Sabah newspaper, known for its pro-government editorial line, reported that Uludağ was taken under custody. Turkey Journalists’ Union denied the claim.

• TELE1 TV’s Editor-in-Chief and BirGün Newspaper columnist Merdan Yanardağ was summoned to testify in the investigation into the news stories concerning Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor Yüksel Kocaman, who got married and then paid a visit to President Erdoğan. The court imposed two probation measures on Yanardağ: overseas travel ban, and signature at a police station.

• It was revealed that Fatih Nurullah, the leader of the “Uşşaki” religious sect in Akyazı, Sakarya had sexually abused a 12-year-old girl, and he was arrested. Later on, an investigation was launched against Oda TV, which reported on the child’s statements, the sound recordings where Nurullah confessed to the abuse, and the repercussions of the incident within the sect. Journalist Sami Menteş penned the news story. First, a court blocked access to the news story in question. Then, it imposed a gag order on all web sites, which would publish this news. However, the incident was discussed for days on end in Turkey, and all media outlets covered it.

• Berat Albayrak, the Minister of Treasury and Finance, and son-in-law of President Erdoğan, filed a criminal complaint against journalist Barış Terkoğlu. In the petition of complaint, it was claimed that Terkoğlu’s article published in OdaTV, titled “Which president did Erdoğan summon to the palace for a rebuke?” had “insulted” the Minister Albayrak, and attempted to “provoke the population against Albayrak”.

• Journalist Özgür Boğatekin, who shared on his social media account the attack on seasonal agricultural workers from Mardin who went to Sakarya Karasu to harvest hazelnuts, was summoned to testify on the charge of “inciting the public to hatred and hostility”.

• An investigation was launched against Cumhuriyet newspaper’s columnist Işıl Özgentürk for her article about the women of Batman.

• Journalist Sinan Aygül was detained to testify under a trial which continues at Bitlis 2. High Criminal Court.

• Journalist Gökhan Altay testified under an investigation into his social media posts between 2014 and 2018, on the charge of “spreading propaganda for a terror organization”.

• Under an investigation into the social media account dubbed “Movement of the Nameless”, journalists Zeynep Kuray and Hakan Gülseven were taken into custody. They were released after testifying. Gülseven stated that he was investigated on the charge of “insulting the President”

New lawsuits were filed against at least 3 journalists:

• The indictment against journalist Müyesser Yıldız, in prison for about 4 months, has been completed. In the indictment, journalists Müyesser Yıldız and İsmail Dükel are charged with “disclosing confidential information about the state’s security and political interests in a continuous manner”, pursuant to Turkish Penal Code, Articles 329/1 and 43. Both journalists face sentences of 6 years, 4 months to 17 years, 6 months. The first hearing has yet to be scheduled.

• It was stated that another indictment was being drafted against the journalist Fatih Portakal on the charge of “insulting the President” in a social media post. Portakal already stands trial for violating the Banking Law with this post.

5 journalists released

• Journalist İsmail Yıldız (Rawin Sterk), jailed pending trial, was released in the first hearing.

• A verdict was reached in the trial where journalists Barış Pehlivan, Hülya Kılınç and Murat Ağırel were jailed pending trial. Journalists Barış Pehlivan and Hülya Kılınç were sentenced to 4 years, 6 months and journalist Murat Ağırel to 4 years, 8 months, 7 days in prison; they were released upon the announcement of the verdict.

• The Court of Cassation overturned the prison sentence of 7 years, 6 months handed down to journalist Mümtazer Türköne, who was arrested after the coup attempt of July 15th, 2016 and imprisoned in August 2016, on the charge of “membership of an armed terror organization”. As a result, Türköne has been released from prison after spending over four years in prison. Just before the verdict, Devlet Bahçeli, leader of the Nationalist Action Party (MHP), stated that he had known Türköne since his student years, and said, “I hope that any injustice in his case will be remedied immediately”. The Court of Cassation’s decision to overturn the prison sentence created a debate on Bahçeli’s statements. In 2018, Nationalist Action Party had begun to pave the way for the “criminal enforcement law” which was to enter into force in April 2020. With this law, approximately 90 thousand prisoners convicted of various crimes were released from prison. However, the law -defended by Bahçeli and his party- excluded terror-related offenses from this amnesty, and thus Türköne could not be released at the time.

2 journalists arrested

• Faruk Bostan,the concessionaire of Kocaeli Halk Newspaper published in Kocaeli, and its editor-in-chief Bülent Karagöz, were arrested on charges of “slander”. The investigation was based on “news stories about an alleged case of sexual abuse in the Kartepe district”. In the news stories, sexual abuse allegations were brought against certain individuals whose real names were changed, but political positions were mentioned. The prosecutor’s office issued a statement stating, “our investigation has confirmed that the individuals named in the news story are unconnected to the incident.”

4 journalists acquitted

• Journalist Barış Terkoğlu faced eight to 19 years in prison on the charges of “publishing, disseminating and disclosing information and documents regarding the operations of the National Intelligence Organization” and “revealing confidential information concerning the state’s security and its domestic or international political interests”. During the legal proceedings, the prosecutor’s office claimed that the offense was committed “in a continuous manner” and demanded that the prison sentence be increased to eight years, nine months to 25 years, nine months. Terkoğlu was eventually acquitted.

• Journalists Erdal Güven and Semin Sezerer were charged with “knowingly and willingly aiding an armed terror organization without being a member”. They faced 7 years 6 months to 15 years in prison. Güven and Sezerer were eventually acquitted.

• Journalist Zehra Özdilek faced 1 to 3 years in prison on the charge of “targeting state officials who played a role in anti-terrorism efforts”. Özdilek was acquitted.

5 journalists handed down a total prison sentence of 21 years, 6 months

• Journalists Aydın Keser, Barış Pehlivan, Ferhat Çelik, Hülya Kılınç and Murat Ağırel were sentenced to prison for violating the MİT Law. It was claimed that they committed the offense of “publishing, disseminating and disclosing information and documents regarding the operations of the National Intelligence Organization” in a “continuous manner”. The sentences were duly increased. The journalists were handed down a total sentence of 21 years, 6 months, 21 days in prison.

In the lawsuit for damages filed by Minister of National Defense Hulusi Akar against journalist Müyesser Yıldız, the latter was fined 20 thousand TL in moral compensation.

The freedom of press and expression violated across the world as pressure mounts on journalists

• Belarus Association of Journalists (BAJ) announced that journalists following the incidents in Freedom and Independence Square in the capital city Minsk were detained. BAJ stated that 4 journalists were prosecuted and 1 journalist was deported. Belarus Ministry of Interior stated that the journalists were neither detained nor arrested. The ministry claimed that the journalists were taken to a police station in the capital to verify whether they had a valid accreditation or not, and those who had the right documents were released. According to the ministry, at the police station, the journalists were released after the footage on their cell phones were erased, while the phones of those journalists refusing to unlock their phones were seized.

• The Chinese journalist Chen Qiushi, who engaged in freelance journalism over the social media, had disappeared in February after reporting on the coronavirus outbreak. It turned out that he was under custody. According to The Guardian, Chen Qiushi’s friend Xu Xiaodong indicated on a livestreamed video that Chen was “in good health” but was still under supervision by a government department in the city of Qindao.
  
  Source: http://pressinarrest.com/rapor/press-
  arrest-september-2020-press-freedom-report/

The full report:

3 JOURNALISTS APPEARED BEFORE A JUDGE PER DAY!

Barriers before the “the people’s right to receive news” crystallized this time in the detainment of 4 journalists who reported on the allegation that security forces had detained two citizens in Van and then threw them out of a helicopter.

The judiciary continued to be weaponized against journalists in Turkey, as confirmed by the fact that every day in October, an average of 3 journalists were obliged to defend in a courtroom their profession and the people’s right to receive news.

In October in Turkey,

• In at least 45 press-related trials in 7 provinces, at least 74 journalists were prosecuted. 21 of them were women.

In the trials concerning these 74 journalists, the prosecutor’s offices,
demanded 3 counts of aggravated life sentences, and a total of 321 years 6 months to 916 years 4 months 15 days of imprisonment.

Women journalists appearing in court faced a total of 70 years 3 months 15 days to 185 years 8 months in prison.

At least 3 journalists appeared in court for lawsuits where a total of 300 thousand TL was requested in moral compensation.

• 7 journalists appeared in court more than once this month:

4 journalists (Taylan Özgür Öztaş, Hazal Ocak, Alican Uludağ, Ahmet Altan) each stood trial in two separate courts for two separate cases.

3 journalists (Sabiha Temizkan, Necla Demir, Arafat Dayan) each appeared before a judge twice in the same court for the same case.

• 30 journalists were prosecuted in high criminal courts, and 44 in criminal courts of first instance:

At least 30 journalists appeared before a judge in high criminal courts.

Trials against at least 44 journalists continued at criminal courts of first instance.

Under the scope of lawsuits for damages, 2 journalists appeared in a civil court of first instance, and 1 journalist in a commercial court of first instance.

• 26 journalists were charged as per the “Anti-Terror Law”:

At least 26 journalists had to present their defense statements against charges of terrorism offenses.

At least 6 journalists were charged with “membership of an armed terror organization,” and at least 3 with “knowingly and willingly aiding an armed terror organization”.

At least 3 journalists were prosecuted for “establishing or leading an armed terror organization”.

On the other hand, at least 8 journalists were accused of “spreading propaganda for a terror organization”. The prosecutor requested an increase in the prison sentence faced by two of these journalists, alleging that “the offense was committed via the media”; and two others for “committing a crime in a continuous manner”.

At least 3 journalists were charged with “targeting a state official who took part in anti-terrorism efforts,” and at least 3 for “publishing and disseminating the statements of terror organizations”.

• 8 journalists were accused of “insulting the President”:

Lawsuits filed for allegedly “insulting the President” continued against at least 8 journalists .

The prosecutors demanded an increase in the prison sentences for 6 out of these 8 journalists as they allegedly “insulted the President” “publicly”.

The prosecutors also requested an increase in the prison sentences for 3 out of the 8 journalists, claiming that they committed this offense “in a continuous manner”.

• “Insulting a state official,” “showing resistance to prevent an official from performing their duty,” “violating the Capital Market Law…”

The trials of at least 21 journalists charged with “insulting a state official” continued.

At least 18 journalists continued to stand trial for “showing resistance to prevent an official from performing their duty”.

At least 6 journalists stood trial for “violating the Capital Market Law”, and were accused of “spreading fabricated, false or misleading information in order to influence investors’ decisions.”

• 14 journalists faced aggravated prison sentences:

The prosecutors requested an increase in the prison sentence faced by at least 10 journalists for allegedly “committing the crime in a continuous manner”.

The prosecutors also requested an increase in the sentence for at least 4 journalists for allegedly “committing the crime via the media”. As such, at least 14 journalists continued to defend themselves against requests of aggravated prison sentences.

• 4 journalists were sentenced:

In October, at least 4 journalists were sentenced to a total of 7 years 11 months in prison and 500 TL in administrative fines.

At least 3 journalists were sentenced on “terrorism” offenses.

Journalist Arafat Dayan was sentenced to prison on the charge of “spreading propaganda for a terror organization and publishing and disseminating the statements of terror organizations in a continuous manner,” journalist İshak Yasul on the charge of “publishing and disseminating the statements of terror organizations,” journalist Sabiha Temizkan on the charge of “spreading propaganda for a terror organization via the media,” and journalist İnan Ketenciler was sentenced to an administrative fine of 500 TL for “recording or transmitting audio and video during investigation procedures without authorization.”

On the other hand, the prison sentences of 2 journalists were increased for committing the crime “in a continuous manner” and “via the media”.

• 10 journalists were acquitted:

Journalists Çınar Ayser, Sertaç Kayar, Ayhan Bilgen, Barış İnce and Can Uğur were acquitted from “terrorism” charges, Alican Uludağ and Duygu Güvenç from the charge of “denigrating judiciary organs,” Hazal Ocak from “publicly insulting a state official,” Taylan Öztaş, from “showing resistance to prevent an official from performing their duty,” and Necla Demir from “publicly insulting the President in a continuous manner”.

A court cited ECHR in its acquittal verdict:
The court which acquitted journalist Necla Demir, who was charged with “insulting the President in a continuous manner”, justified this verdict with references to the rulings of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) and the European Court of Human Rights.

The following statements were used in the justification section of the acquittal verdict for Demir:

“ECHR and Court of Cassation rulings have consistently emphasized that individuals engaged in politics have to put up with harsh, severe and even offensive criticism, and that this is an integral part of democratic social life.
This principle is based on the premise that politicians -unlike private citizens- have willingly chosen to become public figures, subject to the close scrutiny of journalists and the public.”

• Prosecutor objected to the acquittal of 2 journalists:

Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office objected to the acquittal verdict for journalists Alican Uludağ and Duygu Güvenç.

The prosecutor’s office argued that the verdict went against the “basis and procedures of the law”, and stated that they will appeal against it.

• The trials of at least 43 journalists were adjourned until 2021:

Out of the 74 journalists tried in October, 60 saw their trials adjourned. The trials of 43 of them were adjourned until 2021.

It was remarkable that the next hearing in the trial against journalist Deniz Yücel was scheduled for September 2021.

The Press in Arrest team reported the following in the trials that it monitored:

• 2 journalists in prison stood trial, making their defense speeches via SEGBİS:

Ayhan Bilgen and Mehmet Baransu attended their trials from the prisons where they are held, via the Audio and Video Information System (SEGBİS).

Imprisoned for a separate investigation against him, Bilgen attended his press-related trial from prison, via SEGBİS.

• Panels of judges changed in the trials of 40 journalists:

In the October hearings of the trials against at least 40 journalists, it was seen that the panel of judges had changed.

40 journalists had to submit their defense statements against the charges before a new panel of judges/new judges.

• Charges against 9 journalists were revised:

In the October hearings of the trials against at least 17 journalists, the hearing prosecutors submitted their judicial opinions as to the accusations.

However, there were changes when compared to the indictments. In their judicial opinions, the hearing prosecutors changed the charges and sentences against 9 journalists.

As such, the prosecutors leveled different charges and requested different prison sentences against 3 journalists, while demanding the acquittal of 6 others.

Journalist Ayşegül Doğan, who was charged with “establishing or leading an armed terror organization” throughout the trial, was instead accused of “membership of an armed terror organization”.

Although journalist Sertaç Kayar was charged with “establishing or leading an armed terror organization” in the indictment against him, and submitted a defense against this charge throughout the trial, he was later charged with “membership of an armed terror organization”.

Journalist İnan Ketenciler was first charged with “obtaining and disseminating personal information in an illicit manner” in the indictment, but later on charged with “recording or transmitting audio or video during investigation procedures without authorization”.

On the other hand, the prosecutor in the trial against journalist Hazal Ocak, who was charged with “publicly insulting a state official”, also submitted his judicial opinion and requested that Ocak be acquitted.

The prosecutor based this request on the European Convention on Human Rights, Turkish Constitution, and the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights and Constitutional Court:

“Although some of the criticism and value judgments in the article are expressed in a harsh and aggressive style, the freedom of the press allows room for a certain degree of exaggeration and even provocation…
Even if expressions used by journalists in their articles are polemical, they cannot be considered as unfounded attacks against an individual if these are supported by arguments…
As such, the title and content of the news story fall within the limits of the freedoms of press/expression …”

• 1 journalist was not asked for his final words, and the verdict was not read out to his face:

Journalist Arafat Dayan could not participate in the final hearing of the trial against him. The prosecutor had presented his judicial opinion against Dayan in a previous hearing. In this hearing, Dayan was supposed to be asked for his final words; however, the court did not receive his final words. Instead, his defense statements from the previous hearings were accepted as his final words. And the court did not read out the prison sentence of five years 10 months to Dayan’s face.

• 1 journalist’s demand concerning her defense was rejected as it would not “add a novelty” to the case file. 1 journalist faced a sentence “without justification”.

Journalist Ayşegül Doğan’s lawyer demanded the expansion of the prosecution; however, the court rejected this demand arguing that it would not “add a novelty” to the case file.

Journalist Ender İmrek stands trial for an article he penned in June 2019 as regards President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s wife Emine Erdoğan’s French-made bag allegedly worth 50 thousand dollars.

At the third hearing of the trial in October, the prosecutor requested a sentence against İmrek, without however presenting any “justification” for this sentence.

Lawyers objected to the prosecutor’s “judicial opinion without justification”. The judge overruled their objection.

As the debate between the lawyers and the judge raged on, the hearing prosecutor stated “You must understand that my judicial opinion provides ample information.”
The trial was adjourned to receive İmrek’s defense against this “judicial opinion without justification.”

• “Simple trial procedure” employed in a press trial for the first time:

The “simple trial procedure” was added to the judiciary system with the legal amendment popularly known as the 1. Judiciary Reform Package.

Accordingly, the legal proceedings concerning certain charges can be conducted on the basis of the case file, and without holding a hearing.

Journalist Hikmet Tunç, who is charged with “insulting a state official on duty”, and her lawyer accepted the “simple trial procedure”. Accordingly, no hearings will be held during the legal proceedings, the defense statements and evidence will be presented in writing, and in case of a prison sentence, the prison term will be reduced by one fourth.

• The “publicity of trial” principle was violated 32 times:

In the hearings of at least 32 of the 74 journalists tried in October, the judges either closed the hearing to the public, or limited the number of observers in the courtroom, citing the measures taken against the coronavirus epidemic.

As such the principle of the “publicity of trial” was violated 32 times, and these trials were either listened to from the doorsills of the courtrooms, or followed through the hearing minutes.

• “Presumption of innocence” was violated 3 times:

In the October hearings of the trials against at least 3 journalists, namely Ayşegül Doğan, Rojhat Doğru and Mazlum Dolan, law enforcement agents/private security guards were present in the courtroom. As such, the “presumption of innocence” principle was violated in the trials of 3 journalists held in the high criminal courts in the Diyarbakır Courthouse.

At least 21 women journalists stood trial:

21 of the at least 74 journalists prosecuted in October were women.

9 women journalists had to defend their news stories, articles or social media posts at high criminal courts, 10 women journalists in criminal courts of first instance, and 3 women journalists in lawsuits for damages.

Women journalists appearing in court faced a total of 70 years 3 months 15 days to 185 years 8 months in prison.

In the three separate lawsuits for damages against 3 women journalists, the complainants demanded a total of 300 thousand TL in compensation.

• 7 women journalists were charged with “terrorism” offences:

1 women journalist was charged with “membership of an armed terror organization,” 1 women journalist with “establishing or leading an armed terror organization,” 3 women journalists with “spreading propaganda for a terror organization,” 2 women journalists with “targeting a state official who took part in anti-terrorism efforts”, 7 women journalists with “insulting a state official”.

• 4 of the 10 journalists acquitted were women:

Çınar Ayser was acquitted of the charge of “spreading propaganda for a terror organization,” Duygu Güvenç from “insulting the judiciary organs,” Hazal Ocak from “publicly insulting a state official,” and Necla Demir from “publicly insulting the President in a continuous manner”.

One of the 3 journalists sentenced to prison in October was a woman. Journalist Sabiha Temizkan was sentenced to 1 year 3 months in prison for “spreading propaganda for a terror organization via the media”.

Aside from the trials, in October,

• At least 9 journalists were detained, summoned to testify or faced an investigation and/or criminal complaint:

The police detained Mezopotamya News Agency reporters Adnan Bilen and Cemil Uğur as well as Jinnews News Agency reporters Şehriban Abi and Nazan Sala who reported that in Van’s Çatak district, law enforcement officers detained two citizens and then threw them out of a helicopter.

Journalist Ayşenur Arslan indicated that she was summoned to testify as a ‘suspect’ by the İstanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, Press Crimes Investigations Bureau

Journalist Selda Manduz was detained under an investigation in Kars. She was released on probation.

Pınar Gayıp, a reporter with Etkin News Agency (ETHA), was detained under an investigation conducted in Istanbul. She was released after her statement was taken by the police.

While following a news story in the Güçlükonak district of Şırnak, Zeynep Durgut of Mezopotamya News Agency was detained. She was released after giving a statement to the police.

Journalist Hakkı Boltan was detained under an investigation in Diyarbakır. He was later released on probation.

• New lawsuits were brought against at least 2 journalists:

A lawsuit was launched against journalist Abdurrahman Gök for “membership of a terror organization” and “spreading propaganda for a terror organization”. The trial will begin with the first hearing to be held on February 23rd, 2021 in Diyarbakır.

A new lawsuit was brought against Özgür Boğatekin, the News Director of the Gerger Fırat Newspaper based in Adıyaman, for “spreading propaganda for a terror organization” and “targeting individuals who took part in anti-terrorism efforts”.

• 4 journalists were arrested:

The police arrested Mezopotamya News Agency reporters Adnan Bilen and Cemil Uğur as well as Jinnews News Agency reporters Şehriban Abi and Nazan Sala who reported that in Van’s Çatak district, law enforcement officers detained two citizens and then threw them out of a helicopter, for “membership of an armed terror organization.”

During their interrogation by the judgeship, they stated that they were journalists, had press cards and rejected the accusations.

The judgeship negated the journalists’ defense with the following remarks:

“A valid press card is granted to those who meet the conditions set by the Directorate of Communications of the Turkish Presidency. Of course, the suspects are not members of the press as they do not meet the necessary conditions.”

Mezopotamya News Agency stated that the journalists’ cameras and technical equipment were confiscated by the police. Their lawyers indicated that the journalists were subjected to ill-treatment.

• 2 journalists were released:

Faruk Bostan, the concessionaire of the newspaper Kocaeli Halk Gazetesi based in Kocaeli, and its editor-in-chief, Bülent Karagöz, had been arrested in September on charges of “slander”. The investigation was launched against “a news story about an alleged incident of sexual abuse in the Kartepe district”. In the news story, sexual abuse allegations were brought against certain individuals whose real names were changed, but political positions were mentioned. The two journalists were released in October.

• A journalist was fined for ‘social distancing violation’:

Evrensel Newspaper’s İzmir reporter Eda Aktaş was fined 3150 TL for violating social distancing rules while following a news story.

• Court of appeal upheld the verdicts in the Sözcü Newspaper Trial:

The court of appeal upheld the prison sentences handed down by the district court in the trial against the reporters, writers and managers of Sözcü Newspaper. The journalists will appeal against the ruling at the Court of Cassation.

• A court declared journalist Can Dündar a “fugitive”, and the prosecutor requested imprisonment of up to 35 years:

The court declared that journalist Can Dündar shall be deemed “a fugitive”, and that his immovable will be identified and confiscated. The Savings Deposit Insurance Fund (TMSF) will manage the seized property.

At the hearing held on October 14th, 2020, the hearing prosecutor submitted his judicial opinion as to the accusations, charging Dündar with “obtaining confidential information for the purposes of political and military espionage” and “knowingly and willingly aiding an armed terror organization, without being part of its hierarchical structure”. The prosecutor requested that Dündar be imprisoned from 22 years six months to 35 years.

(This report has been written by Press in Arrest editors Sinan Tartanoğlu and Yeşim Yavuzer.)

Source: http://pressinarrest.com/rapor/
press-arrest-october-2020-press-freedom-report/

 

The full report:

In November in Turkey,

Suppression of the freedoms of press and expression in Turkey continued with ongoing trials and new investigations in November, while detentions and arrests concerning the Mesopotamia Agency (MA) were of particular importance.

In October, Mesopotamia Agency’s reporters Adnan Bilen and Cemil Uğur, and Jinnews reporters Şehriban Abi and Nazan Sala, were arrested for alleged “membership of an armed terror organization”, after reporting on how two citizens were detained and thrown out of a helicopter by security forces in the Çatak district of Van province. In November, numerous MA reporters faced investigations and detentions, while another of its Van reporters, Dindar Karataş was arrested.

• In November in Turkey, in at least 30 press-related trials in 8 provinces, at least 40 journalists were prosecuted. 8 of them were women.

In the trials concerning these 40 journalists, the prosecutor’s offices, demanded 2 counts of aggravated life sentence, and a total of 201 years 4 months to 497 years 2 months in prison.

A total of 1 million 470 thousand TL was requested in non-pecuniary damages in claims for damages against 3 journalists and 3 media outlets.

Women journalists appearing before a judge faced 33 years 7 months 15 days to 86 years 1 month 15 days in prison.

Two female journalists presented their defense in lawsuits where they faced 1 million 270 thousand TL in claims for damages.

In November, journalist Hazal Ocak faced a total of 1 million 220 thousand TL in non-pecuniary damages in three separate claims for damages in November.

• 28 journalists were prosecuted in high criminal courts, and 11 in criminal courts of first instance:

At least 28 journalists appeared before a judge in high criminal courts.

Trials against at least 11 journalists continued at criminal courts of first instance.

Under the scope of lawsuits for damages, 3 journalists and 3 media outlets appeared in civil courts of first instance.

• 22 journalists were charged as per “Anti-Terror Law”:

At least 22 journalists had to present their defense statements against charges of terrorism offenses

At least 8 journalists were charged with “membership of an armed terror organization,”

7 journalists with “spreading propaganda for a terror organization,” and

3 journalists with “targeting a state official who took part in anti-terrorism efforts.”

On the other hand, at least 6 journalists were charged with “knowingly and willing aiding a terror organization without being part of its hierarchical structure”.

• 9 journalists were accused of “insult”:
  A total of 9 journalists appeared before a judge for alleged “insult”.

At least 6 journalists continued to stand trial for “insulting the President.” In this scope, two journalists were sentenced to prison.

3 journalists charged with “insulting a state official” were acquitted.

• “Publicly inciting the population to hatred and enmity”, “slander”, “disclosing confidential information concerning the state’s security and domestic and foreign interests” etc.

At least 3 journalists continued to face the charge of “publicly inciting the population to hatred and enmity” in ongoing trials.

One journalist was charged with “intentionally damaging the reputation or assets of a bank, or disseminating groundless news stories,”

One journalist with “slander,”

One journalist with “showing resistance to prevent an official from performing their duty,”

One journalist with “attempting to overthrow the Turkish government through force and violence” and “attempting to overthrow the constitutional order through force and violence,” and

Four journalists with “disclosing confidential information concerning the state’s security and domestic and foreign interests”…

• 10 journalists in total started being retried:

10 journalists appealed the verdicts of the district courts in courts of appeal and Court of Cassation, which overturned the previous verdicts.

District courts complied with the decisions of the courts of appeal and Court of Cassation, and as a result 10 journalists started being retried in district courts.

In November, the first hearings were held in these retrials against a total of 10 journalists.

• 4 journalists were handed down prison sentences:
  In November, at least 4 journalists were sentenced to a total of 19 years, 11 months in prison.

Journalist Ali Ergin Demirhan was sentenced to 1 year, 2 months and 17 days in prison for “publicly insulting the President.”

Journalist Onur Emre Yağan was sentenced to 1 year, 2 months, 17 days in prison for “publicly insulting the President in a continuous manner” even though President Tayyip Erdoğan had withdrawn his complaint. The court deferred the announcement of the verdict.

Journalist Mehmet Baransu was sentenced to a total of 17 years, 1 months in prison on the charges of “obtaining confidential information”, “disclosing this information in a continuous manner” and “obtaining and publishing information and documents regarding the activities of the National Intelligence Organization (MİT)”

Journalist Yılmaz Özdil was sentenced to 5 months in prison under a trial for “violating the Military Penal Code”. The court deferred the announcement of the verdict.

• 4 journalists were acquitted:

On trial for allegedly “insulting a state official on duty” due to a news story from the time when he served as editor-in-chief, journalist Uğur Güç was acquitted.

The court acquitted journalists Uğur Koç and Mustafa Kömüş from the charge of “publicly insulting a state official on duty” in the lawsuit filed upon a criminal complaint by the ex-Minister of Treasury and Finance, Berat Albayrak.

In a trial where he was prosecuted alongside Mehmet Baransu since 2014, journalist Murat Şevki Çoban was acquitted of the charges.

• Trials of 33 journalists were adjourned:

The trials of 33 journalists appearing before a judge in November were adjourned. The trial of two journalists in İzmir was postponed since an earthquake damaged the courthouse.

The Press in Arrest team reported the following in the trials that it monitored:

• 3 journalists on remand presented their defense speeches via SEGBİS:

Journalists Aziz Oruç, Mehmet Baransu and İsmail Çoban attended the trials from prison, via the Audio and Video Information System (SEGBİS).
İsmail Çoban attended a hearing via SEGBİS from prison, where he is held due to another investigation against him.
Mehmet Baransu attended via SEGBİS the verdict hearing of a trial ongoing since 2014.

• Panel of judges were changed in 10 journalists’ trials:

In the November hearings of the trials against at least 10 journalists, it was observed that the panel of judges had changed.

These 10 journalists had to submit their defense statements against the charges before a new panel of judges/new judges.

• “Presumption of innocence” was violated and the independence of the court was compromised in 3 hearings concerning 4 journalists:

In November, the hearings in 3 ongoing press trials against journalists Müyesser Yıldız, İsmail Dükel, Kenan Kırkaya and Özgür Boğatekin were held in the presence of law enforcement officers / private security guards. As such, the “presumption of innocence” principle was violated in trials in high criminal courts, and the independence of courts was compromised.

• “Publicity of trial” principle was violated 6 times:

In the hearings of at least 6 trials concerning 8 journalists in November, the judges either closed the hearing to the public, or limited the number of observers in the courtroom, citing the measures taken against the coronavirus epidemic. In one case, even the journalist supposed to appear before the judge was not allowed in the courtroom, and he was represented by his lawyer.

'Publicity of Trial' violated under the pretext of the pandemic…

Press in Arrest has observed that, in the press trials held in Turkey since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic in Turkey, hearings are closed to observers and the public in an arbitrary manner, under the pretext of ‘protection measures’.

Since March 2020, under the pretext of the Covid-19 outbreak, but without complying with a specific criterion or a legal regulation shared with the public, the courts prevent observers, journalists and public from attending various hearings. This compromises the principle of the “publicity of the trial”, an important component of the right to a fair trial, which is secured by national legislation and human rights conventions.

In the period from March to the beginning of December, in 38 hearings concerning 73 journalists, observers were not admitted to the courtroom or a restriction was imposed on the number of observers attending the hearings, under the pretext of the coronavirus outbreak.

On this matter, we have received the opinion of a jurist specializing in human rights Kerem Altıparmak, who stated, “Trials are held publicly to show that the fair trial principle is upheld. As such, closing the hearing to the public can be possible only in exceptional situations clearly stipulated by the law. Since no such legal amendment has been passed, this restriction goes against the law.”

‘The judge cannot organize this alone; the Ministry must provide the physical conditions’

Altıparmak made the following assessment on the closure of hearings to the public and similar limitations: “A legal amendment must first be passed to this effect. When such an amendment is passed, arbitrary decisions will become unacceptable. Such a restriction can be possible only after it is determined how the problems associated with that restriction will be compensated for. Here, the principle of measure will be key: Is closing the trial to the public obligatory, favorable and proportional? This is not something that the judge can organize alone. The legislative organ must provide the legal infrastructure, and the ministry must provide the physical conditions. Only then can the judge take the appropriate measures. Therefore, this must be viewed as a collective responsibility, not an individual one.”

‘This is a clear violation of the Constitution and the Convention’

A lawyer who defends journalists in press trials in Turkey, Tora Pekin remarked “The recent practice of not allowing journalists and observers to the courtrooms is a violation of the Constitution and the Convention”, and provided the following details to Press in Arrest:

“Publicity or openness of trial is one of the main principles in legal proceedings. Such that, it is clearly stipulated in both the Constitution (Art. 141) and the European Convention on Human Rights (Art. 6). Safeguarded by these regulations, the principle is a crucial part of our right to a fair trial, and non-compliance with this principle suggests that the trial in question is not fair.

A short description of the reason for the existence of the principle of publicity will suffice to explain why it is of vital importance in today’s Turkey. In brief, the reason for the openness of trials to the public is to ensure the independent and impartial functioning of the judiciary. Thanks to the openness of trials, the public has the opportunity to control the judiciary. Trials organized behind closed doors cannot be monitored by the public/society/people.

Today, journalists and independent observers attend hearings as monitors and carry out this monitoring on behalf of the public. By independent observers, I mean human rights organizations and advocates, professional organizations, and parliamentarians, that is, people and institutions who have the power to make their voices heard.

In the highly politicized trials in today’s Turkey, such an activity can reduce the arbitrariness of the courts and align the judiciary with the law to a certain extent. In other words, the principle of publicity has gained much more importance in our day and age.

The areas where the principle of publicity may be restricted are also stipulated by law. Closing hearings to the public partially or entirely is possible only if necessitated by general morality, or public safety concerns. On the other hand, courts may of course adopt some measures and enforce social distancing rules to prevent the spread of Covid-19. For example, a measure such as using only half of the courtroom’s seating capacity may be acceptable.

However, it goes without saying that such measures cannot be implemented in a way which brings about the complete elimination of the principle of publicity. The recent practice of not allowing journalists and observers to the courtrooms is a violation of the Constitution and the Convention. The admission of only lawyers to the hearing does not show that the principle of the publicity of trial is upheld. Lawyers are already there as ‘parties’. It should also be indicated that such closed trials harm not only the sense of justice of the parties and the society at large. The impression that the judiciary wants to ‘conceal certain things’ does great harm to the judiciary as well. Since there are immense violations of law even in public, we are under no obligation to trust trials and verdicts behind closed doors.”

International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women…

November 25th was the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women.

Istanbul Convention describes violence against women as ‘violation of human rights’ and ‘discrimination’.

Violence against women comprises threats, coercion, or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.

Violence against women results in “physical, sexual, psychological or economic harm or suffering to women”.

It is unacceptable for journalists to be tried for simply doing their job, and prosecution of women journalists for practicing their profession is another form of “violence against women”.

According to Press in Arrest’s database,
In the last two years, at least 89 women journalists have faced 84 press trials in Turkey.

As of today, at least 64 women journalists still face at least one press trial, without arrest.

In the last two years, the district courts have handed down one aggravated life imprisonment and at least 71 years, 7 months and 18 days in prison for at least 21 women journalists.

In the last two years in Turkey, women journalists

have been tried as per 26 articles of the Turkish Penal Code, and 3 articles of the Anti-Terror Law.

In the last two years in Turkey, 78 out of at least 89 women journalists have been tried as per the Anti-Terror Law.

42 of them stand trial for “spreading propaganda for a terror organization” pursuant to Anti-Terror Law, Article 7. 11 women journalists have been sentenced to prison as per Article 7.

In November, female journalists appeared before a judge, facing a total of 33 years 7 months 15 days to 86 years 1 month 15 days in prison. Two female journalists faced non-pecuniary damages of 1 million 270 thousand TL in total.

Aside from the trials, in November,

• At least 11 journalists were detained, summoned to testify or faced an investigation and/or criminal complaint:

Mesopotamia Agency’s Van reporter Dindar Karataş was detained in a police raid on his home. Karataş’s phone and his camera’s memory card were seized by the police. On the other hand, the Van office of the said agency was raided by the police on the grounds that Karataş worked there, and the police searched the premises. Under the investigation conducted by Erzurum Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, Karataş was taken from Van to Erzurum and a gag order was issued for the file.

Journalist Cihan Ölmez was detained in a police raid on his home in Şırnak. Ölmez was released after 4 days in custody.
Mesopotamia Agency’s intern reporter Hakan Yalçın was detained in a police raid on his house in Ankara. He was released on probation after his statement was taken by the police.

Under an investigation launched by Diyarbakır Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office 75 people were detained, including Jinnews’ Kurdish-language news editor Roza Metina, also a member of PEN. Metina was released on probation after giving her statement.

Journalists Davut Uçar and Kesire Önel were detained under an investigation by Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office for allegedly “organizing activities in the city for PKK/KCK”. An arrest warrant was issued for journalist Davut Uçar for alleged “membership of an armed terror organization”, and he was then released on probation after giving his statement. Kesire Önel was still under custody as this report was being drafted.

Journalist Çağlar Tekin announced that he was taken into custody in a courthouse where he arrived for a hearing. Tekin stated that the reason for his detention was “sharing a news story which the Anadolu Agency first published and then deleted, concerning the ISIS militants’ use of Turkish Armed Forces vehicles in Syria”. Tekin was released after his statement was taken by the police.

Journalist Melis Alphan announced in her social media account that she had given a statement under an investigation against her. Alphan wrote, “An investigation has been launched against me for ‘spreading propaganda for a terror organization’ due to a photograph which I shared six years ago, from the 2015 Nevruz celebrations in Diyarbakır, when the Peace Process was still in place. I testified as a suspect. However, the said images were broadcast by all TV channels; the state was there”. Alphan was released after interrogation.

The prosecutor’s office launched an investigation against retired journalist Mehmet Yüksel Özbek for sharing in his social media account a news story by Cumhuriyet Newspaper in April 2020. The story was about how the Presidential Communications Director Fahrettin Altun rented a plot of land from General Directorate of Foundations for 10 years for 258 TL per month, and carried out landscaping and construction in this area, and how the İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality demolished the structures built.

Journalist Cengizhan Çelik announced in his social media account that he was summoned to testify. At the police station, Çelik was interrogated about some of his social media posts. Çelik stated that the investigation launched upon a criminal complaint by Boğaziçi Center for Global Relations (Bosphorus Global).

An investigation was initiated against journalist Ahmet Kanbal for reporting on the arrest of nine individuals, including the commander of the 2. Border Brigade in Nusaybin, on charges of ‘migrant smuggling’ and ‘bribery’. The investigation was launched upon a complaint which stated that ‘the news story revealed all the details of the investigation’ and thus ‘breached the confidentiality of the investigation’. In his statement, Kanbal rejected the accusations, stating that the news story was designed to inform the general public and that it did not violate the confidentiality of the investigation.

• 2 journalists were released from prison:

Imprisoned pending trial for “disclosing confidential information concerning the state’s security and political interests,” journalist Müyesser Yıldız was released in the first hearing of the trial. Yıldız spent 5 months in prison on remand.

On trial for “membership of an armed terror organization” and “spreading propaganda for a terror organization”, journalist Aziz Oruç was released at the third hearing of the trial. Oruç spent 11 months in prison, pending trial.

• 1 journalist was arrested:

Journalist Dindar Karataş was interrogated under an investigation into his news stories, interviews and phone conversations with news sources. Karataş was then arrested for alleged “membership of an armed terror organization.” The court issued a gag order for the case.

• European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) reached a verdict in the Cumhuriyet Newspaper Trial:

European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) announced its verdict for the Cumhuriyet Newspaper Trial.

ECHR ruled that the journalists’ “rights to liberty and security” and “right of freedom of expression” were violated.

ECHR stated that the journalists’ detention and imprisonment pending trial were not based on reasonable ground.

According to the verdict, Turkey will have to pay 16 thousand euros in compensation to the then employees of the newspaper: Murat Sabuncu, Musa Kart, Hakan Kara, Güray Öz and Akın Atalay, as well as 3 newspaper executives.

ECHR ruled that journalist Ahmet Şık’s rights of “freedom of expression and press” and “personal security and liberty” were violated when he was imprisoned pending trial for 14 months under the Cumhuriyet Newspaper Trial.

The court refused to rule that the trial was politically motivated.

9 years ago, ECHR had ruled that Ahmet Şık’s detention pending trial under the “Oda TV Trial” was also a violation of his rights.

Source: http://pressinarrest.com/rapor/
press-arrest-november-2020-press-freedom-report/