Çağdaş Kaplan

He worked as a correspondent for the now shuttered Dicle News Agency (DİHA). He was an editor at the news web site Gazete Karınca and editor-in-chief of Yeni Yaşam newspaper.

The agency DİHA, which he worked for, was closed down with a decree law issued during the State of Emergency declared after the July 15th, 2016 coup attempt. During the state of emergency, a number of media outlets were thus closed with decree laws issued by the government, without the approval of the Assembly.

On December 20th, 2011, he was detained under the investigation widely known as the “KCK Press Trial”. On December 24th, 2011, he was arrested on charges of “membership of an armed terrorist organization”. He was released pending trial on February 8th, 2013. He is still on trial without detention, on charges of “membership of an armed terrorist organization”. He faces 7 years, 6 months to 15 years in prison. The prosecutor’s office did not yet submit its opinion as to the accusations, although the trial began in September 2012.

Along with 5 other journalists, Kaplan also stood trial for his news articles about the military operations in the Sur district of Diyarbakır. Kaplan and the other journalists faced prison sentences of 1 to 3 years for allegedly “targeting” the Gendarmerie Commander Musa Çitil who led the operations, but were eventually acquitted. The prosecutor’s office objected to their acquittal, and the appeal process is ongoing.

While working at DİHA, he was also prosecuted for his news articles concerning the investigations and attacks on university students in Sakarya in 2010. In May 2018, he was sentenced to 6 years 3 months in prison on charges of “membership of an armed terrorist organization”. During the appeal period, he was banned from traveling abroad.

On October 7th, 2018, he was taken under custody for sharing in his social media account the photos which he took while working as a journalist in Ayn El Arab (Kobanê), and was released after his statement was taken by the police.

All the proceedings against Çağdaş Kaplan continue in his absence as he is abroad.

“Musa Çitil News” Trial

Due to a complaint filed by the Diyarbakır Gendarmerie Regional Commander Musa Çitil, the Diyarbakır Public Prosecutor’s Office opened an investigation against six journalists, including Çağdaş Kaplan in 2016.

The complaint was issued in response to a news report titled “Kuşatmanın adı ‘Bayrak 12’, başındaki isim Musa Çitil” [“The name of the siege is ‘Flag 12’, the person in charge is Musa Çitil”] which focuses on 2016 military operations during the curfew in Diyarbakır’s Sur district. In the aforementioned news report, the name of Musa Çitil was mentioned as the commander of the operation.

The investigation was against Hamza Gündüz and Ömer Çelik, who was the news director of DİHA, where the news report was published, as well as DİHA reporters Kaplan and Selman Çiçek, journalist Abdulvahap Taş, İnan Kızılkaya, who was the managing editor of the Özgür Gündem newspaper which shared the news in the newspaper’s social media accounts, and owner of the newspaper Kemal Sancılı.

In his complaint file, Musa Çitil claimed “[the suspects] made propaganda through social media accounts and pointed him out as a target because of his appointed operations.” Due to Çitil’s complaint, the Diyarbakır Public Prosecutor’s Office launched an investigation against the suspects on May 18, 2016.

Kaplan was taken into custody on Oct. 6, 2018 in Istanbul as there was an arrest warrant in the scope of the investigation against him. He was kept in custody for one night at the Göztepe Police Center and was then referred to the Çağlayan Courthouse. He gave his testimony to the prosecutor in the scope of the arrest warrant issued by the Istanbul 1st Magistrates’ Judge against him and then released.

After the investigation, Diyarbakır Public Prosecutor’s Office, issued the indictment against six journalists, including Çağdaş Kaplan on May 31, 2018. Musa Çitil was included as the “plaintiff” in the indictment.

In the 11-page indictment, Kaplan was included in the fourth rank as a “suspect.” In the relevant part of the indictment, Kaplan was accused of sharing the news through his social media account with the title “The personnel of Erdoğan in Sur is Musa Çitil” and also of posting the link of the news which included Çitil’s photograph in front of a tank.

Afterwards, Kaplan’s testimony given in the scope of the investigation was included in the indictment. In his testimony, Kaplan said that the news was published by numerous press outlets and that the Gendarmerie General Commander Musa Çitil himself had made statements about conducting the operation himself. Kaplan added he “used his freedom of expression and press” and that the post was simply the sharing of news.

Prosecutor claimed that by sharing information and photographs of Çitil, Kaplan committed the crime of “disclosing or publishing the identities of state officials that were assigned in the fight against terrorism” and recommended the journalists be sentenced.

The Diyarbakır 9th High Criminal Court accepted the indictment. Kaplan and the other four journalists were charged for “disclosing or publishing the identities of state officials that were assigned in the fight against terrorism.”

The first hearing of the trial was held on Oct. 3, 2018. Kaplan did not attend the hearing. An arrest warrant was issued against him. He was taken into custody on Oct. 6, 2018 and after spending one night at the police Office, he was released.

The second hearing of the trial was set to Jan. 13, 2019. Çitil presented a 40-page petition to the court through the Aydın 2nd High Criminal Court two days before the hearing.

In the petition, referring the journalists testimonies as, “We published the story within the limits of press freedom,” Çitil claimed that “by making and sharing fake news, [the defendants] tried to defame the General Commandership of Gendarmerie, including myself and all of the other security forces’ successful operations against the terrorist organization.”

Also, several news reports about the trial from various news outlets were listed by the plaintiff. Çitil demanded to join the trial as the plaintiff and recommended the most severe punishment for the journalists.

In the second hearing of the trial, the court accepted Çitil’s request and set the third hearing for May 8, 2019.

At the 3rd hearing of trial, the court ruled to wait for the execution of the arrest warrant against the defendant and to take Kemal Sancılı’s (who was detained due to another crime) testimony through SEGBİS. The next hearing of trial was set for Oct. 2, 2019.

In this hearing of the case, the prosecutor stated that they were repeating the previous opinion. The court board ruled for their acquittal due to the elements of crime not being constituted, even though a case was opened with the accusations.

5. Standing - Dec. 18, 2019


Duruşma 09.50 olarak belirlenmesine rağmen 10.30’da başladı.

Duruşmada Kemal Sancılı’nın ara duruşmada tutuklu bulunduğu Edirne Kapalı Cezaevi’nden tahliye edildiği için Ses ve Görüntü Bilişim Sistemi (SEGBİS) ile hazır edilmemişti.

Mahkeme Başkanı, Abdulvahap Taş’a “Eğer senin hakkında bugün karar verirsek hükmün geri bırakılmasını ister misin?” diye sordu.

Abdulvahap Taş beyanında sadece haber amaçlı paylaşım yaptığını, bunun suç olmadığını, kimseyi ifşa etmediğini ve hedef göstermediğini belirterek öncelikle beraatini aksi takdirde hükmün geri bırakılmasını talep ettiğini söyledi.

Savcı, önceki mütalaayı tekrar ettiklerini belirtti. Yapılan yargılama, sanık beyanları ve tüm dosya kapsamında sanıkların dosyada yer alan paylaşımları ile Sur ilçesinde PKK örgütüne yönelik Bayrak 12 isimli operasyonda görev alan Musa Çitil’e ait birtakım bilgileri ve resmini paylaşarak müştekiyi hedef gösterdiğini söyledi.

Bu nedenle sanıkarın “terörle mücadelede görev almış kişileri hedef göstermek” suçunu işlediklerini iddia etti ve Terörle Mücadele Kanunu’nun (TMK) 6/1 maddesince cezalandırılmalarını istedi.


Mahkeme heyeti duruşmaya 10 dakika ara verdikten sonra kararını verdi.

Heyet, haklarında her ne kadar “terörle mücadele operasyonlarında görevli kişileri hedef göstermek” gerekçesiyle dava açılmışsa da üzerlerine “atılı suçun yasal unsurlarının oluşmadığı” gerekçesiyle sanıkların beraatlerine karar verdi.


Duruşma Öncesi

Duruşma Diyarbakır Adliyesi’ndeki 9. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde görüldü. Duruşma 9:50 olarak belirlenmesine rağmen 10:30’da yapıldı.

Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları

Duruşmanın görüldüğü mahkeme salonu, Diyarbakır Adliyesi’ndeki standart salonlardan birisiydi. Duruşma salonunun bulunduğu koridorda iki ayrı yere bariyer konulmuştu. Salon havalandırılmış ve temizdi.

Duruşmaya Katılım

Duruşmaya Abdulvahap Taş avukatı Resul Temur ile birlikte katıldı. Duruşmayı Susma 24 Platformu’ndan Özkan Küçük, Türkiye Gazeteciler Sendikası (TGS) Diyarbakır Şube Başkanı Mahmut Oral, TGS avukatlarından Ülkü Şahin ve iki gazeteci izledi.

Genel Gözlemler

Duruşmayı adliye koridorunda bekleyen üç sivil polis, izleyici sıralarından izledi. Kemal Sancılı’nın ara duruşmada tahliye edildiğini mahkeme başkanı mübaşirden öğrendi. Sanık Abdulvahap Taş savunmasını yaptıktan sonra mahkeme başkanı “Beraatimi istiyorum” diyorsun değil mi diye sorarak hatırlatmada bulundu.

4. Standing - Oct. 2, 2019


Mahkeme başkanı sanık S.G. hakkındaki yakalama emrinin infaz edilmediğini açıkladı. Kemal Sancılı önceki savunmalarını tekrar ettiğini söyledi. Avukat Resul Temur da eksiklerin giderilmesini istedi.

Duruşmada mütalaasını sunan savcı, sanıkların sosyal medya paylaşımları ile Sur ilçesinde PKK’ye yönelik Bayrak 12 isimli operasyonda görev alan Musa Çitil’i hedef gösterdiklerini söyledi. Savcı, sanıkların “Terörle mücadelede görev almış kişileri hedef göstermek” suçunu işlediklerini ve Terörle Mücadele Kanunu’nun (TMK) 6/1 maddesince cezalandırılmalarını istedi.

Savcının mütalaasının ardından avukat Resul Temur mütalaaya katılmadıklarını, savunma için süre istediklerini belirtti.


Mahkeme heyeti, duruşmaya ara vermeden kararını şu şekilde açıkladı.

Sanık avukatlarının verilen mütalaaya yönelik savunma hazırlanması için süre verildi.

Sanık S.G. hakkındaki yakalama emrinin infazının beklenmesine, akıbetinin sorulmasına; başka suçtan tutuklu Kemal Sancılı’nın tutuklu olması halinde SEGBİS sistemiyle hazır edilmesi için cezaevi müdürlüğüne müzekkere yazılmasına; tutuksuz sanık Abdulvahap Taş’ın savunma yapması için duruşmada hazır edilmesine karar verdi.

Yargılamanın bir sonraki duruşması 18 Aralık 2019 tarihine bırakıldı.


Duruşma Öncesi

Duruşma Diyarbakır Adliyesi’ndeki 9. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde görüldü. Duruşma saati 10.10 olarak belirtilmesine rağmen saat 09.15’te yapıldı.

Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları

Duruşmanın görüldüğü mahkeme salonu, Diyarbakır Adliyesi’ndeki standart salonlardan birisiydi. Duruşma salonunun bulunduğu koridorda iki ayrı yere bariyer konulmuştu. Salon havalandırılmış ve temizdi.

Duruşmaya Katılım

Duruşmaya sadece Edirne F Tipi Cezaevi’nde başka bir suçtan tutuklu Kemal Sancılı Ses ve Görüntü Bilişim Sistemi (SEGBİS) ile katıldı. Duruşmada avukat Resul Temur ve tutuksuz yargılanan Selman Çiçek hazır bulundu. Çağdaş Kaplan, Ömer Çelik, İnan Kızılkaya, Abdulvahap Taş, Selman Çiçek ve Hamza Gündüz duruşmaya katılmadı.

Genel Gözlemler

Çok kısa süren duruşmada olağanüstü bir durum yaşanmadı.

3. Standing - May 8, 2019


Duruşmada gazeteci olmayan tek sanık S.G. hakkındaki yakalama emrinin infaz edilmediği görüldü.

Kemal Sancılı önceki savunmalarını tekrar ettiğini söyledi. Bir önceki celse kendisi hakkında İstanbul 23. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde yargılamanın devam ettiğini belirtmesi üzerine gönderilen yazıya cevap verildiği belirtildi.

Avukat Resul Temur da gelen belgelere diyeceklerinin olmadığını ve savunmalarını tekrar ettiklerini belirtti.


Mahkeme heyeti, duruşmaya ara vermeden kararını verdi.

Sanık S.G. hakkındaki yakalama emrinin infazının beklenmesine, akıbetinin sorulmasına, başka suçtan tutuklu Kemal Sancılı’nın tutuklu olması halinde SEGBİS sistemiyle hazır edilmesi için cezaevi müdürlüğüne müzekkere yazılmasına karar verdi.

Bir sonraki duruşma 2 Ekim 2019 tarihine bırakıldı.


Duruşma Öncesi

Duruşma Diyarbakır Adliyesi’ndeki 9. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde görüldü. Duruşma belirlenen saatte yapıldı.

Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları

Duruşmanın görüldüğü mahkeme salonu, Diyarbakır Adliyesi’ndeki standart salonlardan birisiydi. Duruşma salonunun bulunduğu koridorda iki ayrı yere bariyer konulmuştu. Salon havalandırılmış ve temizdi.

Duruşmaya Katılım

Duruşmaya sadece Edirne F Tipi Cezaevi’nde başka bir suçtan tutuklu Kemal Sancılı Ses ve Görüntü Bilişim Sistemi (SEGBİS) ile katıldı. Avukat Resul Temur de hazır bulundu.

Genel Gözlemler

Çok kısa süren duruşmada olağanüstü bir durum yaşanmadı.

Duruşma için isimler okunmasına rağmen araya iki duruşma daha alınarak bekletildi. Mahkemede olağanüstü bir durum yaşanmadı.

2. Standing - Jan. 16, 2019


Duruşma saati 10.10 olarak belirlenmesine rağmen 11:40’da başladı.

Savcı, verdiği mütalaada; Musa Çitil’in suçtan zarar görme ihtimaline karşı katılan olarak kabulüne, sanık S.G. hakkındaki yakalama emrinin devamına ve sanıklardan Kemal Sancılı hakkında yazılı savunma yapılması için gelecek celseye kadar süre verilmesini mütalaa etti.

Duruşmada Edirne F Tipi Kapalı Cezaevi’nde başka bir suçtan tutuklu Özgür Gündem Gazetesi İmtiyaz Sahibi Kemal Sancılı Ses ve Görüntü Bilişim Sistemi (SEGBİS) ile katıldı. Avukat Resul Temur de hazır bulundu. Mahkeme heyetinin tebligat yoluyla şikayet ve delillerini sunmasını istediği Çitil’in, Aydın 2. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde 40 sayfalık dilekçe sunduğu belirtildi. Mahkeme Başkanı, Çitil’in davaya katılma talebinin olduğunu söyledi.

Kemal Sancılı, beyanlarında, “ben müştekiyi tanımıyorum, suçlamaları da kabul etmiyorum” dedi. Özgür Gündem Gazetesinin İmtiyaz Sahibi olduğunu, müşteki ile ilgili herhangi bir yazısının bulunmadığını söyleyen Sancılı, “Konuya ilişkin İstanbul 23. ve 27. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde devam eden davalarım var. Beraatimi istiyorum” dedi. Avukat Resul Temur da söz konusu internet sitesinin Özgür Gündem ANF uzantılı olduğunu, müvekkile isnat edilen suçun gerçekten Özgür Gündem gazetesine ait olup olmadığının incelenmesini istedi.

Avukat Temur, müşteki Çitil’in davaya katılma talebini kabul etmediklerini belirterek, ayrıca yazılı savunma için süre istedi.


Mahkeme Başkanı, duruşmaya ara vermeden kararını verdi. Müşteki Musa Çitil’in suçtan zarar görme ihtimaline binaen kamu davasına katılan olarak kabulüne karar verdi. Sanık Kemal Sancılı’nın bu celsedeki beyanları dikkate alınarak, hakkında kamu davası bulunup bulunmadığının İstanbul 23. ve 27. Ağır Ceza Mahkemelerine sorulmasına karar verildi.

Davanın bir sonraki duruşması 8 Mayıs 2019 tarihine bırakıldı.


Duruşma Öncesi

Duruşma Diyarbakır Adliyesi’ndeki 9. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde görüldü. İzleyicilerin duruşma salonunun bulunduğu koridora geçişine izin verildi. Duruşma salona girişte herhangi bir üst araması yapılmadı. Basın mensuplarına basın kartı sorulmadı. Duruşma saati 10.10 olarak belirlenmesine rağmen 11:40’da başladı.

Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları

Duruşmanın görüldüğü mahkeme salonu, Diyarbakır Adliyesi’ndeki standart salonlardan birisiydi. Duruşma salonunun bulunduğu koridorda iki ayrı yere bariyer konulmuştu. Salon havalandırılmış ve temizdi.

Duruşmaya Katılım

Duruşmaya tutuksuz yargılanan Abdulavahap Taş katıldı. İzleyici olarak sadece Mezopotamya Haber Ajansı muhabiri katıldı.

Genel Gözlemler

Duruşma için isimler okunmasına rağmen araya iki duruşma daha alınarak bekletildi. Mahkemede olağanüstü bir durum yaşanmadı.

“Musa Çitil News” Trial Download

“Musa Çitil News” Trial 2. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

“Musa Çitil News” Trial 3. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

“Musa Çitil News” Trial 4. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

“Musa Çitil News” Trial 5. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

“KCK Press” Trial

49 journalists and media professionals working for “Kurdish media” outlets, namely Dicle News Agency (DİHA), Özgür Gündem Newspaper, Fırat News Agency (ANF) and Roj TV were arrested in the early morning hours on December 20th, 2011, with police raids on their homes or media outlets in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Van, Adana and Diyarbakır.

Journalist Çağdaş Kaplan was likewise taken under custody in early morning hours at a raid on his home in İstanbul.

The journalists and media professionals thus detained were taken on the next day to the Istanbul Police Department’s Anti-Terror Branch on Vatan Avenue, Istanbul.

A “confidentiality / restriction order” was issued regarding the case. As a result, the journalists in custody were initially unable to learn the charges against them.

In his statement at the chief public prosecutor’s office during detention, Kaplan said that “he had no ties to a terrorist organization, he was a journalist, he worked as a contracted reporter for DİHA, he had no direct connections to Roj TV and ANF, and he shared news stories with Roj TV as a professional reporter.”

Seven of the journalists and media professionals taken into custody were released on December 23rd, 2011 after giving their statements at the prosecutor’s office.

However, 42 journalists and media professionals including Kaplan were referred to the court. On December 24th, 2011, 35 journalists and media professionals including Kaplan were arrested. Kaplan was taken to Kocaeli Kandıra No. 2 F-Type Prison.

The indictment against journalists and media professionals including Çağdaş Kaplan, a reporter with the now shuttered DİHA, was completed on April 27th, 2012 by Istanbul Public Prosecutor’s Office.

In the indictment, it was claimed that the so-called “KCK / PKK Press Committee” and “Democratic Enlightenment Union” (Yekîtiya Ragihandina Demokratik - YRD) guided the editorial policy and news coverage of the “Kurdish media”.

Dicle News Agency (DİHA), Fırat Publishing and Distribution Company, Gün Printing House (which printed the newspapers Azadiya Welat, Denge Welat, Özgür Gündem, Yeni Demokratik Toplum, Yeni Demokratik Yaşam, Yeni Demokratik Ulus and the magazines Özgür Halk, Demokratik Modernite, Yurtsever Gençlik), Fırat News Agency (ANF), Azadiya Welat Newspaper, Özgür Gündem Newspaper and other daily and weekly newspapers in Turkish; as well as various media or news outlets, including Roj TV, Medya TV, and Mezopotamya Radio, were listed among “KCK / PKK’s media outlets” in the indictment.

The indictment added that “KCK / PKK’s Press Committee has been holding regular meetings since 2001 to consolidate the hierarchy within the organization’s media network, and Press Conferences have transformed into YRD Conferences over time”, and that “The Press Committee’s editorial policy focused on establishing the state of Kurdistan”.

Journalistic activities were presented as “terror group’s activities” in the indictment. The indictment made frequent use of allegations and definitions such as “so-called journalism activities”, “news designed to denigrate the state”, “terror group-driven journalism”, “an independent journalist would not have penned such news stories” and “the photographs found in the computer denigrated state officials”.

37 pages of the 800-page indictment were dedicated to explaining the “KCK / PKK structure”; this section featured the arguments of the prosecutor as well as statements by three members of the organization and three secret witnesses who were captured or had surrendered. In addition, Abdullah Öcalan’s talks with his lawyers and the latters’ correspondence with each other were also included.

The next 100 pages offered a history of the “Kurdish media”. There were claims regarding the relationship between the organization and the newspapers, magazines, radios, televisions and web sites going back to the 1970s.

The prosecution claimed that many media outlets, especially DİHA, Fırat News Agency (ANF), Roj TV, were “broadcasting to serve the purposes of KCK / PKK”. The news, images, articles and interviews shared among these media outlets; statements of secret witnesses and suspects; and “KCK Charter’s sections related to the press” were presented to support these claims.

Journalists’ news stories, journalistic activities and coverage for media outlets such as Roj TV and ANF were presented as criminal activities.

In the indictment, 44 journalists and media employees were charged with “membership or leadership of a terrorist organization”.

The 16-page section on Çağdaş Kaplan began on page 533 of the indictment.

In the indictment, Kaplan’s journalistic activities such as his news stories, news information he passed on to other media outlets, news-related phone calls, and his filing of the indictment of the cases that he followed as a journalist were considered as “evidence for ties to terrorism”.

The prosecutor, without explaining what constituted a crime in Kaplan’s news stories, presented journalistic activities as “journalistic organizational activities” confirming that Kaplan was “actively participating in the press committee of the terror organization”.

The following news stories were added as criminal evidence to the indictment on the basis of phone tapping:

1- News story dated October 30th and published on DİHA, titled “Ebru Muhikancı’s coffin carried on the shoulders of women”. The indictment presented a phone conversation between Kaplan and a district administrator of BDP, his source in a news story concerning the funeral of Ebru Muhikancı, allegedly an HPG member.
2- News story dated December 12th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “Human Rights Association: In Kartepe, it was possible to capture Güzel alive, but his right to life has been violated”, featuring information from a press conference.
In the indictment it was claimed that Kaplan, while following a news story on the hijacking of the İzmit-Gölcük sea bus, shared information about the incident to Roj TV. In his assessment of the news content, the prosecutor said that Kaplan claimed that the right to life of Mensur Güzel, the individual who perpetrated the act, was violated.
3- News story dated December 18th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “DYG Trial Begins”.
In the indictment it was claimed that two days prior to the publication of the story, on December 16th, 2011, Kaplan had phone conversations with journalists about the police operation against university students alleged to be members of Revolutionary Patriotic Youth (DYG), and about the rally to be organized by BDP to protest the KCK operations; connected to Roj TV’s news bulletin; and followed the press conference titled “I denounce myself” organized by BDP Co-Chair Selahattin Demirtaş to protest the operation.
The prosecutor stated, “The analysis of the news content has revealed that the defendants are members of DYG, the youth branch of BDP, and wanted to present their defense in mother tongue”.
4- News story dated December 22nd, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “Journalist Cengiz Kapmaz Taken Into Custody”.
In the indictment, it was stated that Kaplan, during a live connection to Roj TV, claimed that the KCK operations were against Kurdish lawyers -over 70 of whom were taken into custody- rather than against the terror organization, and the Roj TV presenter depicted the operations as ‘political genocide’.
5- News story dated December 6th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “HDK delegate Güneş taken into custody”.
It was claimed that Kaplan connected to Roj TV’s Baki Gül to share information on the arrest of over 70 lawyers including Abdullah Öcalan’s lawyers, prior to lawyers’ visitation to Öcalan, as well as the ongoing ‘Devrimci Karargah’ (Revolutionary Headquarters) and ‘KCK’ operations, and that this information was also present in the news story published on DİHA.
The prosecutor stated “The analysis of the news content revealed that the news was transmitted at 12.52 p.m. on the day of the visitation and there was information on the arrest of 13 individuals claimed to be members of the ‘Devrimci Karargah’ organization” and emphasized that “it was determined that the news article was penned by Kaplan”.
6- News story dated December 13th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “Arrests were protested in Nurtepe amidst heavy police presence”. The prosecutor based his accusation on the claim that Kaplan had connected to Roj TV on the same day and shared the news story on the taking into custody of 20 individuals in İstanbul and Samsun in an operation against ‘DHKP-C’ and “the source was presented as fk”.
7- News story dated December 13th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “Arrests were protested in a sit-in before Istanbul Police Headquarters”.
It was claimed that on the next day, December 14th, 2011, Kaplan connected to Roj TV to give information about the ongoing operations against ‘DHKP-C’ and ‘KCK’, and about the protests organized by lawyers’ organizations to condemn the arrests.
It was claimed that the information shared during this connection was also shared in the news story published on DİHA in the previous evening.
8- News story dated December 15th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “İstanbul Bar Association protested by lawyers”.
It was indicated that Kaplan connected to Roj TV on the same day and gave information on “We Are Defending the Defense” campaign by lawyers and their organizations, and the protests to be held against the arrest of Abdullah Öcalan’s lawyers.
The prosecutor stated, “the news article indicated that the interview was published on the same day, and claimed that Istanbul Bar Association remained silent against the arrest of lawyers under the KCK investigation, and so the Association was protested by lawyers”.
9- News story dated December 16th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “14 people referred to the courthouse”.

It was indicated that on the same day, Kaplan went live on Roj TV and gave information on the arrest of 50 lawyers, ongoing detention procedures, protests against the silence of the Istanbul Bar Association and and the refusal of Abdullah Öcalan’s lawyers’ demand to visit him, and that DİHA reported on these issues as well.

It was also interesting that the prosecutor described these news stories as “journalistic organizational activities” replete with elements of crime. He made the following remarks about the news:

“From these journalistic organizational activities, it was understood that he is an active member of the press committee of the organization, frequently connected live to the organization’s media outlets, made comments and assessments in line with the instructions of the organization’s correspondents, distorted incidents in Turkey in all of his news stories in a provocative manner, and tried to create the perception that the operation targeted the entire Kurdish people rather than the terror organization.”

In the indictment, the following news stories collected from open online sources were claimed to spread propaganda for the terror organization:

1- News story dated December 15th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “How were the sound recordings transcribed in İmralı?”
The news story explained that the Specially Authorized Court prosecuting Abdullah Öcalan’s 36 lawyers had demanded the sound recordings of the İmralı visits, however, the court received not the sound recordings but their transcriptions. The prosecutor claimed that “the said news story did not give information but rather presented the terror organization’s opinion on the matter”.
2- News story dated December 12th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “Silence continues, and human rights do not exist on İmralı”.
This news story explained that “Öcalan was not allowed to see his lawyers for 138 days” and gave information on the prison policies towards Öcalan since 1999. The prosecutor claimed that the story “fully reflected the official opinion of the KCK/PKK terror organization, and in line with the instructions from Qandil, the press committee administrators and members expressed these ideas on every platform.”
3- News story dated November 29th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “Kanar: Did the state set a trap for the lawyers?”
According to the prosecutor, this interview with the criminal lawyer Ercan Kanar on the arrest of Öcalan’s 33 lawyers was conducted “in line with the organization’s instructions, to serve the purposes of the organization.”
4- News story dated December 27th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “Arrested lawyers to the court: Do not act in an immoral and unconscionable manner.”
The prosecutor argued that this news story on the testimonies of Abdullah Öcalan’s arrested lawyers “distorted and protested the arrest of numerous members of the terror organization as a result of the investigation against its leadership committee, tried once again to create the perception that the operation targeted the entire Kurdish people rather than the terror organization, served the purposes of the organization, and that an unbiased journalist would not have penned this and other news articles”.
5- News story dated December 23rd, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “The media rediscovers İmralı”.
The prosecutor claimed that, this news story about mainstream media articles targeting lawyers of Asrın Law Office and Tayyip Erdoğan’s speeches condemning the law office, served the purposes of the organization.
6- News story dated December 25th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “Tens of thousands of protesters in Kazlıçeşme say ‘We shall not yield to repression’”.
The news story touched upon the rally titled “Don’t Trample My Will” held against the KCK operations, and the prosecutor claimed that it likewise “served the purposes of the terror organization.”
7- News story dated October 29th, 2011 and published on DİHA, titled “We don’t want children to get killed, and Kurdish and Turkish mothers to grieve any more”.
The prosecutor claimed that this interview with Birgül Muhikancı, the mother of Ebru Muhikancı who was killed, tried to defend the organization by capitalizing on the public’s sympathy for a mother whose PKK member daughter was killed in a terror incident, and thus tried to transform this grievance into propaganda for the organization.”
In the indictment, the prosecutor penned a section titled “Kaplan’s ties to the European Press Officer of the KCK/PKK organization”, indicating that “the secret witness Bahar pointed to the ties between Kaplan and the ANF editor, claimed to be an officer of the organization” and that “he and Kaplan had four phone conversations”, without presenting the content of these alleged conversations.

The evidence seized in the search at Kaplan’s house was listed as follows:

1- A document with worldwide examples of “democratic autonomy”
2- İsmail Beşikçi’s book titled “Forced Settlement of Kurds”
3- A book on Mahir Çayan (the name of the book was not mentioned)
4- Interviews about ‘democratic autonomy’
5- A document featuring “comments” about the law firm that defended Abdullah Öcalan
6- A photograph of Kaplan’s claimed to have been taken while he was making a victory sign in front of the signpost of the Kandil district in Konya province.
In this regard, the prosecutor said, “It was seen that Kaplan exposed his connection with Qandil by playing on the homonymy he discovered between the town of Kandil and the Qandil mountain, and so this image was placed into indictment to show the suspect’s organizational stance.”
Lawyers argued that the person in this photograph was not actually Kaplan, at the hearing on February 4th, 2013, when Kaplan was still in prison.
7- The indictments of the legal cases followed by Kaplan for journalistic purposes

The prosecutor depicted Kaplan’s work for DİHA and live connections to ANF, Roj TV and the radio Mezopotamya’nın Sesi as “organization-related activities”.

The prosecutor claimed that in Kaplan’s live connections to Roj TV programs, “the Roj TV presenter condemned the investigations against the terror organization, engaged in propaganda, and depicted the ‘KCK operations’ as ‘operations for political genocide’”.

The prosecutor reiterated his claim that Kaplan, in his news, tried to create the perception that the operations targeted the entire Kurdish people rather than the terror organization, and argued that “Kaplan spread propaganda for a terror organization in all his news stories”, and “in social protests organized by the terror organization, acted as a source for news stories spreading propaganda for the organization as DİHA officer.”

In the indictment, the prosecutor charged Kaplan with “membership of an armed terror organization” as per Turkish Penal Code 314/2, demanding 5 to 10 years of imprisonment.

However, he requested that the prison sentence be extended by half as per Anti-Terror Law Article 5. As such, Kaplan faces 7 years, 6 months to 15 years in prison for “membership of an armed terror organization”.

Furthermore, the prosecutor demanded that Kaplan be deprived of certain rights pursuant to Turkish Penal Code Article 53.

The “KCK Press Trial”, marked by debates on the right to defense in the mother tongue, was held at 15th High Criminal Court with Special Authority (10 episodes consisting of 32 sessions) from September 10th, 2012 to March 3rd, 2014. The hearings started at Çağlayan Courthouse and were moved to the courtroom in the Silivri campus on November 12th, 2012. From March 26th, 2014 to January 11th, 2018, 15 hearings were held at Istanbul 3rd High Criminal Court located in the Çağlayan Courthouse.

Defendants detained in different prisons, including the now shuttered DİHA’s Çağdaş Kaplan, were brought to Silivri for the hearings planned to last many days. After the trials ended, they were taken back to their prisons by road.

At the beginning of the trial, protests took place within the courtroom upon the rejection of requests for defense in the mother tongue. Afterwards, all journalists detained under the “KCK” investigation and their lawyers started a hunger strike. Defendants continued to respond in Kurdish and Zazaki during ID confirmation.

Frequently debates and protests erupted during the hearings, lawyers’ microphones were turned off, and the courtroom was evacuated upon the orders of the judge. 15. High Criminal Court filed six charges against the audience, lawyers and defendants for allegedly “protesting the court by applause” or “making statements that go beyond the limits of defense to constitute crime”.

It took six hearings to read out loud the 800-page indictment, and the 185-page indictment against two other defendants whose files were merged with the main case. The indictments were read out in turns by two TRT announcers, mainly to an empty hall. When the reading out of the indictments was completed at the 12th session on April 22nd, 2013, 11 of the 37 prisoners had been released.

In the 12th session on April 22nd, 2013, translators from the Kurdish Institute, which the lawyers had invited for interpretation from Kurdish were also in attendance. DİHA editor Ertuş Bozkurt, one of the detained defendants, read out the 25-page Kurdish defense drafted on behalf of all defendants. Detained defendants presented their individual defenses after this joint defense. The defense of the detained defendants was completed at the 17th hearing on June 18th, 2013. The defendants who were not detained commenced their defenses at the 19th hearing on September 25th, 2013, after the completion of the statements of lawyers of the detained defendants.

Kaplan was released from prison at the 11th hearing of the trial, which took place on February 8th, 2013.

The 19th hearing of the trial took place on September 25th, 2013. Çağdaş Kaplan presented his defense at this hearing. Kaplan said that he responded to ID check questions in Kurdish so far, but stated that he would have to present his defense in Turkey “as he could not fully learn his native language, Kurdish, because of the state’s policies”.

Kaplan said that the evidence presented against him concerned his journalistic activities, and the prosecutor used the expression “journalistic organizational activities” for this purpose.

He emphasized that his conversations with media outlets’ managers on news topics were distorted with material errors and omissions, with the remarks “this part could not be understood”.

He explained that the indictment did not indicate which part of his news stories and live connections to Roj TV included criminal elements, and that all news about the ‘Kurdish question’ were placed in the indictment to create a misleading perception.

He said that it is normal for journalists to connect live to other media outlets, and added “I would have shared the same news story on CNN Türk if they had asked me to.”
Kaplan explained the content of every story mentioned in the indictment to the court, stating “I followed and reported on every news like any journalist should do”. Kaplan indicated that he did not understand which expression constituted a crime in these news stories, and asked “and if there are no elements of crime, why do these news stories and live connections figure in the indictment as criminal evidence”.

Kaplan requested that all his news stories be taken out of the indictment: “The prosecutor is trying to create a perception here. That’s why he has listed all news stories mentioning Öcalan and the KCK operations one after the other”.

Kaplan indicated that one piece of evidence against him in the indictment is his “participation in demonstrations in Diyarbakır and İstanbul”. However, Kaplan said that he was there with his camera and even the indictment stated that “no lawsuit was filed against him as there was no indication that he was there to participate in an illegal demo”.

Kaplan also criticized the fact that the secret witness Bahar’s claims about another defendant were placed under his section, although there were no secret witness statements against him.

He also touched upon the prosecutor’s phrase “an independent journalist would not have penned such news stories” and replied: “This is not something that the prosecutor can comment on. It is the society and our readership which must decide whether we are independent and reliable, or not”.

He then reminded the then Prime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan’s remarks about imprisoned journalists: “These are not journalists but terrorists”. Kaplan said that after these remarks, certain newspapers relied on Ministry of Justice sources to publish an article titled “Here are the real crimes of those claimed to be journalists by CPJ”.

He indicated that in this list it was claimed that he was being tried on charges of “hijacking, forging fake police IDs, extortion, and use of weapons”; however, no such charges were ever leveled against him.

He stated that they had filed a lawsuit against the Ministry of Justice, upon which the ministry denied that they had ever sent out such a document.
Kaplan said that they were declared to be “terrorist journalists”, but were not even given the right to answer these accusations, and that such events revealed the real logic behind this trial.

Kaplan’s requests to file a criminal complaint against Ministry of Justice officials and Deputy Prime Minister Bülent Arınç were rejected by the court.

The president of the court asked Kaplan about three numbers in his phone book. Kaplan stated that he did not remember the first of these conversations, the second was with the friend of a student tried in the case known publicly as the “Puşi Case”, and the third was with a district president of the Peace and Democracy Party. He stated that the last two were his news sources.

Another judge asked Kaplan whether Roj TV’s reason to contact him was “an institutional connection or personal acquaintance”. Kaplan said that such news reporting was very normal and common among journalists.

The other judge stated that “Roj TV was guided by the terror organization, its activities in Germany were banned and Turkish state officials are working to get it closed” and asked for Kaplan’s opinions on the matter.

Kaplan responded, “I don’t have to see it the way the state sees it. For me, it’s a TV station, and there are journalists there.”

During this hearing, police officers went to DİHA offices and stated that there was an order to bring Kaplan to court by force. Kaplan mentioned in court this piece of information which he learned during a recess and criticized the fact such an order was issued although he participated in all the hearings after being released from prison, and the fact that police officers went to his workplace while he was presenting his defense in court. He requested the order to be revoked.

Kaplan also stated that in one piece of evidence, the photo taken under the signboard of Konya’s Kandil district, he was not the individual in the picture. Kaplan’s lawyer Ramazan Demir had indicated the same on the 7th hearing. The court ordered that the photo in question be examined. Forensic Medicine Institute issued a report dated March 5th, 2014 indicating that the individual in the photo was not Kaplan, and the report was included in the case file at a hearing held in İstanbul 3. High Criminal Court.

The 30th hearing of the trial took place on January 13th, 2014. At the time, there was a heated public debate about whether the Courts with Special Authority were going to be abolished. Lawyers argued that this debate made controversial the court which conducted the “KCK Press” trial. Due to this reason, lawyers demanded that the proceedings at Istanbul 15th High Criminal Court be suspended and that the detainees be released. The court rejected this demand.

Courts with Special Authority were indeed abolished with a law that came into force on February 21st, 2014.

The last hearing of the “KCK Press Trial” at İstanbul 15th High Criminal Court with Special Authority was held on March 3rd, 2014. The file was then transferred to the Istanbul 3rd High Criminal Court.

The six detained defendants were released on May 12th, 2014 as a result of the routine detention check, upon the orders of the 3. High Criminal Court. As such, there were no longer any detained defendants.

The trial resumed on July 10th, 2014, at Istanbul 3rd High Criminal Court in Çağlayan Courthouse.

The ban on the traveling abroad of 37 defendants was lifted in the first hearing at Istanbul 3rd High Criminal Court.

At the 10th hearing, the judge ordered that the journalists’ passports be annulled as per a State of Emergency Decree Law.

The lawyers said that upon the abolition of Courts with Special Authority, the trial had lost its legal grounding. They argued that the continuation of these proceedings at high criminal courts was against the Constitution. The Istanbul 3rd High Criminal Court indeed referred the file to the Constitutional Court on allegations of unconstitutionality. The court waited for a response from the Constitutional Court for two hearings. The Constitutional Court sent no answer to the court for 16 months. The court then decided to continue the trial.

In the subsequent hearings, the lawyers reiterated their demand for waiting for the Constitutional Court’s ruling and the acquittal of all defendants. Lawyers said that most of the law enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges involved in the investigation and prosecution of the trial before the trial was transferred to Istanbul 3rd High Criminal Court were now under arrest or on the run after the July 15th military coup attempt. Lawyers demanded that the legal measures taken against these individuals be included in the file. The court accepted this request. However, the court also ruled that all the other investigations and prosecutions concerning the journalists would also be included in the file.

Of the 46 defendants, only İsmet Kayhan, who is on the run, has not presented his defense in court. Even the “evidence assessment” phase has not been completed yet.

Judicial information about the officials involved in the investigation and prosecution phase has yet to be included in the file. İsmet Kayhan has not been arrested.

The 16th hearing of the trial took place on May 9th, 2019, and the 17th on October 22nd, 2019.

The 18th hearing was held on February 25th, 2020. Kaplan did not attend this hearing as he was abroad.

The 19th hearing of the trial took place on July 2nd. The president of the court stated that the writ sent to the General Secretariat of Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) about the progress in the trial was added to the case file. Accordingly, HSK demanded information from the court for the disciplinary investigation against Bilal Bayraktar, a prosecutor dismissed for alleged “membership of the Fethullahist Terror Organization.” Bayraktar was the prosecutor in charge of indictment and hearings at KCK Press Trial in the very beginning.

Journalist Çağdaş Ulus’ lawyer Mehtap Acar Ulus stated that her client was included in the trial via manipulation. She demanded that his file be separated from the collective file and Ulus be acquitted.

The court ruled to await the execution of the arrest warrant against İsmet Kayhan, who lives abroad.

The trial will continue with the 20th hearing scheduled for December 1st, 2020.

The prosecution has still not submitted its opinion as to the accusations although trial began in September 2012.

ECHR Proceedings

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) rejected the journalists’ application concerning this file in November 2019, pointing to non-exhaustion of domestic remedies -namely, the filing of an individual application with the Constitutional Court. However, at the time the journalists were arrested and had filed an application with ECHR, it was not yet possible to file an individual application with the Constitutional Court in Turkey. Therefore, the requirement of exhausting the individual application to the Constitutional Court before applying to ECHR did not exist yet.

19. Standing - July 2, 2020


Duruşma, gelen evrakların tutanağa geçirilmesiyle başladı.

Mahkeme heyeti başkanı; Hakimler ve Savcılar Kurulu (HSK) Genel Sekreterliği’nden bu yargılamanın geldiği aşama ile ilgili bilginin istendiği yazının dosyaya eklendiğini açıkladı. Buna göre, HSK; “Fethullahçı Terör Örgütü üyesi olduğu” iddiasıyla meslekten çıkarılan savcı Bilal Bayraktar ile ilgili disiplin soruşturması için mahkemeden bilgi istiyordu. Savcı Bayraktar, “KCK Basın” yargılamasının soruşturma ve iddianame savcısıydı.

Gazeteci Çağdaş Ulus’un avukatı Mehtap Acar Ulus, Çağdaş Ulus’un bir manipülasyon yoluyla bu davaya dahil edildiğini söyledi. Çağdaş Ulus hakkındaki dosyanın, bu dosyadan ayrılmasını ve Ulus’un beraatini talep etti.

Hakimler ve Savcılar Kurulu‘nun (HSK) savcı Bilal Bayraktar hakkındaki disiplin soruşturması kapsamında, “KCK Basın” yargılamasıyla ilgili gelişmelerin ve kararın HSK Genel Sekreterliği’ne bildirilmesine yönelik yazı, dosyaya eklendi.

“FETÖ üyesi olduğu” iddiasıyla meslekten çıkartılan savcı Bayraktar, “KCK Basın” dosyasının da soruşturma ve iddianame savcısıydı.

Çağdaş Ulus müdafii avukat Mehtap Acar Ulus, müvekkili hakkında beraat talebiyle yazılı beyan sundu. Ulus’un dosyasının KCK Basın dosyasından ayrılmasını talep etti.

Diğer sanık müdafiileri, bu aşamada bir talepleri olmadığını söyledi.


Mahkeme, Çağdaş Ulus’un dosyasının ayrılması yönündeki talebini reddetti.

HSK’nın iddianame savcısı Bilal Bayraktar hakkında yürüttüğü disiplin soruşturması için, yargılamanın her aşamasının HSK Genel Sekreterliği’ne bildirilmesine karar verildi.

Ayrıca, sanıklardan yurtdışında ikamet eden İsmet Kayhan hakkındaki yakalama kararının yerine getirilmesinin beklenmesine karar verildi.

Yargılamanın, 1 Aralık 2020 tarihinde görülecek 20. duruşma ile devam etmesine karar verildi.


Duruşma Öncesi

Güvenlik görevlisi, bariyerlerin geçilmesine izin verdi. Duruşma öncesi salonun önü boştu. Avukatlar tam duruşma saatinde, salonun önüne geldi.

Avukatlardan birinin beklenmesine karar verildi. Avukatın, o sırada başka bir mahkemede karar beklediği için geciktiği belirtildi.

Duruşma 10 dakika gecikmeli başladı.

Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları

Mahkeme salonunda yaklaşık 25 kişilik oturma alanı vardı. “Koronavirüs” pandemisi karşısında alınan tedbirleri kapsamında, sosyal mesafenin sağlanması için sandalyelere birer aralıkla bantlar çekilmişti.

Duruşmaya Katılım

Duruşmaya, Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) ve Türkiye Gazeteciler Sendikası’ndan gözlemciler katıldı.

Genel Gözlemler

Duruşma 18 dakika sürdü.

Pandemi nedeniyle izleme alanında fiziksel mesafe önlemleri alınmıştı ancak salonda bulunan mahkeme başkanı, iki heyet üyesi, savcı ve katip arasında sadece bir mahkeme heyeti üyesi maskesini takıyordu.

Mahkeme başkanı duruşma boyunca mikrofonunu kullanmadı ve kısık sesle konuştu. Söyledikleri izleyiciler tarafından duyulmadı.

18. Standing - Feb. 25, 2020


Duruşma öngörülen saatten 10 dakika sonra başladı, karar için verilen 5 dakikalık ara dahil, toplam 35 dakika sürdü.

Duruşmaya, Ses ve Görüntülü Bilişim Sistemi (SEGBİS) ile katılması beklenen Yüksel Genç, mahkeme salonunda hazır bulundu. Genç, yaptığı savunmayı ayrıca yazılı olarak da sundu.

Genç savunmasında, hakkında İstanbul 14. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde görülen ve daha sonra “KCK Basın” ile birleştirilen dosyanın iddianamesine tepki gösterdi. Demokratik Toplum Kongresi (DTK) kuruculuğuyla suçlandığı bu dosyadaki deliller arasında hakkındaki teknik takip delillerinin de gösterildiğini, ancak kendisinin o tarihlerde “KCK Basın” davasından tutuklu olduğunu açıkladı.

DTK’da 2009-2011 arası görev yaptığını ve DTK’nın yasadışı bir yapı olmadığını söyledi, suçlamaları reddetti. TBMM Anayasa Komisyonu’nun DTK’dan resmi olarak görüş istediğine dair belgeyi mahkemeye sundu.

Sanıklardan Hüseyin Deniz de salonda hazır bulundu. Deniz bu aşamada söyleyecek bir şeyi olmadığını ifade etti.

Ardından Çağdaş Ulus’un avukatlığını üstlenen eşi sözü aldı. Ulus’la 5 senedir tanıştıklarını, çocuklarının 1 yaşında olduğunu ancak bu davanın halen devam ettiğini söyledi. Ayrıca eşi Ulus’un 2011’de gözaltına alınmadan birkaç ay önce zorunlu askerlik hizmetini yerine getirdiğini anlattı; teröristlikle suçlanmasına tepki gösterdi. Dosyasının ayrılmasını talep etti.

Ardından söz alan diğer tüm sanıklar müdafii Özcan Kılıç, öncelikle Yüksel Genç’in duruşmalardan vareste tutulmasını talep etti. Sanıklardan Ziya Çiçekçi hakkında açılan başka bir dosyanın birleştirilmesini de istedi.

Kılıç, müvekkillerinin DTK üyesi olmakla suçlandığını, ancak DTK’nın yasadığı bir yapı olmadığını anlattı. DTK’nın yasadışı bir örgüt olup olmadığının tespit edilmesini talep etti.

Avukat Kılıç, “KCK Basın’ dosyasının soruşturma aşamasında gözaltına alınan, o dönem AFP (Agence France Presse, Fransız Haber Ajansı) muhabiri Mustafa Özer’in MİT ajanı olduğunun ortaya çıktığını” iddia etti. İlk başta şüpheli listesinde yer alan ancak şu an dosyada bulunmayan Özer’in mahkeme huzurunda dinlenmesini talep etti.

Mahkeme karar için 5 dakika ara verdi.


Mahkeme sanıkların ve müdafilerinin tüm taleplerini reddetti.

İsmet Kayhan hakkındaki yakalama emrinin infazının beklenmesine karar verdi.

Bir sonraki duruşma 2 Temmuz 2020 saat 10.00’da görülecek.


Duruşma Öncesi

Duruşmadan birkaç dakika önce polis barikatı açılarak gazetecilerin salon önüne geçişine izin verildi.

Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları

Mahkeme salonu yaklaşık 30 kişilikti. Mahkeme başkanı mikrofon kullanmadı ve duruşmada konuşulan hiçbir şey izleyici bölümünden duyulmadı.

Duruşmaya Katılım

Duruşmaya sanık müdafii olarak sekiz avukat katıldı. Duruşmayı; Gazetecileri Koruma Komitesi (CPJ), P24 ve Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) temsilcileri takip etti.

Genel Gözlemler

Duruşma öngörülen saatten 10 dakika sonra başladı, karar için verilen 5 dakikalık ara dahil, toplam 35 dakika sürdü.

Duruşma devam ederken, bir sonraki duruşmanın SEGBİS bağlantısı kuruldu ve SEGBİS’le bağlanan kişi kendi duruşmasını bekledi.

Duruşma esnasında mahkeme başkanının sanıklardan Yüksel Genç’e “sen” diyerek hitap etmesine bir avukat itiraz etti. Mahkeme başkanı “Bu sen-siz tartışması yıllardır sürüyor” dedi ve “sen” ifadesinin sıkıntılı bir ifade olmadığını söyleyerek duruşmaya devam etti.

Mahkeme karar için ara verdiğinde salon boşaltıldı. Ancak savcının salonda oturuyordu. 5 dakika sonra salonun kapısı açıldı. Mahkeme başkanının bir sonraki duruşma tarihini söylemesiyle duruşma sona erdi. Mahkeme başkanı erkek, heyetin iki üyesi kadın hakimdi.

17. Standing - Oct. 22, 2019


Bir önceki duruşmada, sanıklardan Yüksel Genç hakkında İstanbul 14. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde görülen dosyanın KCK Basın dosyasıyla birleştirilmesi talebi, İstanbul 3. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi tarafından reddedilmişti.

İki duruşma arasında, İstinaf Mahkemesi; Genç hakkındaki iki dosyanın İstanbul 3. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde birleştirilmesine resen karar verdi.

Yargılamanın 17. duruşması, bu kararın dosyaya eklenmesiyle başladı. Yeni dosya eklendiği için Genç’in tekrar savunma sunması istendi. Avukat Özcan Kılıç, Genç’in savunması için Diyarbakır’da hazır edileceğini ifade etti.

Sanıklardan Ziya Çiçekçi hakkında, “terör örgütü yayınlarını basmak ve yayınlamak” suçlamasıyla İstanbul 15. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde görülen dosyanın İstanbul 3. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde birleştirilmesi için muvafakat (kabul etme) yazısı geldi. Avukat Özcan Kılıç da dosyaların birleştirilmesi talebinde bulundu.

Avukat Mehtap Acar Ulus, FETÖ suçlamasıyla yargılanan ve etkin pişmanlıktan yararlanan bir emniyet müdürünün, müvekkili Çağdaş Ulus’un sahte delillerle tutuklandığına dair ifadelerinin olduğunu belirtti ve bu konudaki delilleri mahkemeye sundu. Müvekkili Ulus’un dosyasının ayrılmasını talep etti.


Mahkeme, sanıklardan Yüksel Genç’in bir sonraki duruşmada savunmasını Ses ve Görüntü Bilişim Sistemi üzerinden (SEGBİS) sunmak üzere Diyarbakır’da bir mahkemede hazır edilmesi için talimat yazılmasına karar verdi.

Çağdaş Ulus’un dosyasının ayrılması yönündeki talebi reddetti. Ziya Çiçekçi’nin dosyasının birleştirilmesi talebini de reddetti.

İsmet Kayhan hakkındaki yakalama kararının infazının beklenmesine de karar veren mahkeme bir sonraki duruşmanın 25 Şubat 2020 saat 10.30’da görüleceğini açıkladı.


Duruşma Öncesi

Duruşma öncesi gazetecilerin bir kısmının barikattan geçip mahkeme salonu önünde beklemesine izin verildi.

Mahkeme salonu önü kalabalıklaştıktan sonra ise barikattan geçişler kapatıldı. İki gazetecinin salon önüne yaklaşkasına duruşma başladığı ana kadar izin verilmedi.

Gazeteciler ve güvenlik görevlileri arasında tartışma yaşandı. Gazetecilerden biri, güvenlik görevlisine “keyfi davrandığını” söyledi. Bunun üzerine güvenlik görevlisi barikatı kapatarak “Sadece senin geçişine izin vermiyorum, keyfi değil mi” dedi.

Duruşmanın başlamasıyla, güvenlik şefi gelerek, gazetecilerin içeri girişini sağladı.

Mahkeme Salonu koşulları

Mahkeme salonu katılımcı sayısına göre genişti. Mahkeme başkanı mikrofon kullanmadı ve duruşmada konuşulan hiçbir şey izleyici bölümünden duyulmadı.

Duruşmaya Katılım

Duruşmaya sanık müdafii olarak altı avukat katıldı. Duruşmayı, P24 ve Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) temsilcileri ve gazeteciler takip etti.

Genel Gözlemler

Duruşma öngörülen saatten 40 dakika sonra başladı, 25 dakika sürdü.

Salona girdikten sonra yaklaşık 10 dakika boyunca mahkeme katibi dosyayla ilgili telefonda konuştu. İzleyici bölümünden sadece “Burası terör mahkemesi değil” cümlesi duyuldu.

Avukatlar, konuşmanın; sanıklardan Yüksel Genç’in İstanbul 14. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde açılan dava dosyasının KCK Basın dosyasıyla birleştirilmesiyle ilgili olduğunu açıkladı.

Duruşma başladığında, avukatlardan biri başka bir adliyede de duruşması olduğu için ayrılacağını ifade etti. Bunun üzerine mahkeme başkanı öfkelendi, birkaç dakikalık bir tartışma yaşandı.

Mahkeme karar için ara verdiğinde salon boşaltıldı. Beş dakika sonra salonun kapısı açıldı. Mahkeme başkanının bir sonraki duruşma tarihini söylemesiyle duruşma sona erdi.

Mahkeme heyeti üyelerinden biri değişmişti. Mahkeme başkanı erkek, heyetin iki üyesi kadın hakimdi.

16. Standing - May 9, 2019


Mahkeme Başkanı, mikrofon kullanmadığı için 10 dakika süren duruşma boyunca katılımcılar çok az şey duyabildi.

Daha sonra duruşma tutanağından edinilen bilgiye göre, İstanbul İl Emniyet Müdürlüğü’nün sanık Dilek Demiral’ın pasaportu üzerindeki şerhin kaldırılması şeklindeki işlemlerin devam ettiği yönünde cevabı dosyaya eklendi.

Ayrıca “KCK Basın” soruşturmasını yürüten emniyet görevlileri hakkında görevi kötüye kullanma suçlamasıyla İstanbul 26. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinde görülen yargılamanın devam ettiğine dair cevap ve duruşma zaptı örneği de mahkemeye ulaştı. Avukat Özcan Kılıç, Ocak 2019’da görülen bir önceki duruşmada bu davanın akıbetinin öğrenilmesini talep etmişti.

Mahkeme Başkanı, sanıklardan Yüksel Genç hakkında İstanbul 14. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde bir dava açıldığını ve İstanbul 14. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nin kendilerine birleştirme kararı gönderdiğini söyledi. Mahkeme Başkanı, İstanbul 3. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi heyeti olarak birleştirmeye onay vermediklerini söyledi.

Duruşma savcısı, bu duruşmada da esas hakkındaki mütalaasını açıklamadı; eksiklerin giderilmesini mütalaa etti.

Mahkeme ara vermeden, kararını açıkladı.


Sanıklardan Yüksel Genç hakkında İstanbul 14. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’nde açılan davanın İstanbul 3. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi’ndeki dosyayla birleştirilmesini kabul etmeyen mahkeme, dosyayı İstanbul Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi’ne gönderdi.

Bir sonraki duruşmanın 22 Ekim 2019 saat 10.00’a bırakılmasına karar verildi.


Duruşma Öncesi

Avukatlar ve iki muhabirin salona girmesinin ardından salonun kapısı kapandı. Kapı kapandıktan sonra gelen izleyicilerin içeri alınmasına zorluk çıkarıldı.

Duruşmaya katılım

Duruşmaya altı avukat katıldı. Duruşmayı; P24, Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) ve Türkiye Gazeteciler Sendikası’ndan temsilciler ve muhabirler takip etti.

Genel Gözlemler

Mahkeme başkanı mikrofon kullanmadığı için, izleyici alanından sadece, sanıklardan Yüksel Genç’in dosyası ile ilgili konuşmalar ve bir sonraki duruşma tarihi duyulabildi.

Duruşma 10 dakika sürdü.

15. Standing - Jan. 11, 2019


Duruşma saatinde başladı ve 10 dakika sürdü.

Avukat Özcan Kılıç “KCK Basın” soruşturmasını yürüten emniyet görevlileri hakkında “görevi kötüye kullanma” suçlamasıyla İstanbul 26. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nde açılan davanın akıbetinin öğrenilmesini talep etti.


“KCK Basın” soruşturmasını yürüten emniyet görevlileri hakkında “görevi kötüye kullanma” suçlamasıyla İstanbul 26. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nde açılan davanın akıbetinin sorulmasına karar verildi.

Dava, 9 Mayıs 2019 gününe bırakıldı.


Duruşma Öncesi

Duruşma öngörülen saatte başladı. Öncesinde sanık gazeteciler ile duruşmayı takibe gelen gazeteciler sohbet etti. Duruşma öncesi herhangi bir destek açıklaması yapılmadı.

Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları

Mahkeme salonu katılımcı sayısına göre genişti. Mahkeme başkanı mikrofon kullanmadı ve sözleri katılımcılar tarafından duyulmadı.

Duruşmaya Katılım

Duruşmaya iki sanık ve dokuz avukat katıldı. Dört muhabir duruşmayı haber/rapor amacıyla takip etti.

Genel Gözlemler

Duruşma yıllardır sürdüğü, halen esas hakkında mütalaa verilmediği ve davada ilerleme olmadığı için duruşmaya katılım çok düşüktü.

“KCK Press” Trial 15. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

“KCK Press” Trial 16. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

“KCK Press” Trial 17. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

“KCK Press” Trial 18. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

“KCK Press” Trial 19. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)

Press in Arrest is a database, monitoring, documentation and collective memory study of Press Research Association.
+90 (312) 945 15 56 | pressinarrest@gmail.com

Creative Commons License
Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.