Ertuş Bozkurt was born in 1985 in Baskale, Van. He began his education at Selçuk University, Faculty of Communication, Department of Journalism and continued his education at Istanbul University, Faculty of Communication, Department of Journalism and then at Marmara University, Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Press Economics and Management.
He began his career as a journalist in 2003 and worked as a reporter, editor and regional chief at DİHA.
He worked for the Azadiya Welat newspaper and local TV channels, production companies, and was one of 36 journalists arrested in December 2011 under the so-called “KCK Press Case.” He remained in prison for 2.5 years. He was among the six journalists released in May 2014.
Currently, he is still on trial without arrest on the charge of “being the executive of an illegal organization.”
On December 20, 2011, 49 journalists and employees of Kurdish media, especially in the Dicle News Agency (DİHA), the Özgür Gündem newspaper, Fırat News Agency and Roj TV, were detained during police raids on houses and offices within the KCK operations in Istanbul, Ankara, İzmir, Van, Adana and Diyarbakır.
Bozkurt was detained early in the morning during a raid on his house in Diyarbakir and taken to the Counter-Terror Branch of the Diyarbakir Security Directorate (TMŞ). The next day, he was taken to the Counter-Terror Branch (TMŞ) at the Vatan Police Station in Istanbul. In an investigation by the Istanbul Public Prosecutor’s Office, the journalists in custody and their lawyers were not informed about the accusations on the basis that there was a “restriction-confidentiality order” on the case.
On December 23, 2011, seven journalists were brought to the Istanbul Courthouse in Besiktas after receiving a medical report in the morning. Forty-two journalists, including Bozkurt, were referred to the court. Bozkurt said in his testimony at the prosecutor’s office that he was not in the KCK/PKK Press Committee, he did not know what the YRD committee was; he knew almost all of the suspects because of the newspapers he worked for; he did not have any information about the Press Committee and he had no activity other than journalism.
On December 24, 2011, Bozkurt and 35 other journalists were placed in pretrial detention. Bozkurt was taken to the Kandira Prison.
The indictment was completed on April 27, 2012, by the Istanbul Public Prosecutor’s Office.
In summary, the indictment argued that the “KCK/PKK Press Committee” and the Democratic Enlightenment Union (Yekîtiya Ragihandina Demokratik - YRD)” directed the broadcasting policy and news of the Kurdish media. In the indictment, 44 journalists and media workers were accused of “being an executive of an armed terrorist organization” or “being a member of an armed terrorist organization.”
In the indictment, the prosecutor assessed that “KCK/PKK’s Press Committee has held regular meetings since 2001 in order to consolidate the hierarchy in the media network of the organization, and that the Press Conferences have gradually turned into YRD Conferences” as well as “The Press Committee’s publication policy aims to be in line with the goals of establishing an independent Kurdistan.”
While the journalistic activities are defined as an organizational activity; the indictment lined up assessments such as “so-called journalism”, “news that would disrupt the image of the state”, “news that would put the Turkish state in trouble”, “organizational journalism”, and that “an independent journalist would not be able to make these news”, “state members were insulted in the photographs found on the computer.”
Thirty-seven pages of the 800-page indictment described the KCK/PKK structure. In this section, the statements of the prosecutor, the three members of the organization and three secret witnesses who were arrested or surrendered were included. The meetings of Öcalan with his lawyers and their correspondence were also mentioned.
The next 100 pages outlined the history of the Kurdish media, newspapers, magazines, radio, television and internet sites that have been broadcasting since the 1970s and the allegations about the relationship of these media with the organization. The prosecution alleged that DİHA, ANF, Azadiya Welat and Roj TV were broadcasting in line with the goals of the KCK/PKK. It used the news, images, articles and interviews that these media organizations quoted from each other, secret witness statements, suspicious statements, and the KCK Convention’s chapter on the press as evidence.
Journalists’ news, journalistic activities, their reports for the media outlets such as Roj TV and ANF were considered as evidence of a crime. Six-hundred and fifty pages of the indictment consisted of individual evaluations of 44 journalists.
Dicle News Agency (DİHA), Fırat Printing Publication and Distribution Company, Gün Printing (the printing house where papers Azadiya Welat, Denge Welat, Özgür Gündem, New Democratic Society, New Democratic Life, New Democratic Nation newspapers; Free People, Democratic Modernity, Patriotic Youth papers were printed) Fırat News Agency (ANF), Azadiya Welat newspapers, Özgür Gündem, daily and weekly newspapers published in Turkish; Roj TV, Medya TV, Mesopotamia Radio and various media and news sites were listed as organs of the “KCK/PKK’s press.
The 58-page long section on Ertus Bozkurt begins on page 165 of the indictment. Fifty-two pages of these 58 pages included wiretapped phone calls. Ertuş’s detention in 2004 and his trips to overseas between 2007-2011 were also listed.
Thirty-two of the 62 phone calls between 2007-2011, which were summarized in the indictment, were Bozkurt’s live telephone connections to the Roj TV and Newroz TV news programs. Eighteen of them were calls with other journalists and seven of them were interviews with news sources.
In addition, Bozkurt’s emails with two journalists, who are also defendants in the case, and 14 news reports were included as evidence. In the indictment, Bozkurt was charged with “reporting in a protest manner”, “reporting the orders from the organization[PKK]”, “making propaganda for the organization by reporting news to Roj TV”, “working as an editor at DİHA, which operates under the orders of the organization.” The prosecutor, who accused Bozkurt of “being an executive of the organization”, claimed his allegations were “confirmed by secret witness statements.”
The items seized in the house raid are as follows:
1- Two CDs
2- One flash memory
3- Two documents
4- Abdullah Öcalan’s book titled, “Road Map” dated June 2011, published by Aram Publications (2 copies)
5- Etem Xemgin’s book titled, “History of Kurdistan” from Doz publications
6- Free People and Democratic Modernity Magazine September-October 2011 issues
7- The book, “Hawar” from Aram publications
8- Abdullah Öcalan’s book titled “The Solution of Democratic Civilization” dated August 2011, published by Hawar Publications.
9- Phone and SIM cards with many digital materials.
The prosecution said that books which had previously been banned by various court decisions were found at the home.
The prosecutor noted that phone call conversations were shortened since the live connections to the Roj TV were too many and the details of these calls were included in additional folders. Bozkurt’s telephone conversations in Kurdish were translated into Turkish and added to the indictment, but due to the difficulties in translation, almost all of the records consisted of consecutive words and meaningless sentences. In almost every sentence in the summaries of the records, the phrase was “not understood ” was used. In the records, the majority of which were live connections with Roj TV, Bozkurt reported from Diyarbakır the news, the protests and the activities of the DTP.
The evidence added to the file as a result of communication tracking is listed as follows:
1- The record of his live connection with Roj TV on December 19, 2007.
2- The record of his live connection with Roj TV on January 17, 2008.
3- The record of his live connection with Roj TV on January 17, 2008.
4- On February 8, 2008, Roj TV presented a protest in Sultanbeyli where three vehicles were burned, and Bozkurt quoted the protests in Diyarbakir. In this record, incomprehensible sentences such as “Abdullah Öcalan, the PKK is coming in the old way in March, so Nevruz is coming in this house, celebrating the feast in May at the moment. They should help out in the process” were included. “Heroism” and “deployment of soldiers” were marked in bold.
5- On February 13, 2008, in a live call from an unknown number, the presenter’s statement “Öcalan is exposing Gülen” and Bozkurt talking about the demonstrations in Diyarbakır and that the “protests will continue until the 15th of the month” were included.
6- The record of the live connection he made with the Roj TV on February 20, 2008.
7- The record of the live connection with the Roj TV on March 18, 2008 on Newroz preparations and the prohibition of DTP’s Newroz posters.
8- The record of his telephone conversation with a journalist from DİHA on April 25, 2008.
9- The record of the live connection with Roj TV on April 28, 2008. In the indictment, the expression “Kurdish singing with long sentences during the broadcast cannot be understood” was written and “the funerals of the guerrillas” were written in capital letters.
10- The record of the live connection with the Roj TV on April 29, 2008.
11- The record of the call he had before the live connection with the Roj TV on April 30, 2008.
12- The record of the call on April 30, 2008 (25 minutes after the previous call), where he was live on the Roj TV and reported on the May Day celebrations in Diyarbakır.
13- The record of his live connection with the Roj TV on May 1, 2008.
14- Record of a phone call with Erdal Er from Roj TV on April 16, 2008 about the airstrikes.
15- The records of the live broadcast with the Roj TV on April 19, 2008, where reported on the broadcasting problems of Roj TV in Diyarbakır.
16- The record of the live connection with the Roj TV on May 27, 2008.
17- The record of the live connection with the Roj TV on May 27, 2008. On this record, the prosecutor noted that the presenter said “Ertus Bozkurt is in Diyarbakir now, we will connect to him.” The prosecutor said “Bozkurt’s words cannot be understood but Ertuş can be heard talking.”
18- The record of a phone call with a person from Newroz TV talking about the broadcasting for the evening news on May 27, 2008.
19- The record of a live connection with the Newroz TV on May 27, 2008. On this record, the following incomprehensible statements “if guerrillas came to Kurdistan life party (not understood)…Iranian agency rushed during the day Kurdistani guerrillas pejak” were listed.
20- The record of his live connection with the Roj TV on July 3, 2008.
21- The record of his live connection with Roj TV on July 10, 2008.
22- The record of his phone call with Baki Gül of Roj TV about a story on August 4, 2008.
23- The record of live connection with the Roj TV’s for a show by Baki Gul on February 24, 2008.
The indictment included Bozkurt’s 23 phone calls with the Roj TV. This was followed with an assessment by the prosecutor. In this assessment, prosecutor said “Ertuş was making controversial assessments by connection to live broadcasts of Roj TV which is operating abroad under the influence of the terrorist organization.” The prosecutor said Bozkurt was passing information and images of protests in Diyarbakır to the Roj TV and Gün TV; he sent reports and interviews via email; he informed the media outlets about the detained protesters; he was present at the funerals of the members of the organization.
The prosecutor assessed that Bozkurt passed the decisions for protests to Roj TV “in an encrypted manner,” that “by giving information about the detainees, Ertuş criticized the government’s policies against the Kurdish people” and “he introduced himself as a journalist of Northern Kurdistan.”
24- The record of a phone call on February 20, 2008, with a person from Roj TV. Bozkurt included the following conversation: “If you don’t distribute the magazines, too much” and the other person responded, “If you don’t come home, I’ll carry them” and they joked. In the note on the record, the prosecutor argued that “One of the magazines referred to in the conversation was meant to be the magazines that operated under the influence of the KCK/PKK terrorist organization” and “the phone call was one about the activities of the terrorist organization within the Press Committee.”
25- The records of a phone call with a relative on April 15, 2008. In his assessment, the prosecutor claimed Bozkurt was intending the foundation of the terrorist organization and he meant some parts of Turkey when he said Kurdistan due to the following conversation with his relative: “If he have our own state one day, I’ll declare you as the mascot.” The prosecutor also assessed that “it is understood Bozkurt is operating at a high level within the Press Committee.”
26- The record of a phone call from Baki Gül on May 27, 2008, asking Bozkurt to make a street interview in Diyarbakir about Prime Minister Erdogan’s speech for Roj TV.
27- The records of a phone call with a DİHA colleague on May 27, 2008 about the submission of the news and the date of publication.
28- The record of a phone call with Baki Gül on May 28, 2008, about sending reports.
29- The record of a phone call with someone from Roj TV on May 29, 2008 who asked for the footage of an interview. In the summary of the record, the name of the deputy Emine Ayna was written in capital letters.
30- The record of the phone call on May 29, 2008, with a Roj TV employee who said Emine Ayna’s speech was not in the footage and asked for it.
Under these records, the prosecutor made assessments as Baki Gül, who was calling Bozkurt, used the term “retarded” for Prime Minister Erdoğan and asked Bozkurt to make interviews to criticize Erdoğan’s social projects in the region. The prosecutor argued that Bozkurt gathered interviews against the government in accordance with the instructions of Roj TV and sent them to Roj TV.” He also claimed Bozkurt was “helping to increase the loyalty to the organization and broadcasting hatred towards the state” and “Therefore he was found to operate in the Press Committee.”
31- The record of a phone call with an employee of Roj TV on May 27, 2008: Bozkurt, the Diyarbakır office editor, confirms he uses the account “diyarbakırdiha@” during this call. According to record, the other person received an unusual email from this address and said the address might have been hacked.
The prosecutor said in his assessment that Bozkurt “used the Diyarbakır DİHA email address for organizational [PKK] activities and was warned by the other person against the possibility of the password being cracked.”
32. The record of a phone call with Haydar Tekin, an employee of Fırat Distribution and a defendant of the case, on December 27, 2008. In his assessment, the prosecutor stated that Haydar Tekin, one of the two top executives, was also responsible for the distribution office.”
33- The record of his live connection with a channel on February 6, 2009, which is not specified.
34- The record of a phone call about the news with a person identified as a Roj TV reporter on an unspecified date.
35- The record of his live connection with Roj TV on March 20, 2009. In his evaluation note, the prosecutor used statements such as “reflecting the military operations against the organization as operations against the Kurdish people; by reporting on the protests for DİHA he created the program for Roj TV, which broadcasts the activities to the organization.”
36- The record of a phone call with the Özgür Gündem editor Ayşe Oyman, one of the defendants of the case. On this call, he passed information about a breaking news on March 11, 2009.
37- The record of the live connection with Roj TV on April 20, 2009.
38- The records of a phone call with Roj TV before the broadcast on May 1, 2009.
39- The record of a phone call with Roj TV on May 10, 2009, where he passed some information on military mobility in Diyarbakır and operations in the Bingöl countryside.
In his evaluation note, the prosecutor used statements such as “Bozkurt’s agitated people by creating an artificial agenda before the local elections”, “aiming to create a Turkish-Kurdish conflict by giving false information”, and “publishing news in the form of attack instructions.”
40- The record of a live phone call with the Roj TV on July 10, 2009 where he shared the information about the conference of the Democratic Society Congress in Diyarbakır.
In his assessment, the prosecutor said, “ It is observed that the suspect reported on meetings of the civil society and the Democratic Society Congress, both of which were established and formed in accordance with Öcalan’s instructions. The prosecutor stated that while reporting on these meetings, Bozkurt referred to Diyarbakır as Northern Kurdistan, talked about the representatives at these meetings, the importance of these meetings and what they mean for the so-called future of Kurdish people.
41- The record of a phone call with a person on May 12, 2009, in which they listed the recent news.
42- The record of a phone call on reports with Erdal Er from Roj TV before the live broadcast on June 20, 2009. In his assessment, the prosecutor stated that he “made propaganda for the members of the organization ‘by calling them HPG guerrillas’ and that the organization was attempting to reach the sympathizing audience.”
43- The record of a phone call with Roj TV on July 7, 2009 for live broadcast.
44- The record of a phone call with Roj TV on July 22, 2009 with Erdal Er, the presenter of the show. Bozkurt talked about Öcalan’s roadmap for the resolution process, and Bozkurt also reported about military operations in Şırnak and Hakkari during this live broadcast.
In his assessment, the prosecutor said Bozkurt “blessed Öcalan, the leader of the terrorist organization, by referring to him as the Kurdish People’s Leader.” According to this assessment, Bozkurt reported on “Öcalan’s instructions via his lawyers, the road map he created for the so-called peace.” By doing so, Bozkurt had allegedly “conveyed this road map to the masses which were in favor of the organization.”
45- The record of a phone call with Roj TV on August 28, 2009.
46- The record of a phone call on October 14, 2009: a person calling Bozkurt said, “Should I tell you on the phone? I’ll send you an email.” The prosecutor considered the meeting as compliance with organizational secrecy.
47- The record of Bozkurt’s phone call with a person on October 21, 2009.
48- The record of Bozkurt’s phone call with a person from Newroz TV on October 21, 2009: Bozkurt told this person he had important news. The prosecutor said in his assessment that Bozkurt was the first person to be informed about the people who went to Qandil.
49- The record of Bozkurt’s phone call on November 6, 2009, with a journalist from DİHA: Bozkurt said on this call that the ZDF channel asked for images. In the evaluation note, the prosecutor argued that Bozkurt sent images to the channels in European countries in order to make propaganda and to damage the reputation of the country.
50- The record of a phone call on September 25, 2009: The person on the line informed Bozkurt about the villages where military operations were ongoing.
51- The record of a phone call with a person on December 7, 2009.
52- The record of a phone call on November 29, 2009: A person called Bozkurt asking for a journalist to cover an event. In the assessment note, the prosecutor said that half an hour after the call, “people were dancing and chanting slogans for Ocalan at the venue of the event.”
53- The record of a phone call with a person on November 29, 2009. In his assessment, the prosecutor said that two hours after the call, there was an attack on armored vehicles with fireworks and Molotov cocktails in the neighborhood the caller mentioned.
54- The records of a phone call where a person informed Bozkurt on January 16, 2010, about an event the following day. The prosecutor said in the assessment that Bozkurt reported the speech to support the TEKEL [Tobacco] workers on strike the day after.
55- The records of a phone call with a BDP district official on December 5, 2009, for an event.
56- The records of a phone call with a BDP district official on December 6, 2009, for an event.
57- The records of a phone call of Bozkurt on December 6, 2009, with a person from whom he was trying to get information about a story. In his assessment, the prosecutor said that DİHA was “informed in advance on the four protests on December 6, 2009 and DİHA “recorded the protests by sending correspondents and cameramen.” Therefore, Bozkurt was involved in “making propaganda of the terrorist organization by reporting” on their protests.
58- The record of a phone call with Newroz TV’s live broadcast on December 4, 2009.
59- The record of a phone call with the Roj TV on December 19, 2011.
60- The record of a phone call with the Roj TV on August 14, 2008.
61- The record of a phone call with somone from Roj TV on August 15, 2008.
62- The record of a phone call with Roj TV on September 5, 2008.
63- The record of a phone call with Kenan Kırkaya, DİHA editor and a defendant of the case, via email.
64- Information that Bozkurt regularly contacted Ismet Kayhan, an ANF editor and defendant of the case, via email and contacted MSN four times.
The indictment included a two-page assessment note after listing the issues obtained from the wiretapped communications. Bozkurt was accused of “making propaganda by submitting reports to the Roj TV”, “Delivering images and footage to the Gün TV and Roj TV”, “reporting in a protesting manner to create a Turkish-Kurdish conflict.”
Reports obtained from open sources and allegedly containing propaganda for the organization were listed as follows:
1- The report with the headline “DIHA is forced to account for Newroz incidents” published on the Evrensel website on April 8, 2008. According to the report, Bozkurt had read the press release regarding the detention of DİHA reporters.
2- The report titled, “News Center Agenda, May 30” published on DİHA’s website on May 30, 2011. The press release read by Bozkurt was also included.
3- The article titled, “Ehmedê Xanî, Celadet Bedixan and Musa Anter’s dream realized in Cizre” published in DİHA on May 14, 2011.
4- The article titled, “The resistance which started in Lice holds great sacredness” published in DİHA on November 26, 2010.
5- Ertuş Bozkurt’s report titled, “The Federal Kurdistan Region’s condemnation of operations” published in DİHA on August 29, 2010.
6- The report titled, “Political parties in the Federal Kurdistan Region: Öcalan must be released for peace” published in DİHA on August 25, 2010 by Murat Kolca-Ertuş Bozkurt.
7- Ertuğ Bozkurt-İbrahim Açıkyer’s report titled, “Aram Tîgram, who came to Diyarbakır for the first time: Diyarbakır is a dream for me, I brought it a gift.” published in DİHA on May 30, 2008.
8- DİHA’s report titled, “Demirtaş from DTP: DİHA reporters are being forced to pay a price” on April 7, 2008. In his assessment, the prosecutor stressed that Bozkurt wanted the release of jailed DİHA reporters.
9- Ertuş Bozkurt’s report titled, “The support for Kurdish journalists sentenced to death by Iran continues” on August 7, 2007.
10- The article titled, “Great tension at Yazidîs sacred place Şêxan” by Ertuş Bozkurt published in DİHA on February 16, 2007.
11- Ertuş Bozkurt’s report titled, “Kakeyî: Everyone must stand by Öcalan” published in DİHA on February 2, 2008.
12- Ertuş Bozkurt and Nasır Kaya’s report titled, “Surprise visit from Ralston to Maxmur Camp” published on January 29, 2007 in DİHA.
13- Sedat Suna and Ertuş Bozkurt’s report titled, “The most trusted institution has gangs, corruption and rape cases” published in DİHA on March 11, 2006.
14- DİHA report titled, “Modern execution of the free press” published on the website of Özgür Gündem newspaper on May 31, 2011. According to the report, Bozkurt said 30 employees of DİHA were detained. The prosecutor did not evaluate the reports in the indictment and did not disclose the criminal elements in them. Bozkurt’s overseas travel in 2007 for three weeks was included in the indictment. The prosecution claimed that Bozkurt participated in the Fourth Press Conference, which happened in that time frame.
Under the section titled, “Evidence based on the secret witness statements”, the secret witness Bahar’s statements that Bozkurt was operating in the Press Committee and the secret witness Batuhan Yıldız’s statements that Bozkurt participated in the 4th Conference of the YRD were included.
Finally, the indictment included the prosecutor’s assessment of the items confiscated during detention. The items are as follows: a hard disc with the photos of the members of the organization taken in rural areas and camps, notes and photos on the Umut Bookstore bombing, the “screenshots of documents considered to belong to military news units,” was also mentioned in the indictment. Mazlum Dogan and Kemal Pir’s black and white photos found in a hard drive were also included. As a result of the review of the hard disc, “Gündem newspaper’s report titled ‘People’s Freedom is Marching’ ” was among the evidence.
The prosecutor alleged the following in his legal assessment on Bozkurt;
“Serving in the higher committee of the Press Committee consisting of seven members”; “working as an editor at DİHA, which operates under the orders of the organization”; “participated in the meetings of the YRD where the organization’s press policy was determined”; “participated in private meetings with Karayılan”; “passing the orders by the top-level executives to the lower echelons of the organization and the head of the press and media organizations.” The prosecutor alleged that in all of his interviews, Bozkurt made propaganda with the organization’s objectives and portrayed the Republic of Turkey as “a bloody state.” Prosecutor, argued that these findings could be confirmed with the statements of secret witnesses. He accused Bozkurt of being the executive of the organization.
Bozkurt is facing from 15 years ta 22 years 6 months of imprisonment. The prosecutor’s office, has not yet presented its opinion as to the accusations in this trial that started at September 2012.
The proceedings, which were marked by debates on the right to defense in the mother tongue, took place in the 15th Assize Court (10 chapters consisting of 32 sessions) from September 10, 2012 to March 3, 2014. On November 12, 2012, the hearings that began in the Caglayan Courthouse were moved to the Silivri campus courtroom. From March 26, 2014, to January 11, 2018, 16 hearings were held at the Istanbul 3rd Assize Court at the Çağlayan Courthouse.
All the detainees, including Ertuş Bozkurt, travelled back and forth from Silivri to different prisons for the trials that lasted for days. At the beginning of the trial, protests took place in the courtroom after the requests to make defenses in the mother tongue were rejected, and all journalists and lawyers in pretrial detention for the KCK started a hunger strike. The defendants continued to respond in the Kurdish and Zazaki languages during the identification sessions at the court.
There were often arguments and protests during the hearings, the microphones of the lawyers were turned off and the hall was evacuated. The 15th Assize Court denounced the audience, the lawyers and the defendants for applauding as a form of protest and for “the statements that went beyond the defense limits and constituted a crime.”
It took six hearings to finish reading out the 800-page indictment against 44 defendants and the 185-page indictment against two defendants, whose files were merged. The indictment was read out by two TRT presenters mostly to an empty hall. In January 2013, two more cases two other people who were on trial in another court and their 187-page indictment were merged with the KCK trial. When the reading of the indictments was completed on April 22, 2013 during the 12th hearing, 11 of the 37 detainees had been released.
Lawyer Davut Erkan, who took the floor in the 11th hearing on February 8, 2013, stated that there were serious material errors arising from the records which were mistranslated from Kurdish to Turkish in the indictment. Erkan showed examples of these about Ertuş Bozkurt “These are the mistakes that inflate the file or make it look like a criminal one.”
Interpreters from the Kurdish Institute (Enstîtuya Kurdî) brought by lawyers for defense in Kurdish were also present at the 12th hearing on April 22, 2013. The 25-page long defense in Kurdish, prepared on behalf of all the defendants, was read by the DİHA editor Ertuş Bozkurt, in the courtroom. Following the joint defense, the defendants in pretrial detention made their individual defenses. The defense of the defendants in pretrial detention was completed in the 17th hearing on June 18, 2013.
After the statements by the lawyers, the other defendants, who were not pending trial, began their defenses in the 19th hearing on September 25, 2013.
While reading the joint defense, Bozkurt said they would “not make a legal defense against this unlawful accusation,” that this was a political case “aiming to liquidate the Kurdish opposition,” that it could be understood by statements from the Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Vice PM Beşir Atalay and former Interior Minister İdris Naim.
Referring to the link between the government and freedom of expression and press with academic quotations and examples from history, Bozkurt said, “We know that those who were called witch, barbarian, brutal, bedouin, bandit and naked in the official history until recently were actually freedom fighters who refused slavery and submission and waged a heroic war against the unequal state civilization, domination, sovereignty and colonialism. We know how the states slandered these people and ordered their death. Just like today by calling them terrorists. But we want you to know that we will not give up the search for natural truth against your distorted, false exploitation, death truth built in blood, we will continue to hand out what you monopolized into the society, multiply those you assimilated, and to be the voice of those silenced.”
Bozkurt said the prosecution defined all journalistic activities as “abnormal journalism” and considered them a crime. He said for that reason they would tell the court about the communication theories. In summary, Bozkurt talked about how the government censored the mainstream media to control the media in general and build pressure on the alternative and dissident media. In the 13th session on April 24, 2013, Bozkurt said, “Today is April 24, the anniversary of the Armenian massacre. We also share this pain.” Bozkurt continued to read the joint defense through an interpreter.
Bozkurt argued Turkish media had a nationalistic trend since forever. He said the democratic journalists were faced with pressure and attacks. Bozkurt spoke about exiled or murdered journalists who were put on trial at the National Courts, martial law courts, the State Security Courts in the past and today in the Assize Courts. Bozkurt stated that the history of the Kurdish media in the indictment was explained in the form of an accusation against Kurdish journalists. “The situation we have today is the repetition of what we have experienced in the past,” he said. He listed the names of the Kurdish journalists who were killed. Referring to the principles of free press that emerged under these circumstances, Bozkurt stressed that women’s journalism was one of them.
Bozkurt’s defense continued as follows: “When the KCK operations were discussed, those who fervently supported it did not argue whether we were guilty or not but focused on how it would strengthen the government’s hand, solve the problem, and end the violence. We were jailed as a result of someone’s solution fantasies (…)”
“One hundred and fifty pages of the 800-page indictment consisted of the history of the PKK and KCK. You would agree that this has nothing to do neither with us nor the media. The 250 pages consist of a total of reports published in different media outlets regarding the Kurdish issue. This includes the speeches we have made at events such as panels and festivals as well. One hundred and ten pages are about the books, newspapers, magazines, computers, USB drives, press cards, etc. all of which were seized during our detention. Again, 57 pages are about the reports by journalists for television and radio. The indictment consists of 40 pages of news content, 32 pages of daily conversations, three pages about short messages, and 14 pages of statements made by confessors. Nearly 200 pages out of 600 pages consist of the same materials being repeatedly put on the indictment. (…)”
“In the indictment, the Kurdish media institutions have been defined as terrorist organizations. The legal existence of Kurdish media institutions was considered as a crime and unsubstantiated allegations against us were cited as evidence.”
“We find the indictment is not serious, immoral and unlawful. In this context, we will file a criminal complaint against those responsible.” After Bozkurt read the joint defense, the president of the court asked whether the telephone numbers and records mentioned in the indictment belonged to Bozkurt. Bozkurt said his criminal record was incorrect, only one of the phone numbers belonged to him, and the records did not belong to him. The president of the court then asked for his lawyer’s defense.
Attorney Osman Ergin said his client Bozkurt read the joint defense; he would take the floor about the evidence in the following sessions. Ergin said all the evidence should be read one by before the court because the head of the court only read the headlines. The court president, said the evidence was read while the indictment was being read and they would not read it again, and finally that the defendant could not make his defense twice. Prosecutor, also agreed to the rejection of the lawyers’ request. The court rejected the request by the lawyers and continued with the defense of other detainees. Bozkurt and some of the defendants’ request to take the floor to make statements about the evidence was rejected in subsequent hearings.
Lawyer Fırat Epözdemir, who spoke at the 15th hearing on April 26, 2013, said that it was not a crime for his client Bozkurt to go abroad or to go to an organization camp to report. Stating that Bozkurt’s reports, which were included in the indictment as evidence of crime, were also reported in mainstream newspapers such as Hürriyet and Vatan. Later Epözdemir presented the examples of these reports by journalists from the mainstream media who travelled to the camp, and finally Bozkurt’s reports for DİHA to the court.
At the end of the hearing, the prosecutor demanded a legal complaint against Bozkurt who read the joint defense, for using “epistle of hatred, skit, theater and referring to detainees as captives” as well as requesting the remand of defendants in prison.
In the interim decision during the 15th hearing, the court ruled to officially demand the detailed voice analysis reports by the Forensic Medicine Institution because Ertuş Bozkurt denied some of the records in the indictment. The court also decided to file criminal complaints at the Silivri Chief Public Prosecution against Ertuş, some of defendants and lawyers for using the following words in their legal defense: hostage, epistle of hatred, a skit, theater, captive, infamous and disgraceful indictment, an indictment prepared with hostile logic, a staged and distorted scenario.
In the 18th session on June 19, 2013, the forensic reports which read, “The analyzed voice records of Bozkurt most likely belong to him. Three reports on the voice records of Bozkurt were added to the file as well.” Lawyer Osman Ergin, who also took the floor in the 18th hearing, stated that his client Bozkurt spoke to the Kurdish media because he knew Kurdish well. He worked with televisions in Iraq and Iran, worked in Suleymaniye, Mosul and Erbil.
He said Bozkurt travelled to Mahmur and reported from there. Ergin said the statements of the secret witness, cited as the basis of the charges, were not consistent and convincing; the statements in favor of the defendants were not added to the indictment. Attorney Ergin took the floor during the 21st hearing on September 27, 2013 and stressed that his client Bozkurt was not a part of the Press Committee scheme which was prepared by the prosecution based on secret witness statements.
He also underlined that the date of the scheme was before the testimony of the secret witnesses. He demanded that the Counter-Terrorism officers who prepared this scheme be heard in court. The court rejected this request on the grounds that it would not “contribute to the file.” Ergin also demanded that the wiretapped phone records, which were translated incorrectly from Kurdish to Turkish, be re-translated by the experts. The court ruled that the incorrectly translated parts, if identified, should be re-translated.
Ergin, identified the mistranslated parts of Bozkurt’s phone calls and submitted the list to the court during the 25th hearing on November 1, 2013. The court decided that the list consisting 17 articles should be re-translated and asked if and why there were any contradictions with the old translation.
In the 29th hearing on December 6, 2013, the documents were delivered to the expert. On March 3, 2014, translations were brought to court during the 32nd, the last hearing of the Istanbul 15th Assize Court.
On the 30th hearing on January 13, 2014, the lawyers demanded the proceedings at the Istanbul 15th Assize Court be suspended and also demanded the release of the prisoners, arguing that the controversy on the possible abolition of the current Special Competent Courts (SCC) also made this court controversial. The court rejected this demand.
With the amendment of the relevant law on February 21, 2014, the SCCs were completely abolished, the trial continued at the Istanbul 3rd Assize Court at Çağlayan Courthouse as of July 10, 2014. The travel bans for the 37 defendants, including Bozkurt, was removed at this hearing.
The remaining detainees including Bozkurt were also released after routine detention investigations, and as of May 12, 2014, there were no detainees from the case. The lawyers said the proceedings in the abolished SCCs lost their legitimacy, and that the continuation of these proceedings in the Assize Courts was unconstitutional. The Istanbul Third Assize Court sent the file to the Constitutional Court to examine the allegations of unconstitutionality. The court awaited two hearings in order to receive a reply from the Constitutional Court, and after sixteen months the court decided to take the case as the Constitutional Court did not respond.
The lawyers reiterated their demands to wait for the decision of the Constitutional Court and the acquittal of all the defendants. Most of the law enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges who were involved in the investigation, prosecution and judiciary process were either detained or they deserted after the failed July 15 coup attempt.
The case was then transferred to the Istanbul Third Assize Court. The lawyers demanded the legal proceedings against these figures to be added to the file. While accepting this request, the court ruled that all prosecutions and investigations against the accused journalists should also be included in the file.
Of the 46 defendants, only the deserted defendant Ismet Kayhan did not make his defense in court. The substitution of evidence has not taken place yet.
The ongoing case against the law enforcement officers, who were involved during the investigation process and are on trial at the Istanbul 26th Criminal Court of First Instance, is expected to be attached to the case. At the same time, the arrest warrant against Ismet Kayhan is expected to be executed.
The 16th hearing of the case was held on May 21, 2019. In the seven-year trial, the prosecution still did not disclose its opinion on the merits. The next hearing of the case was scheduled for 10.00 am October 22, 2019.
17th hearing of the case took place at October 22nd, 2019. Next hearing is set to February 25th, 2020.
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. 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 20th hearing was held on December 1st, 2020. Two members of the panel of judges had changed.
Of the defendant journalists, only İsmail Yıldız (Rawin Sterk) attended the hearing. İstanbul 34th High Criminal Court had decided to merge the case file for “membership of an armed terror organization” and “spreading propaganda in a continuous manner for a terror organization” with the case file of the “KCK Press Trial”. The court stated that it had received the said file.
Lawyer Özcan Kılıç demanded the cancellation of İsmail Yıldız’s overseas travel ban. He requested that Yüksel Genç be relieved from the obligation to attend the hearings. The court accepted both requests.
Mehtap Acar Ulus, the lawyer of journalist Çağdaş Ulus, requested that her client’s trial be separated from the main file. The request was rejected.
The court ruled to lift Yüksel Genç’s obligation to attend the hearings.
The trial was adjourned until the 21st hearing on March 4th, 2021.
In this case, which is underway since September 2012, prosecution has not provided their opinion as to the accusations, yet.
European Court of Human Right Process
At November 20th, European Court of Human Rights(ECHR) denied the request regarding the case in which the journalists were being tried, with the reasoning that making a personal appeal to the Constitutional Court was still possible. The attorneys had made the request due to false imprisonment. However, at the time of the arrests and the request to the ECHR, the requirement to make the individual appeal to the Constitutional Court prior to the application to the ECHR, had not come into force.
Mahkeme heyetinin yerini almasıyla birlikte duruşma, daha önceden belirlenen saatinde başladı. Yargılanan gazetecilerden Rawin Stêrk Yıldız ve avukatlar duruşmada hazır bulundu.
Duruşma savcısı dosyadaki eksik hususların tamamlanmasını istedi.
Avukat Sercan Korkmaz, müvekkili Rawin Stêrk Yıldız’ın el konulan telefonun iade edilmesini talep etti. Davanın diğer avukatları da dosyadaki eksiklerin giderilmesin talep etti.
Mahkeme heyeti, İsmet Kayhan hakkındaki yakalama kararının devamı yönünde karar verdi. Gazeteci Rawin Stêrk Yıldız’ın el konulan telefonun iade edilmesini yönündeki talebin sonraki duruşma karara bağlayacağını açıklayan mahkeme heyeti, eksik hususların tamamlanmasının beklenilmesine karar verdi.
Mahkeme, duruşmayı 22 Haziran 2021 tarihine, saat 10:30’a erteledi.
Adliyeye girişler Covid-19 salgını nedeniyle tek sıra halinde yapıldı. HES kodu sorgulaması yapıldı. Kapıların girişleri bariyer ve uyarı yazıları ile bir birinden ayrıldı. Yurttaşlar, gazeteciler ve avukatlar X-Ray cihazından geçirildi. Yurttaşlar, ateş ölçümü yapılarak adliyeye alındı. Duruşmanın yapıldığı salonunun önü çok kalabalık değildi. Gazetecilerin duruşma salonu önüne geçmesine engel çıkarılmadı.
Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları
Mahkeme salonu, adliyedeki standart salonlardan bir tanesiydi. SEGBİS için iki ayrı ekran kurulmuştu. Gazeteci ve izleyiciler için ayrı bir yer, avukat ve sanıklar için ayrı yer ayrılmıştı. İzleyici sıralarına pandemi dolayısıyla uyarı yazıları asıldığı görüldü. İzleyiciler duruşma salonuna alınmadı.
Duruşmayı P24 ve bazı internet haber siteleri izledi.
Saat 09.50’de başlaması gereken duruşma, yaklaşık 15 dakika gecikmeyle, saat 10.05’te başladı. Mahkeme heyetinden iki üyenin değiştiği gözlendi.
Duruşmaya, yargılanan gazetecilerden sadece İsmail Yıldız (Rawin Sterk) katıldı. İstanbul 34. Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi, Yıldız hakkında “silahlı terör örgütüne üye olmak” ve “zincirleme şekilde terör örgütü propagandası yapmak” suçlaması ile açılan davanın yargılama dosyasının “KCK Basın Davası” yargılama dosyası ile birleştirilmesine karar vermişti. Bu dosyanın mahkemeye geldiği belirtildi.
Duruşma savcısı, dosyadaki eksiklerin giderilmesini talep etti.
Avukat Özcan Kılıç, İsmail Yıldız hakkında uygulanan yurt dışına çıkış yasağının kaldırılmasını talep etti.
Gazeteci Çağdaş Ulus’un avukatı Mehtap Acar Ulus ise, Ulus hakkındaki yargılama dosyasının ana dosyadan ayrılmasını talep etti.
Mahkeme heyeti, duruşmaya kısa bir ara verdi.
Mahkeme, Yüksel Genç’in duruşmalara katılma zorunluluğunun kaldırılmasına karar verdi.
İsmail Yıldız’ın da yurtdışına çıkış yasağının kaldırılmasına karar verildi.
Çağdaş Ulus hakkındaki yargılama dosyasının ayrılması talebi reddedildi.
Yargılamanın, 4 Mart 2021 tarihinde görülecek 21. duruşma ile devam etmesine karar verildi.
Koronavirüs karşısında alınan önlemler kapsamında, adliyeye; tek sıra halinde girilebildi. Bu düzen, bariyerler ve uyarı yazıları ile sağlandı. Ateş ölçümü ve X-Ray taraması yapıldı.
Duruşmanın yapıldığı salonun önü çok kalabalık değildi. Gazetecilerin, duruşma salonunun önünde beklemesi engellenmedi.
Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları
Mahkeme salonunda; gazeteciler, gözlemciler, avukatlar ve sanıklar için hazırlanan yerler birbirinden ayrıydı.
İzleyiciler için ayrılan her iki oturma yerinden biri, koronavirüs karşısında alınan sosyal mesafe önleminin sağlanması için uyarı yazıları ile kapatılmıştı.
Duruşmayı, Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) gözlemcisi ve bazı internet haber sitelerinin muhabirleri takip etti.
Koronavirüs pandemisi karşısında alınan tedbirler kapsamında, gazetecilerin ve gözlemcilerin duruşma salonuna alınmayacağı belirtildi. Ancak, bu sırada duruşma başlamış, gazeteciler ve gözlemciler duruşma salonundaki yerlerini almıştı. Gazeteci ve gözlemcilerin, bir seferliğine duruşmayı izlemelerine izin verildi.
Mahkeme başkanı gergindi. Taleplerini dile getiren Avukat Özcan Kılıç’a karşı iki kez sesini yükseltti.
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.
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, Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) ve Türkiye Gazeteciler Sendikası’ndan gözlemciler katıldı.
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.
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.
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 sanık müdafii olarak sekiz avukat katıldı. Duruşmayı; Gazetecileri Koruma Komitesi (CPJ), P24 ve Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) temsilcileri takip etti.
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.
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 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 sanık müdafii olarak altı avukat katıldı. Duruşmayı, P24 ve Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) temsilcileri ve gazeteciler takip etti.
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.
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.
Avukatlar ve iki muhabirin salona girmesinin ardından salonun kapısı kapandı. Kapı kapandıktan sonra gelen izleyicilerin içeri alınmasına zorluk çıkarıldı.
Duruşmaya altı avukat katıldı. Duruşmayı; P24, Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) ve Türkiye Gazeteciler Sendikası’ndan temsilciler ve muhabirler takip etti.
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.
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 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 iki sanık ve dokuz avukat katıldı. Dört muhabir duruşmayı haber/rapor amacıyla takip etti.
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)
“KCK Press” Trial 20. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)
“KCK Press” Trial 21. Standing (Minutes of the Hearing)
Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.