Journalist Fatma Koçak was born in Sivas in 1975.
She was the news manager of the shuttered Dicle News Agency (DİHA).
The agency was closed down with a decree law issued under the State of Emergency, which was declared after the military coup attempt on July 15th, 2016. During the state of emergency, a number of media outlets were closed with decree laws issued by the government, without the approval of the Assembly.
Koçak was one of the 36 journalists and media professionals arrested on December 24th, 2011 as part of the trial known to the public as the “KCK Press Trial”. She was detained in Bakırköy Women’s Closed Prison until September 27th, 2013.
She faces 7.5 to 15 years of imprisonment, on charges of “membership of an armed terrorist organization”. Her trial continues.
The prosecution has still not submitted an opinion as to the accusations although the trial started in September 2012.
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.
On December 20th, 2011, armed police raided the İstanbul home of Fatma Koçak, the news manager of the shuttered Dicle News Agency (DİHA). Koçak was detained during the raid. She exercised her right to remain silent at the police station.
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.
Seven of the journalists taken under custody were released on December 23rd, after being interrogated by the prosecution. However, some journalists and media professionals including Koçak were referred to the court with a request for their arrest.
According to the indictment, during the interrogation at the prosecutor’s office, Koçak stated that “She worked as news manager at DİHA, her news articles were not dictated by the terror organization, and the materials seized during the raid did not belong to her”.
Koçak was arrested along with 35 journalists on December 24th, 2011 and placed in Bakırköy Closed Women’s Prison.
The indictment against 44 journalists and media professionals, including journalist Fatma Koçak 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 29-page section on journalist Fatma Koçak began on page 638 of the indictment.
Under the title “archive records”, the prosecutor stated that she was previously taken under custody by the police in a raid on DİHA’s İzmir office in 2009, and that “banned publications” were seized during that raid. The indictment also listed the dates Koçak traveled abroad via Istanbul airport in 2011.
The indictment listed her passport, notebook, handwritten notes, CD/DVD, print outs, mobile phone, SIM card, computer, hard disk and a video cassette of footage from a protest rally, as well as the following publications as evidence:
1- “Hêviya Jinê” (Women’s Hope) magazine, June-July 2011 issue.
2- “I Love You, I Hate You”, Masum Elmas, Berçem Yayınları.
3- “Coming down from the mountain-How will PKK lay down arms?”, Cengiz Çandar, March 27th, 2012 TESEV Report.
4- Demokratik Modernite magazine, issues 1 and 2.
The following conversations were included as wiretapping records:
1- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of an individual calling the news center to report that “clashes may break out in a protest”.
In his assessment about this record, the prosecutor claimed that Koçak was informed three hours in advance of a protest with petrol bombs, but that she “instead of preventing this protest from happening, sent a reporter to record the protest and used the footage as propaganda for the organization”. The prosecutor argued that “A regular journalist would not be informed of such a story; or even if he were, he would know that he has to notify the police force of the protest”.
2- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of an individual calling the news center to report that “a protest with stun grenades” would be organized.
The prosecutor claimed that in the continuation of this record, “the same individual called again to say that a stun grenade had been thrown at the police and asked why it was not covered in the news”.
3- Wiretapping record dated September 2009 of an individual from Democratic Society Party (DTP) calling the news center to indicate the hour and place of a protest.
In his assessment of this wiretapping record, the prosecutor claimed that “in this conversation, information about the terror organization’s activities was passed on to one of its media outlets.”
4- Wiretapping record dated October 2009 of Koçak calling the offices of Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) to ask the time of the protest rally to be held. In his assessment about this record, the prosecutor listed the Kurdish and Turkish slogans chanted, and claimed that “the suspect knew about the protest in advance”.
5- Wiretapping record dated October 2010 of an individual from Okmeydanı Peace and Democracy Culture Center calling the news center to give information about an event in that evening.
6- Wiretapping record dated January 2010 of a reporter from Birgün newspaper calling the DİHA news center to ask about the protests and activities scheduled for that day.
In his assessment about this record, the prosecutor stated, “at a protest organized on that day, slogans were chanted for Abdullah Öcalan”.
7- Wiretapping record dated October 2009 of an individual from Democratic Society Party (DTP) calling the news center to indicate the hour and place of a protest. The prosecutor claimed that once again, a protest was announced in advance.
8- Wiretapping record dated November 2009 of a conversation with the defendant and DİHA reporter Ömer Çelik about news coverage.
9- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of an individual calling to give information about clashes in Nusaybin, Mardin.
10- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of a conversation with a DTP district president about the detention of party members, and a protest to be organized by the party.
In his assessment, the prosecutor claimed, “they talked about organizational activities and detained individuals”.
11- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of a conversation with the president of an association raided by the police.
In his assessment, the prosecutor claimed that the person from the association “stated in an encrypted manner that there are things he could not say on the phone”.
12- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of a DTP district officer calling DİHA offices to inform that “the police surrounded the party office”.
In the indictment, following these 12 records, the prosecutor listed the following records under the title “Interviews revealing the defendant’s ties to DİHA and ROJ TV, which are also part of the terror organization’s Press Committee like the suspect”:
13- Wiretapping record dated September 2009 of reporter from Roj Tv calling the DİHA İstanbul office to ask about their “Diyarbakır reporter”.
The prosecutor said about this Diyarbakır reporter that “he was seen in Diyarbakır and he is also being investigated for the activities of the Press Committee”.
14- Wiretapping record dated February 2010 of a DTP officer calling to inform the “assault against their party”. According to the recording, a DTP officer calls Koçak to ask whether “they can send the footage to Roj Tv”, and Koçak responds that DİHA is an agency and has already published the footage on its web site.
15- Wiretapping record dated July 2009 of a DTP officer calling to ask why “DİHA footage taken the previous day has not yet been published.” Koçak responds that the news agency sends the footage to its subscribers, which then decide whether they will publish the footage or not.
16- Wiretapping record dated November 2011 of a BDP officer giving news information to DİHA and asking them to pass the information to Roj TV as well. Koçak responds that “DİHA is an agency, we publish the footage on our site and willing subscribers may then publish these”.
In his assessment, the prosecutor said “the suspect is being given information as to whether the organization’s protests are being published by ROJ TV or not”.
17- Wiretapping record dated October 2009 of Koçak calling Asrın Law Office to get information about the lawyers’ visit to Abdullah Öcalan kept in İmralı.
18- Wiretapping record dated November 2009 of Koçak calling a lawyer from Asrın Law Office to get information about their visit to Öcalan.
In his assessment, the prosecutor stated that Asrın Law Office is the “center of the terror organization’s leadership committee”. He claimed that Koçak demanded information from the law office and they passed on the instructions they received from Öcalan to the organization’s senior leaders active in rural areas.
19- Wiretapping record dated November 2009 of a conversation with a DTP officer to get information about the agenda of the day.
20- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of an individual from DTP calling to indicate the hour and place of a protest.
21- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of an individual asking for an old news story from DİHA archive, and Koçak responding that “DİHA is an agency, it sends news stories to subscribers but does not archive them.”
In his assessment of this conversation, the prosecutor claimed that “an individual whose brother joined the terror group called Koçak to get information about his brother, and she directed her to Günlük Newspaper, Evrensel Newspaper and Hayat TV to find the news story he sought”.
22- Wiretapping record dated October 2009 of an individual from DTP calling to give information to Koçak.
23- Wiretapping record dated November 2009 of an individual calling to place an obituary in DİHA and asking about the price.
24- Wiretapping record dated December 2009 of an individual from Ahmet Kaya Cultural Center in Paris calling to inform DİHA about a file that they drafted.
As a result of the examination of e-mails, the prosecutor claimed that Koçak established contact four times with the Fırat News Agency (ANF) editor İsmet Kayhan, who is also a defendant in the case.
Koçak’s news articles published in DİHA and allegedly “spreading propaganda for the terror organization were listed as follows:
1- Interview published on August 19th, 2010, titled “Assoc. Prof. Gambetti: Kurds have the power to make it happen”.
2- News story published on August 19th, 2010, titled, “Can democratic autonomy be the solution model?”
3- News story published on May 29th, 2011, titled “After dressing its own wounds, Batman is about to inflict a defeat”.
4- News story published on March 8th, 2011, about the World Women Conference titled “Women’s conference ends in fiasco”.
The prosecutor used the following statements in his assessment of these news stories:
“When the news stories penned by the suspect are examined, it is seen that they are in line with the goals and policies of the terror organization, emphasize democratic autonomy, criticize the operations against KCK in a harsh manner, and praise the terror organization and its leader.”
The materials seized from Koçak were listed as “files with numerous phone numbers and e-mail addresses”, “terror organization’s documents” and “Öcalan’s photos”.
The prosecutor claimed that Fatma Koçak “served as an officer in the Press Committee’s Turkey executive board” and “worked as news manager of DİHA, and penned numerous stories spreading propaganda for the terrorist organization”.
The prosecutor claimed that Koçak was informed in advance of protests and rallies, and claimed “news stories were instantly passed on to Fatma Koçak”, “Koçak was informed in advance of the names of lawyers going to İmralı Island”, and “the suspect was likewise informed of protests organized on behalf of the organization.
The prosecutor also alleged that Koçak shared footage and images with Roj TV, and “used encrypted conversations while doing so”.
In the indictment, the prosecutor charged Koçak 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, Koçak faces 7 years, 6 months to 15 years in prison for “membership of an armed terror organization”.
Furthermore, the prosecutor demanded that Koçak 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 news manager Fatma Koçak, 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.
Speaking at the 7th hearing of the trial on November 16th, 2012, lawyer Senem Doğanoğlu stated that three news articles by Koçak were listed in the indictment. Lawyer Doğanoğlu said that these were carefully selected from the hundreds of news stories that her client penned. Doğanoğlu said, “The World Women Conference held in Venezuela, the news about women’s suicides in Batman and an interview on ‘democratic autonomy’ with a woman academic: I underline these, because the prosecutor used the expression ‘alleged rape of Kurdish women’, which points to his ideological leanings.”
Doğanoğlu said that the wiretapping records added to the indictment consisted simply of Koçak answering calls to the agency office. Doğanoğlu said that she would not explain each of them, but added, “Let me just say this: She was asked why she did not report scheduled protests to the police. I will contend myself with repeating my client’s response. My client is a reporter, not an informant; and journalism cannot be based on snitching.”
Stating that Koçak is on hunger strike for 53 days for “the right to defense in the mother tongue”, lawyer Doğanoğlu indicated that the court “has an obligation to protect the freedom of expression”.
Taking the floor at the 11th hearing of the trial on February 8th, 2013, lawyer Davut Erkan said that the prosecutor’s assessment of the issues presented as evidence in the indictment is “interesting”. Lawyer Erkan stated that “Koçak was asked why she did not inform the police about scheduled protests”. Erkan said, “Was there any need for that? The police was already wiretapping the agency! You have to ask the police instead, why didn’t they prevent the protests? They were wiretapping the phone, they already knew about the protests.”
At the 15th hearing of the trial on April 26th, 2013, lawyer Fırat Epözdemir underlined that it is usual for political parties to pass on information about protests, activities and press conferences to news centers. Lawyer Epözdemir said, “The phone conversations are added to the indictment as evidence of crime, but most of these events are already covered in news stories.” He then presented Koçak’s “independent reporter contract with DİHA” and her news articles to the court.
Lawyer Özcan Kılıç also stated that there are basically two groups of evidence related to Koçak in the indictment. He said that the first is the overseas travel records, and the second is her conversations with reporters as news manager. Stating that the prosecutor purposefully omitted naming Koçak’s overseas travel destinations, lawyer Kılıç stated that Koçak had gone to Venezuela. He also added that no lawsuit was brought against her until date for her news articles.
Lawyer Senem Doğanoğlu stated that they submitted to the court the acquittal decision of the Izmir 8th High Criminal Court regarding the file referred to in the archive records as “she was captured”.
She also stated that Koçak’s interviews with the academic Zeynep Gambetti on “democratic autonomy”, and with MP Ayla Akat Ata about her experiences in elections as a woman, were also included in the indictment as evidence.
At the 17th hearing of the trial on June 28th, 2013, Koçak presented a short defense in Turkish. Saying that she agreed with the joint defense read out by Ertuş Bozkurt, Koçak added:
“I want to indicate that I really had a lot of difficulty thinking what I ought to say. Because, it is easy to answer an argument that is logical and founded. However, I am really struggling to find answers to these accusations that lack logic, push the limits of the human intellect, and question my intentions. I do not want to give separate answers to each of these accusations, which question a human’s basic rights of thinking and sharing what they think about.
In the indictment, I am actually being asked, why are you a Kurd, why are you a woman, why are you a journalist? I would really consider myself guilty if I didn’t pen news stories that inform the society and mobilize the public. (…) Everyone, including the judges here, need a future that is more free and fair, where no one is prosecuted or victimized because of their identity. In these days, when our hopes for the future are strengthened, I kindly ask you to fulfill your duty and put an end to this meaningless trial.”
As the president of the court was asking questions to her, Koçak said that the materials seized were found in the agency’s guesthouse, and therefore did not belong to her. Koçak stated that only her passport was seized in her house, which was raided while she was not home.
The judge also asked about her e-mails to İsmet Kayhan and relations with Fırat News Agency (ANF). Koçak stated that these conversations were in accordance with the principles of professional ethics, and explained journalistic concepts such as “breaking the news”.
Taking the floor, lawyer Özcan Kılıç said, “DİHA has contracts or subscriptions with other news agencies as well. Why does the court only ask about their relations with Fırat News Agency? I want an answer to this.”
Koçak stated that they exchanged news stories with other agencies such as Doğan News Agency, Cihan News Agency and İhlas News Agency.
Koçak told the court that she had three requests.
She first asked for a criminal complaint to be filed against the indictment prosecutor, since it is imperative to protect news sources, but the prosecutor had exposed their news sources.
She stated that her second request was for the court to hear an expert witness on how a media outlet functions and how news contacts are established.
Thirdly, Koçak demanded that “in order to reveal the discrimination against the Kurdish press in this trial, the phone records from the intelligence services and news desks of other news agencies such as Doğan News Agency, Cihan News Agency, İhlas News Agency be read out in this court ”.
“I am sure that you will find many more examples there of what we are being accused of here. Because that’s what journalism is about. If I do not have a lot of news sources, I cannot be called a reporter; if I do not receive many phone calls, I cannot pen news.”
Reminding that she was accused of not reporting to the police a scheduled protest, Koçak said that on these dates, she was “also called by a woman who was taken hostage and battered by her husband” and that she went to the scene of the event. She asked “Why did not the prosecutor include this in the indictment, but chose to add every news story that included the words Kurd or protest?”
Koçak was released at the hearing on September 27th, 2013.
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. Koçak did not attend this hearing.
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 trial was adjourned until December 1st, 2020.
The prosecution has still not submitted its opinion as to the accusations although trial began in September 2012.
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.
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 (Indictment)
“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 | firstname.lastname@example.org
Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.