She was born in Istanbul in 1977. Graduated from Boğaziçi University’s Faculty of Political Sciences and International Relations.
Started journalism at Hürriyet Daily in 2001. Worked as an intern at 32. Gün tv program. Later on she worked at Akşam Daily’s foreign news department. Prepared documentaries for SkyTurk TV. Worked at Show TV’s foreign news department. In 2008 started writing columns at Akşam Daily. After Akşam Daily, she continued writing columns at Milliyet and HaberTürk.
She worked as a commentator on the program “Sınırsız” on HaberTürk TV. She was the host and the commentator of the program “Nerede Kalmıştık” on Kanal 24. Since 2011 she has been a commentator on programs “Medcezir” on Beyaz TV and “Dört Bir Taraf” on CNN Türk.
After HaberTürk Daily was shut down, she started writing at HaberTürk news site.
Her article “Minister of Justice’s reaction to that disgraceful decision” was published on HaberTürk Daily and its website. A lawsuit was opened against her due to the complaint of the judge that she had pointed at on her article regarding his decisions. She was accused of “publicly insulting a public officer due to the performance of his public duty through an audio, text or visual message”. She was requested to be sentenced to, from one year two months to two years four months of imprisonment.
She is released pending trial.
Journalist Nagehan Alçı’s article “Minister of Justice’s Reaction to That Disgraceful Decision” was published on June 15, 2018 on HaberTurk Daily and its web site.
Alçı, in her article, had mentioned a judge on duty in Istanbul. Alçı had claimed that “the judge, with a decision he gave, had caused the murder of journalist Hrant Dink”.
The judge, who was mentioned in the article, filed an official complaint against Alçı, on May 28, 2020, about two years after the original publishing date of the article. The judge, in his complaint letter claimed that “the article contained insult and calumny, and put him on target for terrorist organisations”.
Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, due to the complaint, launched an investigation against Alçı. Alçı, through her article, was accused of “insulting” the mentioned judge.
According to the indictment, Alçı, in her defence statement during the investigation, claimed that the judge she mentioned in her article “was one of the judges who oversaw the ‘publicly degrading Turkish Nation, State of the Turkish Republic, Turkish Grand National Assembly, the Government of the Republic of Turkey’ case that caused Hrant Dink’s murder”.
Alçı, in her statement, said “After Dink was murdered, he(the judge) oversaw the case where Agos Daily editör in charge and Hrant Dink’s son Arat Dink and paper’s concessionaire Serkiz Seropyan were tried on the same grounds. He sentenced Dink and Seropyan to one year of imprisonment each”. Alçı said the following:
“Back then, as a journalist and a citizen, I had watched how Hrant Dink was being demonised at the courtroom, and was put in the middle of a huge black propaganda. I declared my opinions as to that procedure with solid reasons. That is only a declaration of opinions.”
The indictment against Alçı was completed on July 6, 2020.
The indictment against HaberTürk news site writer Nagehan Alçı was completed by Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s on July 6, 2020.
The indictment stated that the investigation was launched due to the judge’s complaint on May 28, 2020, who was mentioned in Alçı’s June 15, 2018 article “Minister of Judge’s reaction to that disgraceful decision”.
Judge was the “complainant” of the indictment. The indictment summarised judge’s complaint letter and cited the following from Alçı’s article:
“Unfortunately, the ‘judge-prosecutor mentality that does not care about personal rights’ still reigns. Not only that judge in İzmir, but for instance still in Çağlayan Courthouse, that judge who gave that decision which imprisoned Hrant Dink and his son Arat Dink only for being Armenian and finally caused Hrant Dink’s murder (…) works as a judge at the Criminal Court of First Instance.
Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HSK) is vital on making the necessary process work against these judiciary personnel with this lawless state of mind. This institution’s chairman Mehmet Yılmaz, too, with his just judicial appearance, is a person who gives hope to those who want to believe in the judiciary systems in this country. Judges and prosecutors may have political beliefs, as long as they remain impartial and loyal to justice…”
The judge who was mentioned in the article, in his complaint letter, claimed that Alçı “had made allegations saying that he had caused Hrant Dink’s murder, however he was working as a judge of an enforcement court in Malatya at the time when Hrant Dink was murdered in Istanbul”. Judge, in the letter, claimed that “the article contained insult and calumny, and put him on target for terrorist organisations”.
The indicment argued that the expressions in Alçı’s article “were in a manner to damage judge’s pride and reputation”.
The indictment accused Alçı of “insult through an audio, text or visual message”. She was requested to be sentenced to, from three months to two years of imprisonment according to the article 125/2 of the Turkish Penal Code.
The indictment claimed that the crime of “insult” was commited “due to the public duty of a public official”. According to that the requested sentence against Alçı was requested to be increased according to the subsection (a) of the third paragraph of the article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code. According to which Alçı was requested to be sentenced to, from one year to two years of imprisonment.
The indictment then claimed that Alçı had committed the crime of “insult”, “publicly”. Therefore the already-requested-to-be-increased sentence was once again requested to be increased by a sixth according to the fourth paragraph of the article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code.
Therefore, in total, Alçı was requested to be sentenced to, from one year two months to two years four months of imprisonment.
Alçı was also requested to be “bereaved of specific rights” according to the article 53 of the Turkish Penal Code.
The indictment against Alçı was accepted by Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance.
The trial of Nagehan Alçı, a columnist for HaberTürk’s news web site, began with the first hearing at Istanbul 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance, on December 3rd, 2020. Alçı did not attend. Alçı was represented in the courtroom by her lawyer Selim Erbağcı. The judge mentioned in Alçı’s article, who had filed a complaint about her, attended the hearing with his lawyer Yeşim Gün.
The complainant judge remarked, “Due to my duty as a judge, the defendant has equated me to those judges who reach disgusting verdicts as they have no respect for human rights, and protect torturers. Although I worked at Malatya Enforcement Court on the date Hrant Dink was murdered, I had been previously targeted by pro-FETÖ press outlets. I accidentally found out in a search on the internet, that the defendant insulted me with the same motivation. Her insults are similar to those of FETÖ’s”.
Yalçınkaya said, “My conscience cannot accept that such accusations be leveled in the press and in courts. After I pass away, I do not want anyone to describe me as one of the killers of Hrant Dink.” He added that he read extensively on Armenian history: “I read about Armenian history from various sources. When I worked at Diyarbakır State Security Court, I closely examined the history of the Mesopotamian peoples. I have nothing against the Armenian nation. I request that the defendant receive a sentence from the upper limit.”
The judge’s lawyer Yeşim Gün said, ” as everyone knows, after a newspaper article, prosecutor Mehmet Selim Kiraz was martyred. There is no guarantee that my client will not suffer a similar fate”. Claiming that Alçı targeted her client with the article in question, Gün said “She has committed the crime of insult, and since the crime has been committed via the media, we request that the defendant receive a sentence from the upper limit.” Lawyer Gün also stated that they wanted to participate in the legal proceedings.
The complainant judge said that “the prosecutor’s office protects the defendant.” The court requested that Nagehan Alçı be brought to the next hearing, by force if necessary.
Alçı’s lawyer Selim Erbağcı rejected the charges, and argued that the article in question fell within the scope of the freedom of press and expression. Erbağcı requested that Alçı be acquitted. He added that Alçı will attend the next hearing.
The court adjourned the hearing to receive the defense of journalist Nagehan Alçı.
The trial was adjourned until the second hearing on February 11th, 2021.
Saat 10.00’da başlaması gereken duruşma, yaklaşık 45 dakika gecikmeyle, saat 10:47’de başladı. Yargılanan gazeteci Nagehan Alçı, duruşmaya katılmadı. Alçı’yı, duruşma salonunda; avukat Selim Erbağcı temsil etti. Alçı’nın yazısında adı geçen ve Alçı’dan şikayetçi olan hakim de duruşmaya avukatı Yeşim Gün ile birlikte katıldı.
Duruşmada ilk olarak “şikayetçi” hakimin beyanları alındı. “Hakimlik görevim sebebiyle iğrenç karar veren, insan haklarına önem vermeyen, işkencecileri koruyan hakimle eş düzeyde bir yargı mensubu olarak gösterildim” dedi.
Hakim, “Hrant Dink’in öldürüldüğü tarihte Malatya İcra Mahkemesi’nde olduğum halde, daha önce de FETÖ’cü basın tarafından hedef gösterildim. Aynı düşünce ile sanığın tarafıma hakaret ettiğini internette yaptığım aramada tesadüfen öğrendim. Hakaret yöntemi FETÖ’cülerle aynı” diye konuştu.
Yalçınkaya, “Ne basının ne mahkemelerin bu tür söylemlerle muhatap olmasına vicdanım el vermiyor. Öldüğümde arkamdan Hrant Dink katillerinden biri denilmesini de istemiyorum” dedi.
Yalçınkaya, Ermeni tarihini birçok tarihi kaynaktan okuduğunu dile getirerek, “Ermeni tarihini çok kaynaktan okudum. Diyarbakır Devlet Güvenlik Mahkemesi’nde görev yaptığım dönemde Mezopotamya’da yaşayan insanların tarihlerini çok okudum. Ermeni ulusuyla hiçbir problemim yoktur. Sanık üst sınırdan cezalandırılsın” ifadelerini kullandı.
Hakimin avukatı Yeşim Gün, “gazetede yazılan yazıyla şehit savcı Mehmet Selim Kiraz’ın başına malum olay gelmişti. Benzer bir şekilde müvekkilimin başına bir olay gelmeyeceğinin garantisi yoktur” dedi. Alçı’nın yazısı ile müvekkilini hedef gösterdiğini dile getiren avukat Gün, “Hakaret suçunu işlemiştir. Suçun, basın yayın yoluyla işlenmesi de gözetilerek, sanığın üst hadden cezalandırılmasını talep ediyoruz” dedi. Avukat Gün, yargılamaya katılma taleplerini iletti.
Duruşma savcısı, şikayetçi hakim ve avukatının yargılamaya katılma talebinin kabul edilmesini talep etti.
Şikayetçi hakim, tekrar söz alarak; “Sanığın savcılıkça korunduğunu düşünüyorum” dedi. Hakim, Nagehan Alçı’nın bir sonraki duruşmaya zorla getirilmesini talep etti.
Alçı’nın avukatı Selim Erbağcı, suçlamaları reddederek söz konusu yazının basın ve ifade özgürlüğü kapsamında olduğunu söyledi. Erbağcı, Alçı hakkında beraat kararı verilmesini talep etti. Alçı’nın bir sonraki duruşmaya katılacağını da sözlerine ekledi.
Duruşma savcısı da dosyadaki eksikliklerin giderilmesini istedi.
Mahkeme, yargılanan gazeteci Nagehan Alçı’nın savunmasının alınması için duruşmayı erteledi.
Şikayetçi hakim ve avukatının, yargılamaya katılma talebinin Alçı’nın savunmasının alınmasından sonra değerlendirilmesine karar verildi.
Yargılamanın, 11 Şubat 2021 tarihinde görülecek ikinci duruşma ile devam etmesine karar verildi.
Koronavirüs karşısında alınan önlemler kapsamında, adliyeye; tek sıra halinde girilebildi. Bu düzen, bariyerlerle sağlandı. Ateş ölçümü ve X-Ray taraması yapıldı.
Duruşmanın yapıldığı salonun önünde bariyer yoktu. Mahkeme salonunun önü kalabalıktı.
Mahkeme Salonu Koşulları
Duruşma küçük bir salonda görüldü. İzleyiciler için ayrılan her iki oturma yerinden biri, koronavirüs karşısında alınan sosyal mesafe önleminin sağlanması için bantla kapatılmıştı.
Gazetecilerin ve gözlemcilerin duruşma salonuna girmesine izin verildi. Ancak bazı gazeteciler, duruşmayı ayakta izlemek durumunda kaldı.
Bağımsız Gazetecilik Platformu (P24), Disk Basın-İş ve Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği (MLSA) gözlemcileri ile basın mensupları takip etti.
Duruşmayı, özellikle iktidara yakın olduğu bilinen basın ve yayın kuruluşlarının muhabirleri takip etti. Alçı’dan şikayetçi olan hakim, savunmasındaki bazı sözler için muhabirleri, sık sık; “Bunu da yazın” sözleri ile uyardı.
Press in Arrest is a database, monitoring, documentation and collective memory study of Press Research Association.
+90 (312) 945 15 56 | email@example.com
Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.